The Devil's Advocate

The Devil’s Advocate

When a review isn’t heresy and prophesy prevails

A new profile of Louie Cruz Beltran was posted on 9/10/2002 at www.latinola.com. I read through it and was struck by some of Louie’s comments, and compelled to reflect on earlier conversations with folks about his music, especially his debut CD It’s My Time. Earlier this year the Living Room posted a review of the CD by Elena Walker. Months later, Elena did another review for www.allaboutjazz.com, which was totally different in style and focus. A visitor then asked if Elena had changed her mind about Louie’s music. Her response boiled down to this: the first review was an attempt to generate some controversy and therefore discussion about the music. It was deliberately written in a way to produce a reaction but clearly failed. One can speculate why, but I suppose to some devout fans that piece was simply heresy and they weren’t going to dignify it with a response. An unfortunate choice, as you will see later.

About one month ago I was on the phone with a visitor to the Living Room who voiced some very strong objections to the first review. Under the circumstances (I was at work) it was not an opportune moment to get into an argument so I simply sat back and listened. Now, after some deliberation and reviewing what my caller had to say, I have decided to revisit two points the caller raised about the Living Room review and connect the dots (the latest catch-phrase) between it and the latest profile.

The first argument (my order of arguments, not the caller’s) is that the Living Room review reflects “artistic ignorance.” It was acknowledged that the second review was totally different, but it was “motivated by opportunity.” Let me dispatch this one quickly. First, Elena is writing for free when she submits pieces to AllAboutJazz, as are all the writers. If “opportunity” was the motivation, it was the opportunity to showcase the CD to Louie’s benefit; it was not about monetary gratification. Having won a Canadian award for a children’s book it can be fairly said that her writing skills are not at issue so she doesn’t require an “opportunity” to build credibility as a writer. As for the claim of “artistic ignorance:” Elena came to journalism by way of her career as a professional musician. She was asked to review other musicians and decided a journalism degree was called for to do it properly. I have heard the stories, and seen the pictures, of her past life as a musician with her ex-husband, a jazz guitarist. There is much more to say, but it is Elena’s to say if she chooses. The bottom line is that a musician, familiar with the jazz genre, reviewed another musician’s work, which incorporated that genre.

If the real issue is Elena’s interpretation of the music on the CD, then we have a different matter at hand and her interpretation is properly the subject of discussion. Reviewers (previously known as critics) have offered their interpretations for ages through their reviews. The artists and fans don’t always agree with them, but they often provide the starting point for critical thought about the piece under consideration. Remember Jim Wright’s Delta Blues reviews? If the reviewer is not knowledgeable about the genre s/he is reviewing, one can properly argue “artistic ignorance,” but is not appropriate to do so here, given Elena’s background. Which leads to the next point.

My caller’s second argument is that Elena had no right to start a dialogue under a false pretense (attempting to create controversy), which could mislead people who read the first review and never came back. I worked really hard to muzzle my inclination to disagree. Why? Because Elena, indeed every person, has the right to argue the opposite point and start a discussion that way if they choose. Consider the Devil’s Advocate. This person is employed by the Vatican to deliberately and forcefully argue against the canonization of a person. They make Hedda Hopper look like a Girl Scout so thoroughly do they scrounge for derogatory information. The Advocate’s job is not done until the final decision is made. Ask yourself how many people you know who do just what Elena did? They may drive you nuts, but in the end you often appreciate the way they challenge your comfortable assumptions and beliefs. They are your personal Devil’s Advocates.

Elena’s review was intended to get a rise out of people, to stimulate critical thinking. Her arguments came down to this: the CD was not up to Louie’s live performances. She states,

In Louie’s case, this CD is neither dynamite nor a disaster: It’s a little more like firecrackers. I suspect the problem has been too little ego. Louie restricting himself and not allowing the room he needs to explore the depths of what he can do and what his fans travel to hear when he works live.

It’s a sad observation but when reading his notes and listening to the CD, I get the feeling that Louie has tried to satisfy everyone but himself. If I have a criticism of the finished product, it’s that it’s too generalized

Louie live is exuberant! Contrast, color, energy, fire! Life in all its fullness is explored and listeners are treated to a cornucopia of sound. Louie live is a kaleidoscope! Louie on CD is a blander, “safer” version.

Let’s have another CD Louie: One where we get to hear you focusing on the music you love to do!

“It’s My Time” showcases only a modicum of this man’s abilities.

For those of us who purchased the CD, these were hard words to read. If we read her comparing and contrasting of Louie’s performances at Pasadena in March 2001 and at the GB2001, we get a real taste of the differences she experienced. Yet no one took up the gauntlet regarding the CD (or the live performance at Pasadena). Did readers believe they were out of their depth, or that such comments amounted to heresy? Did readers believe that Louie’s music is good music, maybe great music, all the time? Or were they uncomfortable with a possible truth? If we are unwilling to consider the quality of what we are being presented, how can we honor the growth that occurs within an artist over time? More importantly, when and how will we recognize that growth? Few people write their magnum opus on the first try. Consider Elena’s comments in her AllAboutJazz review. She states,

It’s My Time encompasses a selection of Beltran’s compositions, drawn from his successful career.

The emphasis on this first solo CD is on musical self-exploration: A beginning of the exposure of Beltran’s private music, unique and apart from his work with others.

In other words, Louie is sharing himself with us, but this is a beginning! There is, there must be, more to come and what comes next must build and improve on what we have already heard. But have we heard the first CD clearly and will we know if the next CD is better, or simply accept it because Louie created it?

I suspect that Louie would agree with Elena’s statements in the AllAboutJazz review in view of his own comment in the LatinoLA profile,

Those who won’t get a chance to visit one of Beltran’s performances within the greater Los Angeles area can still get a glimpse into the facets of his life through “It’s My Time,” but Beltran cautions not to take his debut CD as a complete reflection of what he’s all about, “To anyone who wants to get to know me and my music – that is ongoing,” he explains.

He says it is “ongoing,” which means growth will occur, or should occur.

When I look at the Living Room review in its totality I am forced to conclude that it is an honest reflection of Elena’s experience of Louie’s music. Elena likes Louie and his music, read what she says about the clips on his web site and the live performance at the GB2001. There is much to be said that is positive about the CD, and she said it in the AllAboutJazz review. Her difficulty is that the CD lacks the verve that marks his live performances. Controversial? Only if you believe that It’s My Time is the pinnacle of Louie’s creativity. It isn’t, and Louie confirms that in the LatinoLA quote. In this regard, Elena’s reviews are consistent with Louie’s self-assessment.

Louie has another CD in the works, and no doubt it will be quite different from the debut. Louie suggests that the envelope embracing his music is ever expanding. He has, in effect, moved the horizon further away in using the word “ongoing,” and this is a challenge for himself as well. Whether he realizes it or not (and I think he does) he has raised our expectations. Those of us who are former musicians or aficionados of Latin jazz will know if the next CD represents a movement forward in Louie’s music. What about those of us who don’t fall into that category? No doubt we will show our support for Louie by buying the CD and promoting it to our friends. We will latch on to every positive comment from every jazz source as a sign that Louie is gaining a greater audience, and greater recognition by his peers. What if his peers, the aficionados, or the industry disagrees with our assessment? Will we be willing to listen, or will we try to shield ourselves, and Louie, from any bad news?

When we blindly accept a product, whether artistic or commercial, without consideration of its quality, we open the door to mediocrity. To forgo excellence in the effort to be supportive can be very counterproductive in the long run. Why? The recipient of our support never really knows if they are truly fulfilling their potential. We will not be doing Louie any favors if we blindly accept his work and refuse to acknowledge the valid criticisms that will surface along his journey. Louie, more than any of us, must already know that. He is willing to forego the commercial gratification that could arise if he walked another path. But the path he has chosen is not without its own expectations and standards. He will have to meet those standards, which will evolve as his music evolves. Will we evolve too?