I’ve also excised portions from my original post to make amends.
Thanks for reading, Alex
In the past couple of months, I've had this weird, recurring thing with John Lurie. I think it started back in September, when I tracked down the Criterion Collection edition of "Stranger Than Paradise," the viewing of which rekindled my curiosity about the man's legacy in the pantheon of New York City musicians. I knew he'd formed the so-called "fake jazz" ensemble Lounge Lizards during the nuclear winter of No Wave in the late `70s/early 80's (featuring Anton Fier of the Feelies on drums, Arto Lindsay of DNA on guitar, his brother Evan on keyboards and a gent named Steve Piccolo on bass), but what I credibly know about jazz -- fake or otherwise -- isn't much. I did know that Lurie seemed like an incredibly cool cat, and I enjoyed the snippets of music I'd heard by him in various films. I'd always loved the lulling "Bob the Bob," although that particular piece, as it turned out, was recorded by a completely different line-up from the afore-cited incarnation of the band.
In any case, after that, I started searching again with half-an-eye for that debut Lounge Lizards disc. Again, while I'm normally not a big saxophone fan (maybe I'm just haunted by FEAR's scathing indictment of the instrument in its association with NYC), I felt it was music I should know about, given my fascination with all the fixtures around it.
In November, meanwhile, you may remember I sang the praises of the new photo blog I'd encountered called New York City 1990's: Photo Archives by Gregoire Allessandrini. If you've not checked it out, you really need to do so at once, as it's just an amazing trove of images from the era in question. But, while pouring over Gregoire's shots, I came across this excellent shot of posted flyers and bills on a wall in Hell's Kitchen, and sure enough -- there was Lurie's name once again. That's the shot in question at the top of this post, by the way. I hope Gregoire doesn't mind me using it.
Some time after that, I went down to Chinatown to check out the latest incarnation of Downtown Music Gallery. While there, I finally picked up a copy of the Lounge Lizards disc. I'm not entirely sure what I was expecting. Not being a big jazz guy, all I can say it that it has some great, compelling moments on it -- along with some moments that didn't really grab me. Suffice to say, there are a couple of numbers wherein the amount of dizzying noodlrey gets a bit out of hand, but ultimately that's just a rock-head talking about jazz. What do I know?
On a recent, aimless Christmas-shopping expedition, I dialed up on the album on my iPod as I was walking around SoHo and across Canal Street. I frequently do this -- call up certain music while walking around certain neighborhoods. I'll listen to Television or the Ramones when walking through the East Village. I'll fill my headphones with Murphy's Law or the Cro-Mags while walking by the site of the old Ritz. I'll blast Missing Foundation when traipsing through Tompkins Square Park. Invariably, while my subconscious intention may be to magically transport myself back in time, these endeavors rarely work. Too much has happened since those respective eras. As such, walking down Courtlandt Alley off Canal in the direction of 77 White Street (the former site of the Mudd Club) while listening to the Lounge Lizards might sound like a romantic notion, but it did nothing to magically conjure anything other than the confirmation that everything is different from how it once was ... a point that was already self-evident.
Anyway, while I enjoyed the chaotic elements of skronk n' honk on the debut Lounge Lizards disc (the combination of Lurie's horn with Lindsay's scratching, squealing guitar discord being an interesting dynamic), I think I was really hoping for something more along the more melodic lines of the afore-cited "Bob the Bob." I did a little research and learned that said track was originally released on the 1988 album, Voice of Chunk (a disc which featured Marc Ribot taking Arto Lindsay's place on guitar and bass duties handled by future Skeleton Key mainman Erik Sanko). Clearly, this was the album I needed to go fetch.
As I might've guessed, however, the album is long out of print. "No problem," I thought, "This is New York City! I'm sure I can find it here somewhere." Quite often, I can be a naive chump who believes his own bullshit. This was one of those times.
Unable to find it at any of the paltry few likely spots left on the map, I decided that a trek back down into the maze of Chinatown to Downtown Music Gallery on Monroe Street was in order. So yesterday, that's what I did. They were sure to have it, I thought.
I was wrong, of course.
Whatever. I still wanted to track down that album. At this point, my best options were all on the Internet, but as I've whined before, I don't really enjoy that so much. Yes, I can actually prize Voice of Chunk for a tidy sum on eBay or seamlessly acquire its mp3s on iTunes, but fuck that! I want to buy the disc from an actual shop. Apparently, that's a tall order.
So, anyway, as I was lamenting all this this morning, imagine my surprise when my friend Tim Broun of Stupefaction fame posts this amazing clip of John Lurie himself, filmed as recently as this past November, speaking lucidly and affably about his days filming "Fishing with John." In it, the man sounds completely normal and is frankly hilarious.
I'm lifting part one from Tim, but check on his site tomorrow for Part Two.
Weird, though, right?
Nice one...Part two of the Q&A is here: http://theworldsamess.blogspot.com/2012/12/movie-of-week-q-fishing-with-john-with_30.html.
Also, here's an interview I did with JL a few years ago that may interest you: http://www.furious.com/perfect/johnlurie.html
Posted by: Tim B | December 30, 2012 at 05:33 PM
Alex -I don't know this Bruce from Downtown Music, but apparently he is an expert on me.
What you are doing here, though seemingly well intentioned, is just adding to the gossip and linking to that perverse New Yorker article is about the ugliest thing you can do to me.
If you had any respect for me or my music you could have done about 10 more minutes research on the web instead of walking around aimlessly on the street. If you had you would have discovered the following that all eviscerate that trash in the New Yorker which they now refuse to be accountable for.
Rick Moody on the New Yorker article
http://therumpus.net/2011/06/swinging-modern-sounds-30-what-is-and-is-not-masculine/
An interview with Larson Sutton regarding the New Yorker and my "warring permutations" of my band.
http://www.jambands.com/features/2011/02/01/john-lurie-sustains/
An interview with Criterion
http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/2386-talking-with-john
and a letter written to the New Yorker by practically everyone interviewed for the New Yorker article
http://johnlurie-newyorker.blogspot.com
Finally Alex, I am not "flakey" on any level and I doubt you could find a person on the planet who actually knows me who would characterize me as such.
best, John Lurie
Posted by: john lurie | December 31, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Wow, Mr. Lurie -- My sincere apologies. I'll amend this post later today.
Posted by: Alex in NYC | December 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM
No - leave it. I think it works fine. This is what happens to me over and over. Someone is interested in my music or my paintings and what they get to first is the New Yorker.
Is horrible - you do 40 years of work and because of one salacious, slob of a journalist who writes for what was once a legitimate magazine, your reputation is destroyed.
Please leave it.
Posted by: john lurie | December 31, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Anyway, this works perfectly for your idea of me popping up in surprising ways.
When you were walking through Chinatown you probably walked by my apartment, where Nesrin the Zoomer (my hero assistant) could have handed you a copy of Voice of Chunk.
My best to Bruce.
love and peaches, John
Posted by: john lurie | December 31, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Nice blog post, Alex. It's great that you're seeking out more Lounge Lizard music. Voice of Chunk is definitely worth hunting down, as is their 1998 album Queen of All Ears, and pretty much all of John's solo work. I think you might especially like The Legendary Marvin Pontiac - Greatest Hits.
I read your earlier edit, and I, too, took exception to the quotes attributed to Bruce. There are many words I could use to describe John Lurie - "flakey" is definitely not one of them. In this digital age of the blog post, it's unfortunately become increasingly commonplace to take quotes at face value and forego the fact-checking process. Thank you for having the decency to write the addendum.
The New Yorker's hack piece completely disregarded John's myriad artistic achievements and chose instead (despite having pitched the article as a profile focusing on John's life and work) to shine a salacious spotlight on and further aggravate an already volatile situation.
More than two years after it was first published, this horrid piece of journalism still pops up online on an almost weekly basis. In an ideal and fair world, every online mention would be accompanied by the letter John mentions above, signed by pretty much everyone the New Yorker interviewed, as well as Rick Moody's wonderful rebuttal, which does what Tad Friend failed to do – write an honest profile about a man, his music and his art.
http://therumpus.net/2011/06/swinging-modern-sounds-30-what-is-and-is-not-masculine/
The John Lurie I know is an honest-to-a-fault, warm and razor-sharp witty individual.
Oh, and he's a pretty wonderful painter too:
http://johnlurieart.com/
Posted by: Coen Rees | December 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM
Again, I can't apologize enough for this. I also think I need to extend that apology to Bruce from Downtown Music Gallery, as I may have unduly paraphrased him. Honestly, it's a valuable experience to know that words have ramifications, but I sincerely regret the whole thing.
Posted by: Alex in NYC | December 31, 2012 at 01:08 PM
it is ok Alex - honest. I am sure you meant no harm. I wish someone would explain to the "journalists" and "editors" from the New Yorker that what you write can have an awful effect on people's lives.
But now it seems you have amended what you wrote and my posts no longer make any sense.
Posted by: john lurie | December 31, 2012 at 02:11 PM
I removed the link in question and the bits of hearsay, as they were ultimately just that, but I think your posted points still ring true.
Once again, words have ramifications. I can blithely rationalize an irresponsible post here by self-depreciatingly suggesting that "no one reads this stuff," but that doesn't make it right. Whether it's read by one person or one hundred people, what I put up here has got to be on the level. The fact that it's "only a blog" is no excuse for lazy reporting when it comes to the work and reputations of other.
However unintentional, I besmirched an artist I greatly respect and implicated a hard-working small business-owner by alleging his complicity in a bit of gossip. This has been a very sobering wake-up call.
Posted by: Alex in NYC | December 31, 2012 at 02:48 PM
I've always wondered about that New Yorker piece; my love of the magazine has suffered from more than just some sloppy, weirdly vindictive writing over the last few years, and it's fallen off my must read list after over 20 years. As for Lurie, he's always been a bit of a hero of mine, and Voice of Chunk is one of my favorite LL albums. (Also check out Big Heart: Live in Tokyo. Very underrated.) Once, many years ago, I bummed a cigarette off him at the Knitting Factory. I'm ashamed to say that I still think that's one of the closest brushes with cool I've ever had. Glad to see you're still around, John - howzabout a new album?
Posted by: rick mcginnis | December 31, 2012 at 02:58 PM
Hello Rick - I have Advanced Lyme Disease so playing music is difficult and playing the saxophone is impossible now.
I also still am dealing with this stalker situation which is a great deal more severe than how it was presented in the New Yorker. The New Yorker seems to have a penchant for painting a grey area in order to appear objective. But in this case there really was no grey area and what they did was vague, irresponsible and perhaps criminal.
In any case, the combination of these two things makes it very difficult to accomplish much of anything at all.
Sorry about that.
John
Posted by: john lurie | January 01, 2013 at 09:01 AM
on a brighter note - there are my paintings
on a brighter note - there are my paintings
http://johnlurieart.com
Posted by: john lurie | January 01, 2013 at 09:10 AM
I'm so sorry to hear that, John. I've been enjoying the paintings - hoping I get a chance to see them in a gallery one day and not just online or in print. I always try to look at them for awhile before reading the title, which always adds a witty coda to the experience. Take care of yourself, and hopefully at least one of these situations will resolve itself in the new year.
Posted by: rick mcginnis | January 01, 2013 at 09:17 AM
Happy New Year to you all. Here's to a better, brighter 2013.
Posted by: Alex in NYC | January 01, 2013 at 09:50 AM
Dear Alex ,
I definitly don't mind you using this shot of John Lurie's posters from my New York in the 1990's Photo Blog ! On the contrary ! Thank you for your great work and your interest in my work and these old images I was so glad to share with you and New York lovers of all kinds !
Happy new year to you and all your readers.
Keep up the great work you're doing !
GA
http://galessandrini.blogspot.fr
Posted by: Gregoire Alessandrini | January 03, 2013 at 04:50 PM
Thanks for the Gregoire Allessandrini tip. Going to go check those out right now.
I just did an interview with Lurie, by the way, which you can read here: http://quotesyes.com/2013/12/02/john-lurie-interview/
Posted by: Jeff Taylor | December 06, 2013 at 10:04 PM