Miles Beyond

Miles Beyond:

Transcript of Live Interactive Interview
Conducted September 28, 1997
on JazzHOUSE

Copyright © 1997, Jazz Journalists Association

Q. from Jose 1 of 41
The so called Miles electric period is now generally and widely accepted and enjoyed both by disc buyers and by jazz critics and journalists to an extent that it has already become, perhaps, an integral part of the musical mainstream. But this is not what happened when its first expressions started to appear and being listened to, both in records and in concerts. Both the public, in general, and, in particular, jazz journalists, reviewers and critics in the United States "denounced" the new Miles by classifying it with terms that went from "treason" or "sell out" to "pure exibitionism" or "irrationality". To a certain degree I understand the public resistance to innovative creativity. But I have a lot of problems understanding the same response from jazz critics, jazz journalists, etc. How do you explain this lack of understanding, this more or less generalized reaction from critics against what were already at the time a wonderful, stimulating, highly innovative form of artistic expression?

A second, related question: This generalized refusal of the electric Miles did not happen in Europe (in particular, and as I know from personal experience, in France, Spain, Portugal or Italy) neither in what concerns the public nor jazz critics and journalists. To be sure, jazz critical and journalistic patterns in Europe seem usually to be very different from those followed or in practice in the US. Do you accept that there is indeed a wide difference between jazz criticism/journalism in Europe and in the US and, if so, how do you explain it? Also: isn't this difference, very obvious in relation to the Miles electric period, a reflection (or a cause, or both) of the way audiences in Europe and in the US react to jazz -- the former considering it as being primordially an artistic form of expression and, as such, also entertainment; the latter listening to it as being a more or less agreable form of pure entertainment and, consequently, tending to refuse anything new or re .... [long posting cut by system ... limits subsequently expanded - tech]

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 1 of 3
   Here's what Ralph J. Gleason wrote in Rolling Stone about Miles' band in 1974: "This is simply music of another sphere. It has deliberately abandoned all traditional concepts of melody and harmony and accepted the challenge to create beautiful sounds outside the structures the conservatories and the music teachers operate in. This is the purest music I have ever heard in that sense."

And, in his Consumer Guide, Robert Christgau gave these marks to the following albums: At Fillmore East, B; Live-Evil, A-minus; In Concert, A-minus. (He also gave Jack Johnson an A-plus, and Agharta an A).

While these reviews weren't in the 'mainstream' jazz press, they do represent views of highly respected critics of the era.

By and large, the electric Miles recordings were well received by critics who had some grounding in (or even exposure to) the rock of the late '60s. While it's true that some of the most widely read critics of the day, such as Leonard Feather, had no use for the electric music, there was a groundswell of critical approval among younger writers and broadcasters. One might even make the argument that Miles' electric music, and the music that spun off from it (Mahavishnu Orch., Return To Forever, Compost, Weather Report, helped usher in a new generation of critics as editors of journals like Down Beat and Melody Maker sought to find critics who could bring some context to the music being released.

James Hale JJA

  A. from HM, moderating in office 2 of 3
   This is a huge theme that we hope to explore - but many questions, and many assumptions underlying. I recall critics being divided when this music first appeareed, as they often are, for a host (so to speak) of personal and perhaps professional reasons. Also, jazz journalists are not automatically better listeners, more "understanding" than their reading audiences... Second question: yes, there are differences between US and European jazz journlism trends, but many similarities, too. And we can readily argue what the benefits and drawbacks of each particularly construed of these venues are, too. Ben Ratliff is trying to connect with AOL - maybe he'll give a stab at this query. Oh yes, sorry the question got chopped. Our site-weaver has doubled the legnth available to questions: but maybe the public should split compound queries in their parts.

  A. from liebman in home 3 of 3
   there are some real musical reasons for the negative response-the music was very loud, disorganized, very raw-no real melodies, no direct harmony and basically static rhythm-an most of all there was the nostalgia factor and miles was moving too fast for these guys to keep up

Q. from ressetn in chicago 2 of 41

It might be interesting to discuss the big arc traced by these sets, which after all cover a period of less than 4 years, I believe. During that time, the music went from something that now sounds rather benign to something that still sounds pretty dangerous. I'm not sure there's a question in there, but if there is, it has to do the accelerated pace of fusion's development and subsequent demise.

I have always felt that Miles's genius for directing music is reflected in the fact that he continued to create new and timely settings while his soloing barely changed, in terms of its melodic contours. From "Kind Of Blue" to the end of his life, he was improvising around the same triadic relationships and using space the same way, yet his trumpet sounded radically different because of the context he placed it in. Again, I don't know there's a question there, so use it if you can.

And an old standby: Which band was better? The one from the summer of '70 or the one that made Dark Magus? Why? Show your work.

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 1 of 3

I have always felt that Miles"s genius for directing music is reflected in the fact that he continued to create new and timely settings while his soloing barely changed, in terms of its melodic contours. From "Kind Of Blue" to the end of his life, he was improvising around the same triadic relationships and using space the same way, yet his trumpet sounded radically different because of the context he placed it in. "

In fact, Miles trumpet sound doesn't even change as much as you might think -- he slowed down a lot after playing with Bird and realised he couldn't really play like Dizzy, and then found his amazing sound and stayed with it, basically, for a long time.

This is one of the big differences between Miles and Trane. Trane actually did change his own sound, and his improvisations several times at least. It is not a criticism of Miles -- just an observation.

Miles' genius was, as you say, a genius of directing, and also of hearing what was happening around him, and being able to distill the contemporary language in ways that most others could not.

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 2 of 3
   I tried to answer this once, but it didn't seem to come through, so forgive me it ends up here twice.

I agree that Miles didn't change the way he was playing on a fundamental level -- at least once he stopped playing with Bird, and realised he couldn't play like Dizzy. (Though some of his bop soloing from that period is stunning.)

But his trumpet sound doesn't really change either.

this is one of the contrasts between Miles, and say Coltrane. Trane actually changed his sound and his approach to improvising, at least several times. Miles found his amazing sound and stayed with it.

Part of his genius was his ability to hear what was going on in music, right then and there, for his whole life, and he could zero on on just what he liked, and combine players with different languages, or different dialects, if you will, and make incredible music.

In fact, this morning, I stumbled across that strange documentary about Quincy Jones on HBO. In it Miles was talking about Quincy and said that one of Qunicy's talents was being able to give people what they wanted.

Miles said of himself, astutely, something like, "I can't do that shit. I'm stuck with just one personality."

  A. from lieb in home 3 of 3
   yes it can be generalized that his playing wtayed more or less the same(triads, space, tone-well not after the electrification)-and that he knew that changing what was around him was the way to go-but it does go deeper than that-a lot of close intervals in the 60s-more on top of the time-in the 70s more flurries and high notes-screeches, things like that-and the 80s-well??-

Q. from rhmusedit in NYC 3 of 41
Is there anyone who remembers disliking this music when it first came out? How does it sound different to listeners now? What was the musical context in which these CDs first were released? What was the general initial critical reception?

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 1 of 3
   The way the music sounded at the time depended on what you'd been listening to. I distinctly recall hearing ‘At Fillmore East’ for the first time, having just taken off a Hendrix LP. It sounded just fine. Same with Live-Evil.

Perhaps if your only exposure to rock had been early Beatles or some of the other Brit Invasion stuff, or surf music in the U.S., this stuff would’ve sounded strange or abrasive, or something.... but experimental music like Pink Floyd and Zappa was so much in the air then that it was hard to be surprised by anything new or unusual.

The only recording of that time that presented an initial “challenge” to the ear was “On The Corner”, because it was such a departure. That said, it was so damn fresh sounding that it drew me in and held me in its sway for weeks. What *was* going on under all that percussion? Fascinating.

James Hale JJA

  A. from John Szwed in CT 2 of 3
   My answer would be similar to Hale's. The only question left for me is, why does it sound so much better to me now? Is it my disappointment in the way rock developed? In the way jazz developed? Probably.

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 3 of 3
   You know, one of the amazing things in my musical evolution has to do with not liking Bitches Brew when I got it as a gift for my 13th or 14th birthday. It sat in my room for 4 years -- then one day I put it on and loved it. I was so surprised that this music had acutally been right next to my bed for so long and it was so good.

Taught me a fundamental lesson about art -- any art. The artist probably knows more than you do about that particular thing he or she is trying to describe. And you might have to look at it from a different perspective instead of jumping to conclusions like "That blows!".

Q. from marcel in MALTA 4 of 41
Did miles actually use 3 keyboard players at a time.

  A. from HM in office 1 of 2
   Sure. And who were they? Can someone get Zawinul on-line, please?

  A. from liebman in home 2 of 2
   yes-on the corner-herbie, chick and harold (i forgot his last name) from baltimore-

Q. from Enrico Merlin in Trento, Italy 5 of 41
Hello everybody,

I will not able to be with you this evening because of the hour (it will be 3 to 6 am in Italy). Anyway I have some questions for panelists (please forgive my approximate english):


PS: Hi, Teo, how are you? I hope to meet you again soon!


PS: Hi Gary, did you received the package I sent you many months ago? Please drop me a line to my email address (I haven't yours).


Hi Dave, we spoke so many times in these years, but I have some questions anyway...

To ANYBODY knows the answer:

Definition: The percussion player James Mtume Foreman is the Jimmy Heath's son. Questions:

I would like to get in touch (for my forthcoming book/ CD rom release) with Pete Cosey, Mike Henderson and Cedric Lawson. Could anybody help me?

Greetings from Italy Enrico Merlin

  A. from lieb in home 1 of 1
   ciao enrico-hope the family is well-no idea how to get in touch with these guys-sorry i will miss the conferenc this year-love to come again in the future-peace-lieb

Q. from Peter Breslin in Santa Fe NM 6 of 41
Is Dave Liebman there? If so, hello. If not, somebody say hi to him for me sometime. Anyway, Dave, in your liner notes to the Dark Magus reissue, you write "There was scant interaction between rhythm section members or as a unit in relation to the soloist." This is totally contrary to how I hear the music, so I was wondering if you might comment and elaborate. Thanks.

  A. from HM in office 1 of 2
   Dave's here - and looking over this question.

  A. from lieb in home 2 of 2
   hi peter-the kind of interaction that took place in the previous bands with herbie, chick, etc where there was some intentional harmonic and rhtyhmic question-answer stuff happening is what i meant as missing-basically the background was a steady ongoing rhythmic vamp and not relating directly to any of the soloists-it was a different relationship between soloist and r. section than previously in miles music-not a value judgement although i think something was missing because of it-

Q. from Darryl in Maryland 7 of 41
There seems to be some revisionism among critics concerning Miles's '70s music. Why is this happening now?

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 1 of 1
   Well, the glib answer is, we're all getting older, nostalgic and looking to cover our tracks. Seriously, I don't think there's much "revisionism" among those who dismissed the music at the time (some of them aren't with us anymore, or not active). I do think those of us who didn't have a forum in those days, or who weren't in the business yet are weighing in with opinions. That said, however, revisionism in listening to music is pretty common. It is difficult to listen to Ornette circa 1959 now and imagine the furore over the music that happened at the time. I mean, could anyone seriously listen to 'This Is Our Music' now and question Ornette's sanity as was the case then.

Q. from Bob Oberg in Santa Cruz, CA 8 of 41
I was a teenager when Miles electric works first came out. Some of you who were adults, or at least had he appearance of being an adult !, What was the impact of Miles music on you and your friends ?

  A. from John Szwed in CT 1 of 1
   I heard much of this music as an obvious "next step." In any case, it seemed to me far more interesting (and mysterious) than what Zappa, et al were doing. But I didn't think it was as interesting as what was going on in free jazz at the time. I recall the reaction of a friend who was deep into the old Miles, and who clearly was shocked by this turn. But he said to me at the time, "you learn to trust these masters, even when you don't understand what they're doing." But his response was not typical among those who didn't like it.

Q. from Jim Alley in Savannah, GA 9 of 41
Is anybody there?

  A. from HM in NYC 1 of 3
   We're here - Howard Mandel hosting, Whit behind the scenes running the site, Dave Liebman, waiting to answer questions, James Hale, ready to ask some, I wager

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 2 of 3
   Steve Rowland here. Hi Howard and Jim.

I'll around for a while. Hope to be joined at some point by my partner Larry Abrams, who was the scriptwriter for the Miles Davis Radio Project.

  A. from Whit in NYC 3 of 3
   As the technical staff, I apologize for the initial outage in the Answer screen.

Q. from Darryl in Maryland 10 of 41
What were the positive and negative effects Miles's '70s music had on jazz?

  A. from liebman in home 1 of 1
   i don't think there was much effect-the fusion that followed(mclaughlin, corea, weather rep was much different-and when miles came backin the 8os there was little left of the 70s stuff-it was more watered down and slick for me-in fact i think this periodof miles is the most neglected of his career-

Q. from Jim Alley in Savannah, GA 11 of 41
The "trend" over the last decade or more has been away from electric -- at least so far as serious jazz artists are concerned. Yet people now seem to appreciate Miles' electric period more than before? Do you attach any particular significance to this?

  A. from Ben Ratliff in New York 1 of 1
   If we're talking about 1971-75, one reason this period is being more appreciated now--aside from the fact that Columbia has embarked on this project of re-releasing it all (I'm sure each period will be more appreciated as each of these come out, if "appreciated" means "listened to")--is because of its connections to post-hiphop music. (Triphop, electronica, whatever you want to call it.) Much of the Miles music is fascinatingly ambient stuff and has enough rhythmic perversity and jump-cuts in it that it appeals to musician-producers like Squarepusher, Tricky, Goldie, et. al. I'm not saying this is changing the world--I think the stuff is influencing a handful of people now, and perhaps indirectly influencing a wider listenership. But I'm very interested by the connections between that music and this new music.

Q. from Greg Masters in NYC 12 of 41
I think I say this in my article, Electric Miles, posted in the library of this site: jazz critics, and music critics in general, were not open enough at the time of this genre-busting music, to comprehend the complexity of what Miles was doing. All they could respond to was the music not sounding like "jazz." They lacked a vocabulary to describe this music. Multi-culti concepts were not established yet. Ravi Shankar effecting George Harrison so "Within You Without You" emerges was a tremendous breakthrough in western acceptance of "other" cultural influences. Miles was doing the same thing starting in the late 60s adding rock-influenced British guitarist John McLaughlin to explore sounds outside traditional jazz parameters. In interviews of the time, he responds very directly, with annoyance, at interviewers stereotyping him as a "jazz" musician. He was eager to discover new textures, playing post bebop was a bore to him by this time. Critics weren't ready for the evolution. The music is still inadequately described, appreciated, celebrated. Greg Masters

  A. from HM, host in office 1 of 2
   Have you met Greg Masters, host of the Knitting Factory's Miles Mondays, an adventure in the man's rare recordings? He seems to be answering Jose's first question here--not what we had in mind with the "question box," but welcomed anyway! Let me ask a practical question on this, though: weren't there younger, budding listeners who became the critics of today who liked this stuff, which the older established guys and (few) women who were working may have had jazz links to equally established "styles"? Besides not having the vocabulary (a professional problem), some critics didn't have much interest in establishing one, either. Maybe like some of us approaching hip-hop/rap/electronica or some such.

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 2 of 2
   Howard, speaking for myself, I can certainly say that hearing Miles' electric music influenced me to become a critic (for good or ill). The first review I ever had published was of Get Up With It. Because few established critics seemed to be making the links between what Miles was doing and what I heard Sly and Hendrix doing I was emboldened to venture an opinion (something I've never been short of).

Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 13 of 41
For Steve: There was a question on the Miles List the other day about the future availability of the MD Radio Project on tape or re-broadcast. Care to comment?

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 1 of 1
   James, I've always had a limited number of sets of the tapes available for "educational purposes" but for legal reasons cannot promote this. Anyone interested can contact me at or call me at 215-843-4388.

As to rebroadcast, I'm not sure.

I'm currently trying to get PRI

do a re-release of my last series The Music Makers, which will be of interest to many folks here, cause it is about popular music -- documentaries on Zappa, Santana, George Clinton, Patti LaBelle, The Nevilles and the Roots.

If they can do it better than the first time, we may talk about re-releasing the Miles series.



Q. from Jim Alley in Savannah, G 14 of 41
The "trend" over the last decade or two has been away from electric -- at least so far as serious jazz artists are concerned. Yet people now seem to appreciate Miles' electric period even more than before? Do you attach any particular significance to this seemingly ironic situation?

  A. from lieb in home 1 of 2
   probably because it was neglected at the time-also as an antidote to all the neo stuff going on-for sure it had a lot of energy and quality of experimentation to it-not so true these days in my opinion

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 2 of 2
   I can't explain the phenomenon, but up here in Canada there are a number of bands of mid-20s to late-30s musicians playing variations on MD's electric music. One of the best, Rob Frayne, is a former student of Mr. Liebman's. Another good one is Metalwood out of Vancouver with Mike Murley on sax and Brad Turner on trumpet.

Q. from Evan Bickerstaffe in Clearwater, FL 15 of 41
Mr. Bartz: I loved your performances on the Live-Evil set and strongly believe that you were the strongest sax man he had had since Trane, Was there any reason why your tenure with Miles was relatively short.

  A. from Gary Bartz, in via phone 1 of 1
   I can't really answer that. I had started my band, Ntu Troop, around the same time I joined Miles. But I probably would have stayed in the band, anyway, and worked around it. But Jack (DeJohnette) was leaving, had actually left but Miles talked him into coming back, raised his salary. That's how he'd talk you back. [In his Miles imitation rasp] "Well, I'll double it." That would get you back. Keith also was leaving, around the time I left the band. Which would have been winter of '72. We did a summer tour, and went into the fall...I'm not sure on that, have a discographby somewhere. I was there from spring of '70 to winter of '72, a little less than two years. The band when I joined was Dave Holland, Airto Morieria, jack DeJohnette, Keith, and Chick Corea. I just found out not to long ago I was taking Steve Grossman's place. I was never sure; so many people worked with Miles. He would work with someone one night, and he'd decide he didn't like it, it didn't work for some reason Joe Henderson is a perfect example: he did about two, three weeks in the band, that's all. With Wayne in the band at the same time. Everbody talked about it, maybe as late as '69. I started Ntu troop in '70, the first with Woody Shaw. We didn't have the vocals, it didn't take the shape it had later on. First album was Woody, Rashied Ali, Albert Dailey and Bob Cunningham. On Milestone, Home. Before that I was working with McCoy Tyner, and with Max Roach at the same time‹and we never had a conflict in schedules! Which would give you some idea of how much those bands worked! After Miles Ntu Troop got even more popular, we went to Montreux in '73, from '72-'75 we were kind of at our peak.

Q. from Darryl in Maryland 16 of 41
The Miles Davis Radio Project? Please explain?

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 1 of 1

This is an 8-hour long radio documentary which I produced in 1990, completed 10 months before Miles died.

It has a 5-hour chronolgy of his career, one hour called behind the scenes with Miles Davis and a 2-hour concert program which has live material from his 87-88 band and some great live performances from the past.

It includes interviews which I did with nearly 100 people including Gary Bartz, Dizzy, Art Blakey, Art Davis, rare tapes of Trane and Bird talking, Sonny Fortune, Lester Bowie, Joni Mitchell, Roberta Flack

There are many folks we didn't get to including Dave Liebman (sorry). But I think it is one of the most comprehensive documentaries done in jazz.


Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 17 of 41
Dave: You told a fascinating story when you were at the second MD Conference in St. Louis about your initial recording experience with Miles. I think others who weren't there might be interested in hearing about it.

  A. from lieb in home 1 of 1
   yes james-it was far out-that first session- i was at a doctor's office on brooklyn, ny and my mother called and said someone maned teo macero wanted me to come immediately to the studio on 52 st-i rushed there and left the car in the middle of the street i think-got up to the session at 12:30 knowing that they usually were three hours and would end at 1-i sttod in the anteroom between the studio and the booth and then i saw chick, herbie, jack, don alias, larry young, mclaughlin, billy hart,badal roy, colin walcott and a few others maybe-miles signalled me in and made a motion to play-i couldn't here a key or anything except the drums and the clicking of the keyboards-no headphones, no soundcheck, no nothing!!!-so what you here on the first track of on the corner was me tryning to find the key-(Eb)-that was it-he said to me"Join my band"-and i said that i couldn't leave Elvin(JOnes) yet-and that was it-six months later he came down to the village vanguard for three night and asked elvin to let me go and the first night i did with himn was at the fillmore east which reopened for that weekend and closed again forever-so i played with miles and elvin the same night in new york-worlds apart style wise but definitely a high for me-if readers are interested i have a book out with a long (100 page) interview about miles-everything i could remember-it's called Miles Davis -David LIebman-Jazz Connections and is available through this e mail hav been enjoying reading it-even my family thought it was really entertaining-

Q. from Peter Breslin in Santa Fe NM 18 of 41
Dave Liebman, I appreciate your answer. I feel like a jerk disagreeing, since you actually were there. I agree that Herbie Hancock, Tony Williams, and Ron Carter were involved in less vamp and more conversational interaction, for sure. But in "Calypso Frelimo" on Get Up With It, for example, I hear a lot of interaction. Airto's woofing in rhythmic counterpoint to Miles' trumpet on "Sivad" also comes to mind. Question: did you have fun playing in the 70's band, or was it a musical nightmare?

Q. from Darryl in Maryland 19 of 41
A few months ago, Abbey Lincoln repeated on MSNBC the same thing I've read in other places: that Miles was "forced" to go in a rock oriented direction by Columbia records. What is your opinion?

  A. from Gary Bartz in via telephone 1 of 2
   I don 't think he was forced. Because for one thing, when I started going by his house for rehearsal, he had stacks and stacks of records. He espciallyh liked the Sly Stone and Jimi Hendrix, of courwes. A lot of the bands he liked--he actually liked that music. For myself, I did that becuase I liked it. No ne forced me. No one has forced me to do anything as far as music is concerned. They may have asked me, and then I'd make a decision to do it or not. So I don't think so. Als, I think he wanted to reach back to the black audience, and that may have contributed a small part to it. A significant part? It's hard to tell. It did play a part, I think that. He was the type of bandleader I particularly love and have kind of patterned myself aftedr. He picked people to be in the band he didn't have to talk to. He could play something, or just lead it in a certain directiun, and they could take it from there. If you have to tell somethign to someone, that's not really the right person. That's how I feel. My musicians ask each other, particularly if they haven't been in the band: "But he didn't say anything to me!" The regulars, they know. I want a musician. I don't want a follower. If I don't say anything, and Miles was the same way: I don't play drums. What am I gonna tell a drummer? Every drummer is going to play something differ4ent. I want to hear what he hears, not what I hear. Also, I think meeting and marrying Betty Mabre had something to do with that too. That's when his clothes started changing, too. And he started hanging out with Hendrix then, too. Yeah, she made a difference. I moved to NY in '58, caught the tale end of the bebop movement, one night worked with Bud Powell, sat in, just three songs. Jimi, I used to see him in the streets in the '60s: in the streets, he loooked different, I knew he was a musician, he had an aura about him. But I didn't know what it was. We spoke, but never really knew each other. Then when I joined Miles I really began to listen to him much more.

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 2 of 2
   I agree with Gary. And he would know better than I.

But I think it is unlikely that anyone ever made Miles do anything. Especially when it came to music.

I think that when you look at Miles' career, you will see a pattern of him being drawn to whatever was the cutting edge of music. He liked Bird and Dizzy, cause they were great, AND they were hip! Then he worked out those styles, and moved on. And then moved on again.

I think his desire to reach black people is very important, as is his desire to be a visible icon, a star if you will.

That was important to him. He liked the fame and the money. But he liked the music. When I started working on the documentary, I was not too impressed with the music he was playing then (87-88) -- at first. Then I had the privilege of sitting in on some rehearsals -- one of which is in our series in show #6 -- Miles worked so hard on that music it was stunning. He was going for something, and pushed and pushed his players to reach for it. It was very real and very musical.

Nobody pushed him to do that music. It was exactly what he wanted to do and he was doing his best.

Q. from Bob in Santa Cruz CA 20 of 41
I got Bitches Brew through the Columbia House record club - I'd heard about Miles and this album, probably from Rolling Stone magazine, and wanted to check it out. I didn't get it then, and didn't until I had gone through Caravanserai and the Mahavishnu Orchestra. It wasn't a big stretch, but there certainly were many things to appreciate about the creation of the music (like how incredibly delicate the signals Miles gave to the band were.)

  A. from HM, host in office 1 of 3
   Whadyathink, panelists: was that Miles giving delicate signals, or Teo making impromptu segues? Caravanserai seems like Miles-lite to me, did then, too, and the Maha Orch much more thoroughly composed (though thrilling!) What was the effect of hype on Bitches Brew? Does that album, in light of current electric Miles reappraisal, deserve the reputation that's accrued to it?

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 2 of 3
   Howard's last question first: Does the music on Bitches Brew hold up? Having heard two bands -- Bobby Previte's The Horse and Rob Frayne's band here in Ottawa -- play it as rep music... yes. It lends itself to many and varied interpretations and, contrary to what I believed until I heard these bands play it, has a life outside of the studio recording. As far as "hype" goes, I don't know. I can't remember even being aware of it when it came out... for me and my friends the Fillmore recording and Live-Evil made more of a splash... and Jack Johnson.

  A. from HM in office 3 of 3
   I felt, in my utterly unearned snobbishness when it came out, that Bitches Brew was music for people just "discovering" Miles. It was like Sgt. Pepper's, kinda. Like, hadn't you already discovered Revolver?!?! Hadn't you just loved In A Silent Way? But Bitches Brew was cool, it was hours of fun to dip into, the graphics were so great on it and Live/Evil, too, and then Jack Johnson! Like a throwaway, but stunning 'cause it was just flat out like a fast commercial session. And then On The Corner! Take it away, Miles. (I think someone else asked a smilar quesiton, no telling if I've left a similar response).

Q. from Greg in NYC 21 of 41
Howard, I can't figure out how to reply to a question...maybe we were the first generation who listened to various musics rather than concentrate on one area, like classical, rock, folk, jazz...many of us, it seems, were listening to many types of music (records were cheap in the late 60s, remember) and we were sophisticated and were able to establish LINKS, as James notes, and had been primed to accept someone's daring to integrate influences from the different categories of music

  A. from Whit in NYC 1 of 3
   Greg - Since questions aren't shared with the world until they have answers, I'll answer your "answer as a question" and note that guests (who are logged in as such) can post answers by using the "Answer" button on the bottom half of the screen, to answer a question on the top half. Sorry for the confusion.

Whit the Technician

  A. from Ben Ratliff in NY 2 of 3
   Greg--what you say is true, and I don't know how old you are, but I don't think it matters. I first saw Miles in '82, the Mike Stern-Al Foster band, and I don't think I had heard much before other than a couple of the '50s quintet records. I thought it was incredible at the time--not so sure I'd think so now. But that was my square one, a sound that burned itself into my brain, and I'm sure it's different from someone who loved Miles with Bird and grew confused by the flow of the Wayne-Herbie group, or someone who loved the Wayne-Herbie group and couldn't stand Agharta.

As much as I want to believe that we're all more open minded now because there's so much more records available, I'm not sure it's true. I think that by and large we still pick our favorite sounds (they may be mixtures of different sounds, I guess) and stand by them, or affix ourselves to them in generational terms. Don't you?

  A. from HM in office 3 of 3
   the explosion of styles available on handy recordings (marketed for an exploded moneyed teen/20s market for exotic music) itself generated an openess among some listeners, an expectation, even, of dramatic change/transformation in music. More in the way of transport and social significance might have been loaded onto American popular music by its audiences (and not least of all through the perculiar (that is, particular) excesses and pretentions of some music critics of that time) than in previous eras. I think we developed an expectation of change, then, that Miles was very well suited for. Once developed, that's a preference we've (children of the '60s) maintained and passed on?

Q. from Greg Masters in NYC 22 of 41
Ben, good question... from the Miles list, I get the impression that there are a lot of folk around my age, 45, who listen to a lot of different musics, and who grew up listening to the various "fields," Cream & Dylan leading us to Chicago and delta blues, electric Miles fitting in comfortably cause it was a logical step from Jimi Hendrix and the improvisatory glory (or indulgence) of the Dead and other boogsters

Q. from Peter Breslin in Santa Fe NM 23 of 41
I'm just slamming them into the question box. For Steve Rowland- I loved the MD Radio Project, heard every minute of it on WRTI in Philly. I remember the segment about MD's 70's period- there was a spooky segment from Agharta playing and a woman talking about evil spirits or something.

Anyway- will the MD Radio Project ever be available on tape or CD? I teach kids and would love to use it in the classroom.

  A. from HM, host in office 1 of 3
   Is Miles suitable for teaching--CHILDREN!!! At what age can they groove on the energy and abstraction? Dave: is this music for college students?

  A. from lieb in home 2 of 3
   certain miles can be dug by anyone-ballads of course-silent way-filles kilamanjaro maybe-so on-but the 70s stuff i don't know-hey, most musicians didn't get it-like late trane

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 3 of 3
   I think you can play kids a lot more than you think.

My children, 4 & 8 now listen to everything I do -- and seem to like it -- in the car we listen to Miles,

First Meditations, Stellar Regions -- Varese, Roy Harris, Zappa -- It just goes on and they dig it -- they don't have any reason not to like it.

The biggest problem with kids and the radio series is not the music, its the talk about drugs and the cursing. But I think it is great for classroom discussions about music, improvisation, change in art, racsism (miles getting beaten outside birdland) the difference between stars (Miles, Joni Mitchell, Roberta Flack and relative lesser knowns -- Walter Davis,Jr., Prophet Jennings, Art Davis) all of whom are brilliant.

Peter, call me at 215-843-4388.

Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 24 of 41
To Gary and/or Dave: Did MD ever rehearse the band, or was it all worked out onstage? And if Miles didn't lead you through rehearsals, did the rest of you jam together offstage or away from the studio?

  A. from lieb in home 1 of 1
   we had one rehearsal i think in boston at palls mall when we played a week and had time during the day-but it was basicallly a waste of time-for the mmost part the tunes were put together at recording sessions and then somehow one or two would find their way to the gig-but not too many-

Q. from Tesser 25 of 41
Well, here's one for Whit TT; how come every time I read the answers to one question, then hit the "next" button for the next question, the screen takes me back to Question 1? I'd love to read past #5, but I'm not having much luck, and it is definitely time-consuming to have to scroll through all the questions to get to the "next" one.

  A. from HM in office 1 of 3
   Neil, you are using the double carat next (to get to the end of the queue)? Probably not. Well, Whit?

  A. from Whit in NYC 2 of 3
   Tesser (and everyone) - This is the first run of this software, and - yes - there are glitches. I welcome reports. Please e-mail me if you can (guests can also post to the "Secret" room). Mentioning your browser and online service is helpful. Those who've signed on as public, I've become aware, may see some answers not properly synced with questions - this may not be fixed this session (I'm scratching head) - but will be straightened out for the summary - meanwhile please look around.

Now, for Tesser's report of the Next button not working, it work's from here - and I'm logged in remotely too - think it might be a browser glitch, but frankly am mystified.


  A. from Whit in NYC 3 of 3
   Tesser - The "next" button you're hitting - is that the > botton on the top half of the screen?

Is anyone else hitting that button and going to the first question rather than the next?

Q. from Greg Masters in NYC 26 of 41
Ben, good question... from the Miles list, I get the impression that there are a lot of folk around my age, 45, who listen to a lot of different musics, and who grew up listening to the various "fields," Cream & Dylan leading us to Chicago and delta blues, electric Miles fitting in comfortably cause it was a logical step from Jimi Hendrix and the improvisatory glory (or indulgence) of the Dead and other boogsters

Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 27 of 41
Another for Dave or Gary: There are a couple of well documented occasions when Miles added new musicians to the mix ... Sonny Greenwich in 69, McLaughlin at the Cellar Door, Azar Lawrence on what became Dark Magus... are there other times you recall when musicians were added on what amounted to a "one time only" basis?

  A. from Dave Liebman in via phone 1 of 1
   The only time, and it is documented more than one gig, is the third guitarist, Dominique Gaumont. He definitely was with us for a couple months. Outside of that...he let people go. After I started with him, he dropped people: first Cedric Lawson, then Lonnie Liston Smith, so there was no keyboard except Miles playing keyboard occasionally. I played with Badal in the band, three, four, five months. In one mad stroke Miles dropped Lonnie, Badal, and Balakrishna, the electric sitar player. Maybe it was finances, who knows what. It meant that particular section, where Badal would go and do his thing, was gone The congas¸‹Mtume‹became more prominent. Know idea where Mtume is know. He lives in New Jersey, I think but I don't know. I saw him at Miles' funeral; I think he's a successful producer now.

Q. from Bob in Santa 28 of 41
Gary Bartz: My understanding of the 1970/71 period is that Miles was hangin' with Hendrix, Santana, Chambers Brothers, Mati Klarwein and all the women that were in relationships with these people. There was lots of drugs and lots of music being made. Were these pleasant or happy times, in your estimation, for Miles ?

  A. from Dave Liebman in via phone 1 of 3
   Very unhappy times. He was feeling his age at this time, that was really it. He was 50 and he wanted to be 35. that was part of the deal. it was music, but it was also lifestyle. We all feel it, I feel it now, too. But that was his way to try to ot let it go. And to be the first one, and the leader, the first‹he was feeling a lot of pressures, but they were of his own making. The youth culture: he wanted to be part of it, but he came from the '50s, when everybody was cool. He was it! He'd always been part of the scene. He wwanted to be part of it then, plus he had guys around him‹Tony Williams, for instance‹who were part of it. It's understandable. But again, he'd cut himself off. Earlier, musically, he'd had Herbie, Wayne, Zawinul, he played Mingus tunes, Gil,who was a major, major asset, Red Garland had picked tunes.But at this time Miles shut himself off, he didn't want to know about things, he didn't want to know about what the others were doing, about Herbie's Chameleon‹he may have been jealous, or he didn't care about it, he had his own reasons. It was like they were his students. They shouldn't be more successful than him. If they were, he didn't want to hear about it. I can dig it. I might feel that way.

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 2 of 3
   Further to Dave's point... even after his comeback, when he was pretty well acknowledged as a cultural icon around the world (maybe for just surviving) Miles would deny that he knew that former sidemen had bands.

  A. from Gary Bartz in via phone 3 of 3
   The time I was in the band Miles was probably at his cleanest. He was very rarely using drugs, I didn't see that side. He was going to the gym every day. he had stopped smoking and drinking. that was strenuous music. He was saying You had to be like a boxer; we were going up and playing close to two hours, non-stop, every night when we were on tour. After the set, usually someone taped the concert, soembody in the band, and he would like to listen to that, call you up, talk about it [imitates] "Hey, listen to this! This is what I like." He would give directions by telling you what he liked, and then you could deal with it however you wanted to, take it where you liked. He was always up, he was up all night as are most musicians. He knew who would be up, who wouldn't be up. I know he was in good shape during that time though. Plus, the way he played the trumpet was probably the most strenuous of any trumpet players. I saw many a trumpet player come into the dresskng room and try to play his horn, and they couldn't do it. He played from his legs, that's why when his legs were not strong, he couldn't play. That's why he had to be in good shape.

Q. from Jeff 29 of 41
Hello Dave. In his autobiography, Miles talks of his frustrations with Columbia Records. Specifically, he wanted "On The Corner" marketed to African-American youth. Miles says Columbia treated it as they would any other jazz release. Dave, did Miles talk to any of his musicians about his 'goals' for the music? Did you think his targeted audience would've accepted the music if they'd have had a chance to hear it?

  A. from Dave in via phone 1 of 3
   It wasn't targed towards Sly and the Family stone's audience, taht's what he would have wanted. He admired that whole vibe, that was a big influence in that period as I wrote. I don't know what Columbia was doing, but they weren't doing much. I was in 10 Wheel Drive with Genya Ravan, a singer, five horns and a rhythm section and a singer, around that time; we were signed by Polydor, did three records, was kind of a big band around the East Coast. Two trumpets, two bones, I played baritone and the first time I played soprano. The man guy who wrote themusic was a student of Stephen Sondheims, so it reflected a little bit of broadway, a little jazz, and rock and roll. The lyrics were pretty heavy, actually, written by the other guy in charge, and I heard it just the otehr day‹they've put the best of Ten Wheel Drive out!‹and I was surprised, it was pretty sophisticated music, I liked it. It all turned on Genya, she was the jolt, the Janis Joplin, but defintely white rock and roll. Miles thing was defintely coming out of r7b, more of an edge, whereas as the horn bands, Tower of Power, BST, us, we had more of a pop thing, mainstream pop that of course had more Broadway in it. SHowbands, Vegas, and more rock than soul, not r&b. Miles was not a huge star, not in those days. He was plyaing good gigs, but those records, not until Bitchees Brew, were selling. I think he was quite frustrated because he wanted to be like the Stones, Sly, what was going on in those days. Everything became oriented towards trying to make it, the dress, the sound‹in his own way of course. I don't think Columbia knew what was going on: it worked better in the '80s. It's like he had to switch to Warner Bros. then, because he had changed, and with Columbia, he had changed but they hadbn't perceived it as such. It was still Goddard Lieberson, still the old guys. The audience taht was buying Sly and Kool and the Gang and Jimi Hendrix was still a white audience. I don't know if they would have accepted this music, ait was too far out for them. It was too little blues scales, no guitar out front, no McLaughlin live, and no singing, which is the major thing, when you come down to it.

  A. from Gary Bartz in via phone 2 of 3
   I think they would have accepted the music, but the industry has never marketed this music the way it should be. Since tahe inception of the music, and since the industry has been an industry. I've gone in with good marketing plans, and nothing ever came of it. I see it happen all the time. I saw it happen with Miles. One of our running jokes was, "The people from Columbia are here!" Because they always were wherever we were in the world: they always found us. We knew they had the power. Now if Madison Avenue can sell anything‹a pet rock‹why is it so hard to sell quality. My opinion is they don't want to sell it. It's too dangerous for them, for some reason. Because most serious artists have brains, I think. I have a new saying: You have your house musicians, your field musicians. They house musicians are the ones they're interested in selling. Miles was never a house musician. A field musician is someone who'se always going to fight for his art, and your fighting an industry that does not care about your art. That's the problem: it's a symbiotic relationship between two parties who have very different goals. That's the basic problem.

  A. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 3 of 3
   Gary's description of house vs. field musicians seems quite apt. Even when he was playing "commercial music" and was hoping to be like the Rolling Stones, Miles was, I think, trying his best to put the art and the subtlety into it.

That is what he was referring to in the Quincy Jones movie I mentioned earlier. He said he was stuck with just one personality.

Q. from Darryl in Maryland 30 of 41
Taking all of Miles's career into account, how would the '70s era compare to Miles's other periods?

  A. from Dave Liebman in via phone 1 of 2
   I'd have to say in some respects it does not hold up as well. In musical respects. I'm talking music, it just doesn't have the depth and the quality that the others did. But it had something, that was equal, that was the sense of quest and search, and energy and excitement. No question about it. Musically I think it was rather disorganized period, and I think part of the reason was that he did not allow the other musicians to have input compositionally, to compose or bring in idea,s which was always true before that. There's nothing by anybody else, one tune by Zawinul. And I think he went at it, whether it was ego, or he was bent about doing his own thing, he just didn't get any help. I think that was a mistake. And that's someething that's seldom spoken about.

  A. from Gary Bartz in via phone 2 of 2
   My favorite period was the band with Trane, but that was when I was a kid. I liked all of the periods, but my favorite is the '50s. When Trane arrived, that's the band that I liked, and I saw them live more than once. One thing is that they were a band. The only time there's ever been any innovations in this music called jazz is when there's a working band, not a bunch of guys getting together to jam. A working band is a laboratory; for years on end you work on some of the same material, you try it every conceivable way, you work things out‹and that's why the music is so bad now,has stagnated. Because the younger musicians have no where to learn. And not enough time, evey when they've learned, to work together. This music is a science. Just liek scientists go into the lab and work on things, the band is our lab; that's where we worked on things. Each band I was in I learned something: I learned to build a solo and swing hard, working with Art Blakey and the Messengers, with Lee Morgan being very helpful there, too. I learned how to play fast working with Max Roach. I learned how to play modes working with McCoy Tyner. I learned, working with Mingus, different things: he was a workshop, anyway, so that was a laboratory, about notation and different things he would work on. Just as if you go to school each teacher an maybe teach you one thing; no one teacher can ever teach you everything about every subject. Nowadays you have young kids leading bands before they've ever been in one. It's impossible, it's impossible. And it's not fair.

Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 31 of 41
Gary: There has been lots of speculation about what is and what's not in vault at Columbia or in Teo's hands... Did the band do any studio work with you?

  A. from Dave Liebman in via phone 1 of 2
   Our band definitely did more than what was released. I coudlnt' remember specifics. He didn't tape live gigs all the time, not that, but with all these bootlegs coming out, they were certainly taped by somebody, in Europe, at least. I'm sure the sessions will eventually get issued, we'll hear them. There was a lot of crap in those sessions, he just left the mikes on all the time, and went. Teo would do the editing; I remember Get Up With It was weird because he repeated my flute solo twice. I don't know why. That was strange. Teo was proud of doing that, too. I don't know why. It was pretty out when I heard myself play it: it was 27 minutes!

  A. from Gary Bartz 2 of 2
   No, during the period I was in the band Miles felt that band should only be recorded live. The more I thoiught about it, it took a while for us to get into it, each concert. It was a real organic type of band. Rather than just go in and play heads, he didn't want to do that anymore. To do what he wanted to do took a while, and it happened best when we played live.

Q. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 32 of 41
Question for Dave and Gary,or anybody -- One of the interesting things being discussed here tonight is the close relatioship of Miles music to rock, funk and soul music. Why does it seem like such a stretch for folks to appreciate all of this stuff simultaneously? Why hasn't the jazz world become more expansive? instead of more parochial? Dave touched on lack of creative spirit a while ago, but I think there must be more to it than that. I almost got thrown off of WRTI in Philadelphia for playing Hendrix in 1980. ( I insisted and kept on playing him.)

  A. from Dave in via phone 1 of 4
   First of all, the popularity of those genres, immediately, repells so-called artistes. Including myself. Those genres don't need the support of us: why don't we accept it? They don't need us, and we don't need them. There's an attitude there, no question about it. And in my eyes, the music's just too unsophisticated it. Jazz musicians spend years and years learing to be subtle craftsmen. And as much as I really dug, for example, Hendrix and the Beatles and Sly, I could never put them on the same level artistically as the great jazz musician. I just couldn't. For sensual, feel, happiness, love, peace, yes, wonerful. But as far as depth of thought and emotions, it just doesn't come near it. There's been some that has, but not much. Basically it's boring. That's why jazz musicians reject it, in the end. I don't know if that means they've got to go back and play like Wynton Marsalis. But then, loook at all those guys trying to jam rap and crap and bap all into one thing now! I'M Wrong‹who am I to say. Maybe it's just a generational thing. I've got to put that out there, because I don't know.

  A. from Gary Bartz in by phone 2 of 4
   I think it's the industry that has created the monster. It all comes form the black culture: rock, r&b, jazz, even the Latin stuff comes from African roots. In the early days, all the artits and entertainers knew eeach other, they weren't compartimentalized. But the industry, trying to "market" things, with no intention of ever marketing some things that are just not their cup of tea‹I mean, if they loved the music, they would sell it. And they are in charge of this music, they own this music. The musicians don't own it, the corporations do, and they own it forever. They pass it around as if we were five dollar whores. They sell our masters and don't even ask us if we'd like to buy them; many of us would. They put out reissues is different parts of the world, and don't even tell us, we have to find out from our fans. As I said before, they don't care about us, and it's one of the few big industries that don't look out for their future. Most industries have research funds, so they'd be ready 10 years down the line. This industry is only intersted in what's selling today, and they don't care what it is. Jazz happens to fall into the category that's a tax rightoff. I say jazz hasn't become more expansive because of the companies: today it's almost impossible for a jazz musician to make the record you want to make. The companies tell you who to put on the record, what to play, what to call the song, how to dress. They're trying to control someting uncontrollable, and that's jazz.

  A. from Gary Bartz in by phone 3 of 4
   But the musicians, they are the most open=minded. My most recent record, The Blues Chronicles, I had to fight like hell to get the rap on the record, but fortunately my contract gave me the right of final say. So I insisted that the rap had to be on the record, because that's what made the record for me. That was a part of the album. But most guys, especially the younger guys, either don't know they can say anyting, or they don't care. And I think they care. They're just so interested in furthering their careers and getting a record out that they water down their musics for the industry. And then the industry does not sell the record.

  A. from whit in NYC 4 of 4
   As technical clown, I have to suggest that people page back to look for new messages. Seems the programming language I set this up in is smart enough to record the time of the message in the local time of the person posting it. I had expected it to be in the local time of the host machine, and have the messages sorting in time reported - which as it turns out isn't the absolute time of posting. This will be fixed for the next session! Meanwhile, hindsight may be better than foresight. Beware the zones of time.

Q. from Dylan Johnson in Boston, MA 33 of 41
Mr. Liebman and/or Mr. Bartz,

Q. from whit in NYC 34 of 41
Just a test - please don't answer this one.

Q. from Dylan Johnson in Boston, MA 35 of 41
Mr. Liebman,

Q. from Steve Rowland in Philadelphia 36 of 41
Dave, I hear you and I think you are basically right. But somehow, these other "commercial" forms have found ways to touch the pulse of the time, in a way that Wynton certainly isn't doing. I think that is what Miles seemed to be after, and then trying to imbue it with his subtlety and use of colors.

But what do you think Miles would be playing if he was a teenager now. My suspicion is that it would sound closer to Prince that to Wynton. What do you think?

  A. from Gary Bartz in via phone 1 of 1
   No question it would be closer to Prince than Wynton. Wynton sounds like Miles, so what is that? But it's hard to say, because we have more to draw on, now. More history, for one thing. Being the individual he was, whatever Miles would be playing, we'd be listening to!

Q. from Jose 37 of 41
Is Stanley Crouch around as advertised? If yes, this one is for him: what is your opinion about the trajectory of trumpet playing throughout the last twenty years, for instance from Miles, then, to Marsalis, today? Have your views about Miles changed during the same period? (If SC is not present will one of the present be able to comment about the first part of the question?) As important and for organizers and guests: congratulations for an extraordinary interactiview. Please repeat this kind of thing as often as possible. And the technical aspect of the thing was, also, quite good. Congrats also to Whitt. All the best for everybody and thank you.

  A. from James Hale in Ottawa 1 of 1
   Unfortunately, Mr. Crouch couldn't make it. Eric Nisenson also was supposed to be here tonight, but the technology was not kind to him and he couldn't log on.

Q. from James Hale in Ottawa 38 of 41
Thanks to everyone who participated in this. This is the kind of thing we plan to do more of at Jazzhouse, so come on back. Special thanks to Whit for service above and beyond.

  A. from HM in Office 1 of 2
   Big seconding on that, all chat participants. It's been, as we hoped it would be, big fun, at least at this end. And though we of course have some bugs to work out, the JJA is Miles ahead!On our next chats we *will* get Eric Nisenson, who was unable to connect‹sorry all the way 'round‹John Szwed will anwer questions re Sun Ra, Lewis Porter chat re Coltrane, Bill Moody hopefully on jazz mysteries and Rafi Zabor on jazz fiction. Be back soon....

  A. from whit in NYC 2 of 2
   Thanks James. All should know this forum was your idea - and I apologize for the initial roughness of execution. With a few more sessions, we should get this instrument to sing.

Q. from John Szwed in CT 39 of 41
More of a comment than a question: there were, of course, several Miles Davises. In an earlier life he was remarkably closed to many musics and musicians: he went out of his way to trash people like Stevie Wonder, Raymond Scott, Sun Ra, et al (even while holding up the 5th Dimension as a model pop group). Yet in the 70's and early 80's he opened up to Sly, J.B. & Jimi, of course, but also to country & western, Stockhausen, Pederecki, Indian music, etc. It helped to have Gil Evans asw a friend, but he went beyond Gil.

Q. from whit in NYC 40 of 41
Note to guests: If all works correctly, the public shall cease to see the option to ask new questions as of midnight. Invited guests who aren't fully exhausted yet may ask and answer questions until the cows head out to the fields again ... but seriously, thanks for being here! Hope it was rewarding.

C o m m e n t s

Miles Beyond transcript 1 of 11
Warning: date(): It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected the timezone 'UTC' for now, but please set date.timezone to select your timezone. in /web/jh/public_html/com/comnlib.php on line 221
October 02, 97

Well, here it is, with a couple of our clitches and "secret" messages included, a couple posts posted twice‹but pretty much as it went down, the first of a projected series of JJA on-line chats. Please feel free to continue the threads by adding your comments here, briefly. Or sign in with your e-mail address so we can contact you when we open up this chat with other panelists in the future!

[<<] [<]