There's a big difference between a purist, which is someone who wants something to stay the same forever, and a perfectionist, which is someone who wants change for the better.
It's very easy to confuse the two when you're receiving criticism and put on the defensive.
Purism isn't about logic, it's about nostalgia.
Perfectionism will generally be based in logic, or a point of view subtly or wildly different from your own.
as a perfectionist, i can safely say that it is not based on logic. the rational mind cowers to the emotions behind perfectionism, and then explains it as if it were its idea. a logical person would know when to stop, when the law of diminishing returns is about to turn negative or shortly thereafter, a perfectionist such as myself will not bother to start because the law of diminishing returns is exists.
a purist, on the other hand, may be completely open to new ideas within the framework of bebop or within the framework of "real instruments"—even if it ends up sounding bad. a purist with taste i think would be able to marry nostalgia with the new that is good, a purist without taste probably just wants to be safe, or can't be bothered to listen closely enough to the music to find out if it is any good.
the fact is, the streams of missives from the guy may have been because he was a purist or it may have actually been pretty bad and his derision was from the angle of a purist.
even if everything about a man is known, his intentions are forever foreign to us. it's the problem with subjectivity.
On and on (and on) he went. Hancock had “forgotten his jazz roots” and was “trying to be too hip”. He should “never allow that electric bass on stage” and has to “leave all this weird synth keyboard stuff alone”
Bless him, this must've been irritating The Purist for nearly 40 years; I mean, it's been nearly that long since Hancock released the revolutionary and synth-heavy HeadHunters:
Thank you for mentioning Head Hunters. One of my favorite pieces of music to date. Also a great example of a record you can listen to straight through and enjoy every son equally.
That's what I kept thinking the whole night. Like, dude, have you actually listened to Herbie Hancock any time recently? He hasn't played with Miles in 45 years. LET IT GO.
Medium-related comment (sorry), but I wanted to point out a great video of Cantelope Island played by Herbie Hancock. This really is a good example of jazz fusion (With the C -> Ab transition)
If I had the chance to see Hancock, I'd surely want to see some jazz like that.. So I somewhat can understand the 'purist' in the example. I wouldn't however whine about it as I'm sure it'd be some epic music.
I have seen Hancock recently, at a tribute to Miles Davis with Wayne Shorter, and Marcus Miller. And witnessed a different emotion, equally bad to innovation: people without a grain of critical thinking. In other words, they had to like the music, not because it was great, but because it was Hancock, Shorter, and Miller.
Frankly, the concert sucked. There was no intimacy, it sounded cold, and the instruments were completely drained by arena-style drums. At the same festival, in tiny rooms, fantastic innovative music was made. But most people rave only about the things they can namedrop to friends.
Totally agreed. I can't say I particularly enjoyed the set either—but it wasn't because it wasn't what I expected, it was because it wasn't as good as I expected it to be.
it amazes me how much of what is subjectively good is based on reputation alone. like derek jeter winning gold gloves.
but there is a flip side, while you found it cold and lacking intimacy, the people who rave based on reputation alone actually got something out of it—even if just the equivalent to a cheap trinket—they saw someone famous play with other famous people, and thus may have enjoyed it based on reputation alone.
But where's the fusion? There's a guitar, but jazz guitar. A nice bit of synth work... but there's nothing experimental, or involving influences from other genres. Not much influence of other styles, even.
My personal opinion is that this is an example of very talented musicians performing with great proficiency, albeit whilst sticking to pretty safe ground.
I think the term "fusion" is great example of where an amount of purism is required; certainly in popular usage, right now the term is essentially meaningless.
It's very easy to confuse the two when you're receiving criticism and put on the defensive.
Purism isn't about logic, it's about nostalgia.
Perfectionism will generally be based in logic, or a point of view subtly or wildly different from your own.