antoniodeste

I believe it's been almost twenty years since I last listened to this stuff. I used to be, and still am in part, a decent Metheny fan, but I never really digested something like this. It should be noted that it's a free jazz work to which Metheny lent himself because he needed a calling card to present to the new Geffen label, and he had always dreamed of an album with his idol Ornette Coleman. One of the albums that (he says) shook him the most was "New York is Now!" In fact, I talked about it with the guitarist from Missouri, I think in '87, during a PMG tour; he tried to explain to me the motivations, the meaning, and everything else; he then told me to go home and listen to it again. I did, but nothing had changed. In fact, I noticed that Denardo (Ornette's son) really didn't know how to play the drums. Oh well. Fortunately, when it comes to collaborations, there's "The Missouri Sky" with Charlie Haden.

I greatly appreciated the revival of this significant work by one of the most impactful bands of the 80s, and I would say that I generally agree with what I’ve read and, as usual, with the imaginative flair of Mariaelena, whom I greet. I will, however, say that for what it’s worth, I would definitely give my personal award to the previous album "Porcupine"; probably the lesser presence of acoustic or orchestral elements and the greater rhythmic involvement make me prefer it. But, as usual, it’s just a matter of taste. :)

......I have some doubts about the central part as well.....: It came to my mind when I met Fabio Concato at a Yes concert in Assago. While talking about his album "Ballando con Chet Baker," I told him that I found it very beautiful but "centrally weak"; he looked at me with a smirk and told me that this, among many other things, was what he was missing.......

It's a matter of approach and style; I almost always prefer to treat the subject globally, sharing my overall impressions; it's a matter of choices; I really don't like to write a review by examining an album track by track, breaking it down, and putting it under the microscope. :)

I believe that thanks are unnecessary, Fosca, for as much as I may appreciate it. There is, however, an important convergence regarding the meaning of listening to music (and the importance of the emotions that arise from it) that I like and in which, as you will have understood, I recognize both myself and you. This is important. Best regards.

A heartfelt review from someone who loved Daniele deeply and knows him well. I just hope that Pino Daniele manages to read these lines and thinks of returning to Naples.....who knows....

With A-ha, you can at least have a laugh. A-ha.

I still feel perplexed by Sylvian1982's attempts at "explanation"; after all, if it is perceived this way, I certainly cannot oppose it relentlessly. Instead, I would largely share Fosca's impression and reflection: "And if what Hollis wanted to convey with his work is this uncomfortable, sometimes necessary, delightful malaise of living, well, then it's an absolute masterpiece... I don't know, I 'feel' it this way. Music is emotion above all, and there is indeed a lot of it here." I quote what Fosca wrote because, although seemingly contradictory in one part ("delightful malaise of living"), it unequivocally clarifies the nature and direction of works like this. Then, one’s own feeling and analytical ability do the rest… :)

@Joe: Thanks a lot!

@sylvian 1982: Please, must he give himself to the audience? Is it excessively intimate to be musical? I really don't understand.