well i am not a musician, i just know what i like to hear - i am drawn to all of joni's work and of course i have ones i prefer over others - but i feel defensive when people dismiss a brilliant piece like TI, for a piece like Clouds, which to my ear is nowhere near as beautiful or as musically complex. the more i listen to TI the more deceptive the complex guitar work becomes in that it sounds very simple in its beauty. i have been listening to joni almost every day of my life for 30 years - i remember fans leaving in droves over HOSL and Hejira, and those works being dismissed by critics and the musically educated, now those works are generally considered masterpieces. so in 30 years will NRH be considered in that way? peace, david
> I'm going to do my best to choose not to read your reply as snippy. (insert > emoticon here) > > It's not a matter of being smarter or more educated, and certainly not to the > imagined exclusion of intuition, an essential component of art whether > schooled or not. But it should be recognized that there is nothing inherently > anti-intuition about theory, analysis, or education, despite the romantic > myth that there is. > > I don't understand your idea that jazz musicians cover her earlier work > because it is "easier." Specifically, what is easier about it? In my own > investigation of her songs, I find nothing easy about interpreting the early > stuff, in fact, just the opposite ... there are so many oblique (albeit > organic, with a natural internal logic) turns of melody and harmony, that > successfully negotiating their terrain is quite difficult at best. In fact, > my own feeling is that jazz musicians have chosen these earlier songs because > they offer so much more (and so much more interesting) melodic/harmonic meat > on the bone on which to gnaw. At least that's why I do. You might also ask > David Lahm right here on the list why he does. > > -Fred
