Showing posts with label bobby scott. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bobby scott. Show all posts

Saturday, October 1, 2022

Dick Haymes by Bobby Scott [From the Archives]

 © -  Steven A. Cerra, copyright protected; all rights reserved.


JazzLetter, August, 1984


The Dick Haymes Enigma - Bobby Scott


“For those whose intelligence never got beyond the merely clever, Dick Haymes must have been a complete anomaly. I still run into people who speak of him in terms that tell me they never uncovered even a particle of his humanity.


He was an encumbered man. Sometimes his past, including his marriages, seemed to me to be a giant pull-toy he refused to let go of. There was nothing in a present that I shared for a time with him that he could wrap his fingers around. Dick had to pull the weight of that toy.


I loved Dick. And I liked him too. There have been people in my life that I loved but never liked at all. I got over the times that he angered me, and he got over my angers as well. The quality of loving and liking each other was not undermined by the flare-ups. We were touchy individuals. I still am. That failing seems to be siamesed to good taste. People with a solid idea of what should be the end result of an artistic endeavor do indeed take things quite seriously, and so are touchy and easily put off.


And Dick Haymes was a monument to musical good taste. Only on a few occasions did he go for a lower denominator, and those attempts didn't make it. He was a completed person early in his career. If he did badly at any time, it was for mechanical reasons alone. His sole intent was to sing beautiful songs beautifully and reflect correctly the strength and genius of the songwriter's design. An excellent writer himself, he knew a great one when he heard it. I mean a great song, not a hit song. Hits rarely are examples of first-class writing, and Dick's sense of what that is was unerring.


The best singing he ever did was in the living room of his New York apartment when we rehearsed. The inadequacy he felt on stage was missing. Those were the only times his voice was devoid of the tremble that accompanies great trepidation. I heard the fear, at one point or another, in every show we ever did. The doubt would take charge for a bar or two, and my heart fell in sympathy for him.


He was mountain climbing, always. Even the booking agents watched like the vultures that hang around South American airports, to see if he would crack open even wider under the pressure of selling what was no longer in vogue. Most of the audiences in the smarter places, those where the tariff was higher, were aware of his earlier glory, because they were his own age, more or less. And if they went away something less than delighted, it was because it is asking too much of anyone to give you back a pristine past. It wasn't only that Dick had gotten older. So had the songs, and they had lost a degree of pertinence in the new era. And the audience too had grown older, and its members would no longer allow themselves to be drawn into the romantic dream of yesterday. The illusion had been dissipated during the years of World War II. And how could even a man of Dick Haymes' talent bridge such dissimilar eras? He was a dinosaur who had lived through an ice age to emerge in a wide-eyed misunderstanding.


Dick was victimized by too many forces, and by too many people, for me to know where to put the blame for what happened to him. I know little of his halcyon days. I accompanied him as his pianist and wrote arrangements and conducted for him during one of his many "comebacks". His Hollywood years, or so I am told by informed people with no reason to misrepresent him, were a time of power that he mishandled. If I assume, as I fear I must, that he was his own worst enemy, then he did indeed, as the Irish say, "call it to himself."


Alas self-destruction is compelling, even attractively intriguing, to all too many of us, and Dick had climbed to the pinnacle and then fell in phases. Miraculously, he would grab jutting crags with his fingertips, then fall again, only to take hold once more and steady himself at a still lower level, from which he could look up to where he had once been and feel the heart contract and burst. And he would have to try to remember at what level in his falling he had left what part of himself.


He gave the press and the public all the ammunition they fired at him, by committing every no-no imaginable. He had to shoulder the burden of things he wasn't even responsible for, such as his good looks. It would have been all right if he had been handsome and somehow didn't seem to know it. Then he could have played the game of self-deprecation to endear himself to the people.

Unfortunately he was bright enough to know how good-looking he was. And, worse, he had that rich baritone voice that affirmed a bigger-than-life masculinity that is sooner than later found repellent by men who are devoid of it. I remember vividly the impact he had on women in our audiences — and the reactions of their escorts. It created situations of true danger. And I heard remarks made while he was singing, remarks he could hear as well as I, that cauliflowered my ears. Most performers would have insisted on having the offending party expelled from the room. But by that point in Dick's life, the powers that be in the business had already prejudged him to the extent that any "incident" would be attributed to his personality problems. He was cornered, in every respect. Even his own fans somehow held it against him that he wasn't as famous as Frank Sinatra.


He worked hard trying to find the audiences. Too hard. He forced that marvelous baritone voice of his. And he sacrificed its most salient and noble quality, the Haymes ease and warmth of sound production. He had to push his throat, and it did not respond well. And he was put in the position of the tyro performer addressing himself to doing "shows", thinking about "openers" that had "sock", about "pacing the act", about the patter between the songs.


The booking agents, I must say in fairness, tried to get top rooms and top dollar. But this forced Dick to compete on a level that was not musical but show biz. Then, too, his then-wife, Fran Jeffries, was part of the act. She was musical and beautiful, but two chefs generally make a bland soup. At no time, though, was the act "bad". But it wasn't sensational either.


It is evident now that what Dick was shooting for, if indeed he knew what he was after, wouldn't have led him anywhere anyway. He wasn't marketable in the modern sense of the word. He was more an entity of musical history, like Coleman Hawkins or Erroll Garner. He was the personification of a Time, a totally catalyzed expression of a Period.


Ironically, certain avenues have opened up, through the sheer passage of time, that might have assured him some steady work, if at a much lower rate of remuneration. But then, even if he were alive, I think he would have gone on doing battle with the memory of once having lived high. For someone like that, the lesser life is seen as a waiting period, an intermission, until one can resume the elegant life. He was not alone in this. But he handled becoming a dinosaur better than some other singers I know.


Dick and I were both pre-moderns in a post-1945 modern existence. Television gives credence to the momentary. It is a turn-over world now. The only "performers" who can suffer being over-exposed are those who do little or nothing. The medium itself rules out the genuine talents like Garland and Sinatra. Only psychopaths can sing credibly to a camera.


Dick was as confused as I in the late 1950s and early '60s. Luckily he had a sense of humor and an aloofness, whether real or conjured, that served him well. Dick had many well-dressed wolves at the door, including agents of the Internal Revenue Service, ready to pull the flesh from any fish he might hook. He had debts enough to demoralize anyone, and the combination of factors was reason enough to have a bloody Mary before getting out from beneath the blankets. That is how he began his days during that period.


Once I asked whether certain bills for services and copying were really going to be paid. He laughed at my doubt. "Hell, Bobby," he said, "they'll get paid all right. I'm the guy that doesn't get paid in this outfit." And it was quite true. His lawyers saw that everyone got his due. Haymes came later. When he had need to apply himself totally to performing, his mind was on paying bills. When, later on, his situation had improved and he had the time to hone his abilities, no one was interested. It wouldn't have mattered what he was working on, or how good he was. For when certain doors close in the entertainment industry, they close for good.


Dick had a mean streak. And it wasn't helped by his adversities. I've known only a few people with as highly developed a capacity for bitterness. To one of his makeup, loyalty was the ultimate virtue. If someone he trusted let him down, he ground it in his teeth and filed it in memory. The bitterness was bigger than he could afford to carry around. Like unaccepted love, hate has no way to leave its place of origin.



Dick had no more control over himself than most human beings. In addition, he had an idea of himself, albeit a fiction but a clearly defined one from his past, that was too easily offended by a word or a deed and sometimes even by the omission of one. So he had little faith in most people he had to deal with because the mechanism of trust inside him had been found wanting by himself. I must add, though, that once you really had his trust, he never took it back. I enjoyed his company and his friendship. I consider myself lucky to have known him as well as I did. By being at ease with me, he let me travel down the avenues of the world of Dick Haymes. His voice won attention naturally. It had a liquid quality, a fluidness that was as mesmerizing as the murmur of a mountain rill. That wonderful attribute coupled with impeccable enunciation made his 1940s recordings the hallmark of those years. I still hear only his voice singing certain songs, even if someone else is actually performing them — Little White Lies and It Might as Well Be Spring in particular. Dick put those songs to sleep, so to speak, and I have no need to hear them sung by anyone else, ever again. This is proof of his historical impact. Only Sinatra and Billie Holiday and a very few others have had this ability to put their mark on songs by the singularity of their performance.

Great singers are usually great listeners. They learn every time they hear someone else perform, if nothing more than a reconfirmation of flaws they have learned to avoid. Nat Cole has provided a serious secondary education in utterance to several generations of singers. They don't imitate him, any more than they imitate a Haymes or a Garland, but they do seek and often find the source of the success. But mutation of a special nature goes on. If it were otherwise, there would be no thread of continuity in the recordings of the past 60 years. And there is indeed a thread. Columbo to Crosby to Como to Dean Martin is an example of it.


The biggest technical hurdle Haymes faced was in reaching a compromise, an agreement, between the rhetorical and the intimacy of what can only be called the conversational. It was the important difference between Dick singing in his living room and Haymes on the stage. In fairness, we should remember that one gets "up" when the bright lights go on and most performers tend to lean then toward a more declamatory delivery. To be able to combine such qualities as speech-making and the whispering of sweet nothings is a synthesizing at an extremely high level. And Dick did that.


Then there was the weight of the voice, which differs from one singer to another. A voice that "weighs"more than another moves less easily. That "weight" is what kept Dick from doing up-tempo tunes in a first-class manner. Certain types of material were ruled out for him. The "relief" for this consummate ballad singer lay in doing "bounces" that weren't up-tempo. It came from that middling area of tempi. The trick in arranging for him was to articulate, indeed over-emphasize, the rhythmic pulse by syncopated question-and-answer licks that forced the slower tempo to swing. I succeeded more often than not by making the band peck out syncops.


Dick did not like looking the problem in the face. He felt it beneath him to surrender to this "broadened"program of material. Maybe he was right. If someone wanted to hear up-tempo vehicles, they no doubt went to hear Ella Fitzgerald, not Dick Haymes.


Dick's bargain with the extremes of the spectrum was not as fruitful as, say, the one that Sinatra struck. I think this had to do with the lighter weight of Sinatra's voice. It made it easier for him to move fluidly through a song. And he chooses his moments to be "rhetorical" very carefully, using his exquisite gift for the "conversational" to its utmost. At the end of a Sinatra performance, one is apt to have the feeling that they've been spoken to, rather than sung at. Sinatra gives priority to communicating, and only a secondary role to "singing".


The Great Depression made the population seek a reason for living that was of necessity abstract. "Love costs nothing," someone said. Well, at least it was a cost people could afford. When a human being feels helpless, a condition the flattened economy imposed on millions, there is only one place to turn, inward to the heart. And the 1930s were a time of great endeavors of the heart. Cinderella wasn't a fiction. She lived on your block. Songwriters, particularly lyricists, made the class lines grow faint or erased them. They could evoke all the hopes of the individual. Why else a "Somewhere, over the rainbow. . ."? Love, in the songs and in the voices, was the relief from the dark times. Your heart wasn't in the bank that just collapsed ("Who cares what banks fail in Yonkers, as long as you've got the kiss that conquers?") and it wasn't affected by the devaluation of the currency. Songs like I've Got the World on a String showed the heart's triumph over the surrounding adversity. Even today those songs and vocalists are a reminder that love can prevail if allowed to. As an immutable universal, love cannot be chased away. But it can be left unwatered and shrivel to its seed state. Has anyone found out yet what was Blow in' in the Wind? The writers and singers of the last 20 years touch on the truth only when all the side-winding has failed and their sloganeering sounds shallow to the very ears that called it forth. Callousness has usurped the place of sentiment.


Why am I filled with nostalgia when I hear Haymes sing Sure Thing or Sinatra's This is the Beginning of the End? Because like a cup of Irish tea, made with lime-filled water, it is something I can put my teeth around. Even Sinatra paid dearly for being an anachronism, as you know if you remember his last recordings for Columbia, when he was coerced into performing duets with Dagmar. Miraculously, he found a market when he resurfaced with Capitol Records. I have always deemed the coming together of Sinatra with Billy May and Nelson Riddle an accident of historical proportion. For, like J.S. Bach synthesizing the baroque period long after it was a vibrant memory, those three men brought the glory of the preceding age to a high well after it was over.


Dick Haymes, unfortunately, hadn't the luck to meet the historical problem head on and win. Not that he can be called a failure for that. Sinatra's later career is a historical exception. In reality, the big loser after World War II was love. And those who expressed that dream, Haymes and Sinatra among them, suffered accordingly. He constantly alluded to his past, and I enjoyed it. I had been nurtured on his records, along with Claude Thornhill's and those of the Ink Spots and others of the period. He would talk of sharing an apartment with Richard Quine, the movie director and producer, when they were young. I got the idea that Dick's intention was to be a songwriter, which his brother Bob did indeed become. He called that time before his singing career his "pleasurable days". In making demos of his songs, he inadvertently opened the road to a career as a singer. I say this only because he implied it.


He talked too of his childhood in Argentina, where he was born. Some of the images were warm, others icy. He spoke of his father, a Scottish mining engineer, in glowing tones and terms, as the perfect model of a gentleman. He described god-like qualities in the man, not as a son would but as a zealous fan.


His mother was another matter. He resented her setting up shop in New York as a vocal coach, advertising that she had taught him. He believed his mother had been unfaithful to his father, and if conversation turned to that sort of thing, he would mention her as an example. He said he was Scottish, from his father, not Argentine, like his mother. But I never found him anything but American, and I believe that is how he saw himself.


He had his own sense of what was genteel behavior. And few people met his standard for it. The nemesis was crassness. His posture, then, was that of a qualified snob. I believed this snobbery to be part of some inner ideal of graceful living and a gentlemanly elegance of action. He therefore could be quite unforgiving of a faux pas. Someone with such criteria inevitably would have to hold many people in contempt. And he did. I would see his face screw up as he listened to no more than 15 seconds of the wrong thing said in the wrong terms.


That sort of gazing-down-the-nose requires that you develop a filing-card mind that serves only prejudices, not truths. That he had good reason to fear, I do not doubt. He had been promised the moon and now he was lucky to get bus fare. He could have handled a lot of it better, but he didn't. This was the enigma of the man to me: this holding of failings to his breast simply because they were his failings. Somewhere in this there was more than a little of being true to himself. But at what cost?


He could be small on occasion. I let it go by, because his nature was mercurial, and he would bounce back. I had been laboring under the misconception that big dogs are not hurt by the bites of little dogs. But they are. And people in the music business used the toughest measure of all in judging Dick. They compared him to his earlier self. That's the one nobody can win, a game played with loaded dice.


I will never forget the ominous quiet in Bobby Darin's dressing room toward the end of his life, as compared to the tumult of the earlier years when the payroll was bigger and the bleed-offs drew the hangers-on. And I think of my father, who was a singer and actor, and his attitude to people he would meet on the curb along Broadway. I was a child but I could see that he was play-acting. He was only too gracious to a lot of them. But when we had entered the theater where he was playing, his face would harden and his teeth would be bared. I asked about those "funny" people on the street, and he shot out, "Son, there are thousands of people hanging around these show business district streets and not one of them can do a damn thing to help you. But all of their mouths can kill you." I was only seven at the time, but to this day I can hear his voice saying that and see the steely look his eyes took on.


He was right. It is among such spectral types that the rumors, the outrageous stories, are milled with malice. Those people are a breed apart from the fan or the businessman. They get their suntans basking in the momentary attention a "star" gives them. God help him if he doesn't allow this.


And Dick didn't. He could not even put on the show that my father did. He had a long-standing reputation for "looking past" such people. Their presence galled him. He thought they were carrion-eaters of the lowest order, waiting for him to fall so they could realize their wish to pick him to pieces. He was highly aware of them, though I would try to tell him they didn't matter, and he could spot them even at a distance, those who paid to sit at expensive tables among them. Sometimes it elicited from him an "I'll show them!" that was sensational. At other times, not that he was aware of it, he hardened. And then the voice became brittle and he could not compel an audience to listen. I used to watch for that telltale metallic flatness to take over and I'd know that one of those people was at a table where Dick could not miss him.


There are indeed people who get their kicks watching a big man sink. And Dick had made enough enemies — over values — to fill an auditorium. He was also the guy who had everything and let it slip through his fingers — the most likely target for the bad mouth. I wish I had a nickel for everyone who asked me how I got along with such an imperious and self-centered person. I would say, "It's easy," and this would be taken for a kindness. But it was the truth. Dick, more than any other singer I ever worked with, gave his appreciation to creative musical people. He extolled the talent and work of countless gifted people, from accompanists, arrangers and songwriters to other singers and to writers, directors and actors. His taste was impeccable, his perceptions excellent. Dick used people like Johnny Mandel and Cy Coleman when they had not yet acquired reputations and track records.


To performers of doubtful talent, the audience is the critic, the arbiter, the final judge. But what of the total talent who knows he has a gift to bring? Does the whole scene change? Does it take on a tone of the ominous because he has little or nothing to prove to the audience? Is an audience, because it pays its money, entitled to play judge and jury? From their viewpoint they are. Is then Dick Haymes, or a similar unique individual, his own majority of one?


Unfortunately, yes. He embodied the unique. The general public, however, didn't affirm that fact. They did the opposite, buoyed by the bad press Dick so often received. By the time I worked with him, he had been "put aside", maneuvered by an invisible hand, into a position where he no longer was able to pretend to a stardom of magnitude — in fact, to a position where he'd never be a threat to anyone's ego again.


My question is not whether Dick made enemies. He did. Too many. And as IVe said, he handed his critics the ammunition they fired at him.What I cannot understand is how historicity was invoked in the cases of some others and not in Dick's case.


It was for him a time of eating crow and mending fences, to mix a couple of metaphors.He did better than I would have in his position. His smile and his sense of humor amazed me. For the middlemen of music, he was a tit with a bit of milk still left to be extracted. Surely there were people in Peoria who'd like to see Dick Haymes in the flesh. The onus was on him, not on the public or the "business". And though he still was handsome, he was old. And there was no help from a record company.


But he tried and tried, fighting defeat and taking pleasure in the simple use of his gifted throat. And I found myself rooting for him to win, wanting to be of the utmost help, though the wall in front of him was of incalculable height. When I first went to work for him, I thought he was weak of character and afraid. Well I was wrong. What he was was shaky, and justifiably so. I wasn't aware then of the importance of each job we worked. My chores were easily mastered, but not so Dick's. Every opening had an inflated importance because he was swimming upstream, and the eyes of of the critics and the agents were on him. When we played the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City, every performance was clocked by people from "the agency,” bent on putting together a Dick Haymes act that could stand up to current show-biz norms. Advice flowed over him like the rivers of time. It was largely wasted on Dick, who was the least adaptable performer I'd yet met. He tried, but what he offered could only sound disingenuous because it was forced and contrary to his natural tendencies. Today, it is for me an exercise in masochism to watch such films as State Fair and One Touch of Venus and see a Dick Haymes in control of himself, doing what was required of him, because the figure on the screen superimposes itself on my memory of him as an almost broken human being, fighting to get applause from an undeserving audience. My deepest feelings of love for him turn at such moments into a painful muffled scream of "Why?"


Dick could talk about Robert Walker's alcoholism with sympathy and love while letting his own problem with the bottle guide him into one dark alley after another. I never said a thing about his drinking, for one rather obvious reason. It was fast becoming my own refuge. I did not realize at the time how destructive it was to his performance, and, more directly, his central nervous system. I look back now and see the odd way of walking, the spastic movements. I was told much later that he almost had to cancel a tour of Australia because his memory failed on stage: he was unable to remember the lyrics of songs he had sung for 20 years or more.


Dick knew he wasn't hitting the mark. And I knew he was gauging what his trepidation was doing to his performances, and he was looking ahead to a time when the tell-tale tremor would leave his voice. He would have had to dry out completely before he could restore his once marvelous vocal equipment, for the drinking had married itself to his fear. Could he put aside the hooch? Not then — not with all that pressure on him.


But in the last ten years of his life he did put it aside. And I did get to hear him sing on a club date on Long Island. The conditions were less than ideal. The back-up band was so-so, the sound system less than that. Dick was still unable to breathe evenly to resuscitate the young Haymes vocal sound. I kept trying to make excuses for him. Maybe it was his smoking. Seeing him sober and still unable to do what he wanted to do sent my mind to questions I wanted to neither ask nor answer. Could it be that you could actually lose it?


That he could come out onto that dance floor-cum-stage in a nondescript Long Island nitery to a smattering of patrons and give of himself with genuine goodwill was a testimony to the bravery of the human spirit. I looked at the faces in that audience. They smiled when he mentioned movies he had starred in, and applauded his efforts to recreate long-gone moments with songs from their scores. They hung on each syllable, delighted to see history descend on them. Most of them probably saw the ethereal outlines of the loves of his life, such as Rita Hayworth, standing there with him, along with, perhaps, the ghosts of Tommy Dorsey and Robert Walker. I saw them too, and remembered Dick telling me how Orson Welles had made Hayworth a star by filming her in a closed-to-everybody-not-connected-with-the-production studio, or - of the respect he had for Erroll Flynn's abilities as a sailor, or of the joy he derived from the lyrics of Joe McCarthy Jr.'s songs with Cy Coleman. It all came back to me as I saw him trying once more to win the people.


When he finished — to ample applause — I walked to the back of the club to speak to him. He honored me by his pleasure at seeing my face and he hugged me. I sat down in the stark theatrical lighting of the dressing room and took in that handsome carved visage, the crow's feet like ruts in a mountainside, and smiled at seeing that warrior, in whom valor had superseded discretion, still exuding the energy of the distant past, an energy that created an aura around his person. He talked and laughed about the futility of life, and I stared at my friend.
He seemed full of optimism, and I was afraid my face would betray what I felt about his performance. He asked if I was free to go back across the country with him, accompanying him as in the past. I would have gone, too, but I had recently injured my left hand and it was mending in its own good time after surgery.
I wish I had been able to go with him for those eight weeks. I'd have done the job without pay, because I really did love the man and I still wanted to see him win. It would have paid him back a little for what he had inadvertently taught me about not giving up.


And for the devastating example he had presented of how life deals out the wrong cards to its most sensitive children.


I never saw him again.”


The Last Comeback - Gene Lees


There is a road up a canyon in Malibu that I never pass without thinking about Dick Haymes. All those canyon roads have a tinge of mystery about them. You wonder what's up there, where they go, and assume there must be something, somebody, or the roads wouldn't be there. The Southern California coast isn't as pretty as its propaganda. Topographically, it is the beginning of Mexico and Central America and the land is burned brown, except for a time in the late winter when it greens up after the long relentless rains that cut these canyons in the first place.


I went up that canyon just once, in the spring of 1976, when the tiny pink star flowers are on the jade plants. This is originally desert country, and it has been said that all the flora, even the weeds, are imported, including palms from Florida, the feathery pepper trees from Brazil, the eucalyptus from Australia, the Cyprus from the Mediterranean basin, and the various citrus forms from Spain and North Africa. The jade plant, one of the commonest of the naturalized California succulents, is the crassula argentea, and it came here from Argentina. So did Dick Haymes.


He was making the last of his comebacks when I went up into these mountains to meet him. He had returned after ten years in Europe to open in 1975 at the Cocoanut Grove in Hollywood to a house that was packed with his friends. Those who liked him liked him a lot, and one of them prevailed upon me to write something about him for High Fidelity to give him a lift, a leg up. I said I'd do it, but I didn't like doing it. It cost me nothing, of course, to give him some space in a magazine. But I disliked the fact that he needed the help. I am not one of those who takes pleasure in seeing the mighty fallen, and Dick Haymes had been a very big star. He was also a very great singer, which is another thing. In my years as a songwriter, I have had innumerable and interminable conversations with singers about songs and other singers, and Dick Haymes' name would be on the most-admired list of probably every one of them.


I would much rather have been approaching him as a supplicant songwriter with some notes and words on a piece of paper that I wanted him to breathe life into, asking for his help instead of offering him mine. A star is someone who was one when you were young; no one ever achieves that status with you after you pass your middle twenties. And Dick Haymes was a star to me. It was some sort of serious perturbation of the cosmic order that I should, at least for the moment, be in a position of greater power than he. That is what bothered me as I drove up that road that spring day; I realize that now. And I knew by some intuition derived from the very way he sang — the dignity of his work — that he was not a man who would be comfortable in the situation of soliciting publicity. Nor have I ever been comfortable in the role of the one from whom it is solicited.


And so I foresaw, I suppose, that we would be terribly wary with each other. And being wary, we would then strive not be wary, but to be natural. And there is nothing more artificial than the attempt to be natural. Ah well. It was not the ideal circumstance in which I would want to meet Dick Haymes, but what the hell, I was there to do a small favor for a man who had given me much pleasure in my life.


I drove up all the convolutions of that long mountain road, watching numbers on mail boxes until I found the one I was looking for. It was a somewhat rustic place, unprepossessing, but with a view to make you gasp. It looked down the wild slopes, hospitable to rattlesnakes, coyotes, deer and the occasional mountain lion, to the Pacific Ocean, burning silver-white in the slanting metallic afternoon sunlight.


And Dick Haymes came out of that house to meet me. He was a tall man, and strikingly attractive. His hair by now was as silver as the sea out there and it had receded a little, but the face was changed remarkably little. Two deep character lines in the cheeks parenthesized a sensitive mouth, but any moviegoer of the 1940s and '50s would have known him instantly. He wore khaki shorts and sandals, no shirt, and a gold cross hung from his neck on a fine chain. He greeted me and escorted me into the house. If he was faking naturalism, he was doing it well. Neither one of us wanted to make the other uncomfortable. Dick Haymes was a gentleman.


He introduced me to his wife, Wendy Patricia Smith of Windsor, England, whom he had met 11 years before. It was then that he had quit drinking. She offered me coffee, which I accepted, and Dick took a Coca-Cola, and, discreetly, she left us. We sat in the living room, whose walls were almost completely of glass, with their awesome view of the ocean far below. And Dick talked about his life. If he had the capacity for bitterness that Bobby Scott describes, he was concealing it from me very well; but of course, he would, in the circumstances, if he had any brains, and he did.


He did not entirely conceal his bitterness about his mother — which I'd heard about from others — but he muted it. Whether Haymes spoke Spanish, with an Argentinian mother, I do not know but I discovered he spoke fluent French. At one point his mother ran a couture salon in Paris, so he had spent part of his childhood there. And he attended Loyola College in Montreal, out on the west end of Sherbrooke Street, which has since been absorbed into the great complex of colleges known as Concordia University. ("I should have spotted that about him!" Bobby Scott said on the phone. "Sure," I said, "he was trained by the Jesuits.") He also went to school at one point in Switzerland. He was a genuine cosmopolitan.


But that was part of the problem of his childhood, which he was quite frank about. He and his brother Bob were bounced from one private school to another. He didn't say so that afternoon, but I got an impression of two little boys clinging together for warmth as they grew up in a world that was quite uncomfortable, and very lonely.


What Bobby says about his fans not forgiving him for not being as famous as Frank Sinatra is most interesting. Sinatra's career somehow cast a shadow on that of Haymes. Haymes followed Sinatra into the Harry James band when Sinatra left to join Dorsey, and then followed Sinatra into the Dorsey band, and finally followed him out of it to become a "single".


Both of them flew high, then crashed. But Sinatra's comeback was a success, and permanent. That of Dick Haymes was not. Why? The world grew very dangerous after the 1940s. And Sinatra has a quality of the dangerous about him — the explosive, the unpredictable. Miles Davis has that same quality. So has Marlon Brando. This makes them compellingly interesting people, quite aside from considerations of talent. Dick Haymes seemed like the boy next door. He wasn't, of course, not with that complicated and sophisticated international background. But he seemed like it. And that kind of innocence was passe in the rock-and-roll age of loveless sex and of two nations madly threatening to obliterate each other and all life on this earth. Sinatra gave the world the finger and said that he'd done it My Way, and the world bought it, because it seemed that you needed that kind of resilience to survive in the surrounding brutality. Haymes went on saying he was going to love you Come Rain or Come Shine, and after Joseph McCarthy — the slanderer, not the songwriter — it seemed naive. But oh! he did it well.
What a ballad singer.


I have no idea how much Haymes drank in his bad days. He said that it wasn't all that much, but he may have been masking the reality from me. "Fortunately," he said that afternoon, "I never had much tolerance for alcohol. I could get falling-down drunk on four drinks. I was rather fortunate in that, unlike friends I have who can put away a couple of bottles a day. Thus when I stopped, I hadn't done that much physical damage to myself." He certainly looked well.


The reason he went to Europe to live for ten years, quite aside from the fact that that he was very much at home there, was that "I got to the point where I 'd loused up my life so much that I thought it was time to leave town. I would not advise people to go away to some distance place to find their heads. But it worked for me. I figured I'd worn out my welcome in the business. And I went away to try to find myself.


"It must have been the right move, because I did, after some more blunders. In 1965, with no problem whatsoever — which is a blessing in itself— I stopped drinking." I noticed that behind him, as he talked, there was a well-stocked bar. He had mentioned that his wife didn't drink either. So the bar must be for friends. At least he had no fear of having the stuff around. "I came to a crossroads that gave me a choice of either winding up on skid row or functioning with the gifts with which I've been endowed. Thank God — and I use the name advisedly — I made the right choice."


In the course of that afternoon I got the impression that Haymes had a mystical religious streak. One reason for his physical condition was that he was a yoga devotee. He said he no longer cared in the least about so-called stardom; he simply liked to sing and act, and at that time he had done a recent television role or two, and more roles were pending. He said he'd come to the conclusion that the key to it is "dedication with detachment," an interesting phrase that puts one in mind of Huxley's statement that art is created in a condition of relaxed tension. And Haymes said he had come to abhor involvement with one's own ego. On the wall of that living room, burned into a sheet of wood, was the inscription "Keep it simple."


"Whatever has happened in my life, either good or bad," he said, "I find myself directly responsible for. What's past is past; it's a different era. And very possibly I am a different man. There is such as thing as rebirth.


"Strangely enough, after I stopped all of this self-destruction, and self-indulgence as well, I reverted for a while to the real young man I used to be. All of a sudden, all of the things I've loved to do all my life, skin-diving, sailing, skiing, tennis, writing, singing, performing, communicating with people, all came back to me in such a crystal clear concept that I really wondered what the hell I'd been trying to prove. In my case — and everyone has to find his own thing — the problem seemed to be some form of inferiority complex."


Yeah, of course: two little boys in boarding schools, clinging together for warmth.
Mrs. Haymes, I don't think you were a nice woman.


"You see," Dick said, "I love my audience. They are a reflection of me and I am they. There's a communal meditation, if you wish to call it that. People will sometimes ask me after a performance, “How can you move me so much?' And the truthful answer is that I am you.


"I firmly believe there is a spark of beauty in everyone, and I try to tap it. I try to find it."


I think by that part of the fading afternoon he had forgotten that this was an interview. Indeed, it had ceased to be. It had become a conversation.


It came time for me to leave. He walked me out to the car. I wished him well, and I meant it. Like Bobby, I wanted him to make it. But his comeback, this time, was ended not by drink or his own follies but by cancer.


I drove very carefully down that winding road until I reached the comparative safety of the Pacific Coast Highway. And I never pass that canyon debouchment without thinking of him.”




Monday, August 16, 2021

"Gene Krupa: The World Is Not Enough" by Bobby Scott [From the Archives]

 © -  Steven A. Cerra, copyright protected; all rights reserved.


“The Jazz at the Philharmonic tour that fall lifted Gene's spirits, at least for a while. But the traveling paled them. I often watched that pointless drum battle with Buddy Rich on every concert, and wondered what it was doing to his ego. Buddy was like some great meat-grinder, gobbling up Gene's solos, cresting his triumph in traded fours and eights and ending with an unbelievable flourish.


Gene took it in the finest of manners. He didn't think music had a thing to do with competition. He had a way of carrying himself correctly when he walked on, and used that strut of a sort to the fullest at the close of those demoralizing drum wars. I broached the subject to him once. Just once.


"Anyone playing with Bud is going to get blown away, Chappie. And remember, the audience isn't as perceptive as you are." His answer was matter-of-fact, with no hint of malice.”
- Gene Krupa to Bobby Scott


“I asked him why he didn't make judgments of other drummers. It'd be pointless, he answered, to judge what it was they were doing if he wasn't privy to what it was they were aiming for. He refused to be presumptuous. And he never deviated from that.”
- Bobby Scott on Gene Krupa


The editorial staff ft JazzProfiles put together its own feature on Gene Krupa, the drummer about whom Buddy Rich once said: “Things wouldn’t be the way they are if he hadn’t been around.” You can locate that earlier piece here.


While rummaging through some old Jazzletters recently we found this essay in the January 1984 issue of Gene Lees’ monthly missive.


A brief synopsis of Gene Krupa’s career and his importance to Jazz can be found in this Addendum which Gene incorporated into Bobby Scott’s essay.


‘For the younger folk among us, it should be noted that Gene Krupa was born in Chicago January 15, 1909. He was associated with that group of young musicians who became known to legend as the Austin High Gang, although he did not himself attend Austin High School. After various other jobs, he joined Benny Goodman in March, 1935, and was of course its drummer when the band exploded into fame in August of that year, launching the so-called Swing Era. He formed his own band in March, 1938. It lasted until 1943, when his arrest caused him to disband. Coming out of prison, he rejoined Goodman for a few months at the end of 1943, then went to work for Tommy Dorsey, and finally organized a new band in 1944. He continued that band until 1951, then scaled down to a trio or quartet. Teddy Wilson, with whom he was associated in the Benny Goodman trio and quartet, once told Leonard Feather, "He was undoubtedly the most important jazz drummer in the history of jazz music. He made the drums a solo instrument, taking it out of the background." Not everyone of course would rate Gene Krupa quite that highly, but he was indeed one of the most important jazz drummers, and he was certainly the most visible.”


© -  Gene Lees Jazzletter, January, 1984, copyright protected; all rights reserved.


“Eugene Boris Krupa was an enigma.


His tiny frame belied his impact upon the music scene of his heyday. People could not associate a small man with the sound of his drumming. It was only after a double take that he was recognized and entered the ken of the viewer. That was, to him, just fine: he'd spent half his life living down a "slip" he had never even made.


The Ol’ Man, as I called him, in keeping with the tradition of the band era when all leaders were thus called, never used narcotics, nor could he ever have been in even remote danger of addiction. As one might try a roller-coaster ride, once or twice at most, he had tasted them. But in fact they frightened him, in a way that liquor never did.


In the year or so I worked and traveled with him, occasionally taking meals with him, we spoke of his "hitch" two or three times at most. And always it was wrenched up out of his memory. It was not the recollection of the bars on the windows and the isolation but the shame of it that troubled him. He said it changed him inwardly.


He remembered arriving in prison. "This one screw took me to the laundry, where I'd been assigned to work, Chappie," he said. Chappie was his nickname for me. "The screw and I stood there before all the convicts and he said, 'I've got a guest for you fellas. The great Gene Krupa.' Well, not one of the convicts cracked a smile. Then he gives them a big smile, don'cha see, and says, The first guy that gives 'im any help.. .gets the hole.' You understan' me? He meant solitary. Well... the minute he walks out, all of 'em gather aroun' me, shakin' my hand, and one of 'em, a spokesman, says to me, 'What is it we can do to help ya, Mr. Krupa?'"


He chuckled, remembering that moment of friendship. The convicts knew he'd been railroaded. They made sure his drumming hands never touched lye or disinfectants. One afternoon an old-timer inquired of the Old Man, "How long's your stretch, Krupa?" When Gene told him, the convict retorted, "Geezus! I could do that standin' on my head!"


Gene said that was the best tonic he got behind bars. It made him see things in a jailhouse long view. He was bush league in that hardened criminal population. He did a lot of deep thinking while he was "inside". Hard thinking, too. He said that he hadn't used much of what he learned until quite recently, about the same time I had joined his group, in the fall of 1954.


That's what I liked about him, right off the bat. He was as honest as he could be. I had to keep in mind, of course, that I was a sideman and a kid. I expected he would hide behind what he was, but obfuscations were very rare.


I auditioned for him one afternoon at Basin Street East in New York. He had never heard me play. I had been recommended to replace Teddy Napoleon on piano. He wanted to see if I could fit in comfortably with tenor saxophonist Eddie Shu and bassist Whitey Mitchell. We played, the four of us, for ten or fifteen minutes, and I got a decent idea of the head charts they had been using. Afterwards, Gene and I talked salary and the upcoming jobs and travel. Then, out of the blue, he said, "I know you'd have more fun playing with a younger drummer more in the bebop bag, but I still think we can make a few adjustments and enjoy ourselves."


Coming out of a living legend, such self-deprecation startled me. Yet I knew he meant it. I came away that day thinking that I could certainly learn something about deflating my own ego from this tiny, soft-spoken, dapperly-dressed older fellow.


When you're young, and foolish, you think every thought that comes into your head is of oracular origin. But many of one's youthful ideas are of worth. Gene helped me through a sorting process. His own contributions to the quartet were insightful, and they came out of his tested experience.


Like all the successful bandleaders of the 1930s and '40s, he knew his primary task was to choose the right tempo for each piece. It doesn't seem all that important. But it is. The tempo can make the difference between success and failure.


One night in Las Vegas he picked a tempo for Drum Boogie so fast that he couldn't double it. He had either to play a solo that differed from the recording or slow the tempo. Though the listeners expected the doubling up, he slowed it as he began his solo. Very, very infrequently did he make such a mistake.


Although he asked us to play certain tunes, for the most part he gave Eddie Shu and me a free hand with new pieces and the arranging of them. Occasionally he'd insist on something. He wanted us to learn Sleepy Lagoon. When he mentioned the Eric Coates classic, the three of us threw glances at each other. The old man reminded us of the melody's rhythmic character. He said it'd lay well as a four-four bounce, though it was originally in three-four. When we finally got it into a form, it proved a staple of our repertoire. Eddie Shu and I would never have considered it.


It was Gene who first got me to sing, and though the first recordings I made under my own name were done for ABC-Paramount, I had already recorded a single under Gene's aegis for Verve. Danny Boy and She's Funny That Way were recorded in 1955, with Norman Granz as producer. Although the performances I turned in were hardly what I'd find acceptable today, Gene told me, "You've got to start some time, Chappie, and it might as well be now."


Gene continued to encourage me, even insisting that I sing a song in each set of an engagement at the Crescendo in Hollywood. He told me that he had no doubt I would make a success with singing and writing, and this amazed me. And then, once, in a rather serious mood, he urged me to address my thoughts to the success he insisted was coming.


"The toughest thing in life, Chappie, is to mellow with success. A lot of people with talent never seem to be able to handle success." Now I give him high points for perceptiveness, but when you're seventeen, as I was at the time, you can't understand such things. Gene meant me to stash the thought away. He hoped, as he later told me, that I'd begin to set up a value structure to lean upon when I had to face what loomed ahead. Gene knew how success can destroy. He had witnessed what it had done to others — what it had done to himself. He remarked upon an imaginary power that, like a snake, sneaks into your breast and ruins you from within. I used precious little of what he'd told me as I stumbled and bumbled my way through the next ten years of my life and proved to myself that human nature is a disaster.


Gene was, as I've said, physically small, with delicately shaped fingers, salt-and-pepper closely-cut hair, and a compellingly handsome face. Though it was never a strut, his walk told you much about his well-made character. There was magic in his eyes and smile and, in fact, his very presence. These attributes made him both a ladies' man and a man's man. Even kids loved Gene Krupa.


For me he symbolized, maybe epitomized, the Swing Era; the driving dynamic of his drumming characterized the whole period.


In the winter of '54-'55 during an eight-week gig at The Last Frontier, I got an opportunity to clock the Old Man. I was delighted (and sometimes dismayed, I admit) by his traits.


In a town flooded with Show Biz people, Gene was a loner. Though he was always convivial and warm, in his own genteel fashion, he never let casual acquaintances grow into friends. He gave me the feeling that he'd rather be home in Yonkers, New York. It was as if he'd seen enough towns to last him the rest of his life. And of course there was that question behind the eyes of every listener. Was he still using drugs? What a colossal bore it must have been to him, never having been even a casual user. So he kept his contact with the general public short, and he avoided making new fans or friends.


He was ritualistic about his day, which had a shape and constancy. In the earlier hours he took his meals in his room. He left the hotel grounds rarely, and spent little time with us, his sidemen. He was troubled. At home, his wife, Ethel, was entering upon an illness that would take her life before the close of the year.

A woman who watched us every night became enamored of him. She couldn't understand his remote attitude. She cried on my shoulder on several occasions. She was in her thirties, quite beautiful, and mature. He just had no interest in her, not even platonic. Finally I took up her cause with him. He received this intercession in a surprisingly sweet manner. He discussed her lovely disposition. Then he alluded to home. And his cleanshaven, tanned face wrinkled a bit. "It'd be wrong, don'cha see, Chappie," he said.


"Hell, we're on the road, Ace," retorted the morally bereft teenager. Ace was my nickname for him.


"Certain things you just don't do, Chappie. Certain things you just can't live with, son."


When I heard "son", I knew it was my cue to zip up.


And he stayed to his lone regimen. After our last set, he always played a few hands of Black Jack, then started off to bed. On entering the lobby of the casino, he would play a dollar one-arm. He must have beaten the machine with some consistency, for he showed me several bags of silver dollars he was "going to take home for the kids in my neighborhood." He was a celebrity in Yonkers. There was even a Krupa softball team, made up mainly of Yonkers policemen and neighborhood friends.


Gene exuded an aloofness most of the time. But there was no hauteur in it. He never used his position. He was in fact the least leaderish leader I'd worked for till that point in my life. And now I think of it, never did work for anyone after the Old Man; I worked with them. Only Quincy Jones, later on, in the 1960s, had an ease of leadership that echoed the Old Man's. Q.J. had gained a fund of respect for his arranging ability, but he never picked a player who could not cut the charts, nor one he'd have to "bring along". He was luckier than Gene, who had to put together road bands, not often peopled with great talents. Still, Gene was proud of his bands of the past, proud of encouraging and championing talents like Anita O'Day, Roy Eldridge, and Leo Watson. He was quick to take a bow for letting new people like Gerry Mulligan write freely for the band. (Disc Jockey Jump is a classic from that pen.)


One afternoon in Vegas, the four of us were in Gene's room, rapping. Gene sat on the huge high bed, his short legs hanging off the fat mattress, much as a child's would, feet not touching the floor. Eddie Shu, bassist John Drew, and I sat in chairs semi-circling our leader. The conversation turned to "serious" music, that is, the written variety of music so often and incorrectly called "classical" music. (The "classical" was but one period of "serious" music's history.)


Eddie was talking of his beloved Prokofiev. Gene introduced Frederick Delius into the conversation. Having ascertained that we all had a passing acquaintance with that much-traveled Englishman's music, he sent his bandboy-valet-aide Pete off to the center of town to buy a stereo phonograph and every available recording of Delius' music. With a fistful of large bills, Pete disappeared. We ordered sandwiches and beer to consume the time. Our anticipation had reached a zenith when Pete came through the door with a brand new portable phonograph and an armful of LPs. (Oh for those halcyon days of the 1950s when record shops had inventories!) That armful of music made the afternoon one of the most pleasurable I've known. Sadly, one is today hard put to find a single album of that wonderful music.


I had touched on the music of Delius with my teacher, but his academic fur had been rubbed the wrong way by the inept way in which Delius often developed his materials. In fact my teacher though it "pernicious" to treat one's musical thoughts in such a lack-a-day manner. I had to admit he was right. But for me it was a matter of the heart, not the brain. There was a glowing genius in Delius' vision, his sheer individuality. That uniqueness could not easily be dismissed. Of course, when you're studying, you address yourself to examples of lasting structural achievement, including the engineering of Bach, and, among the moderns, the neatly dry but marvelous Hindemith. To the teacher of composition, Delius is unnecessary baggage, ordinarily used as an example of what shouldn't be done with one's musical ideas.


But Krupa found much in Delius' music to commend it. He credited Delius, if the English will forgive him, with developing an American voice, melodically and harmonically. Gene pointed to a bass figure, a fragment, in the orchestral piece Appalachia to show us what Delius was "into" in the 1880s. That phrase shows up in the opening strain of Jerome Kern's Old Man River. Gene didn't mean to imply that Kern had plagiarized it. He meant only to show that Kern, like others, was affected by Delius' music.


That afternoon, acres of hours were consumed listening to North Country Sketches, Paris: Song of a Great City, and the shorter tone poems On Hearing the First Cuckoo in Spring and In a Summer Garden. To my delight I discovered that I was disposed towards Delius' music, that it spoke to me of my self in an odd and mysterious way. It also offered relief from the rhetorical now-hear-this quality of the Late Romantic literature that consuming desire of composers to out-Wagner Wagner. Since that afternoon, I have read a learned critic's assessment that I find marvelously on the mark. He placed Beethoven as the dawn of the Romantic Era, Wagner as its high noon, and Delius as its sunset. There is a point that has been made before that still bears emphasizing. Delius, unlike Wagner, never rages. It is his understating that draws his listeners. Though other composers have captured nature in her glory, with splashing colors that cover the score pages, none has captured her tranquility as Delius did. No one.


Krupa pointed to the folk-song elements in the last scene of the opera about miscegenation, Koanga, insisting, quite correctly, that Delius was years ahead of other composers, Gershwin in particular, in using what can only be termed American materials - those materials we've come to associate with jazz, blues, and popular music. This is no doubt a startling view to the many English fans who find Delius painfully English, a star brightly shining in the Celtic twilight. But Delius' own inclinations drew him to the ground-breaking American poet Walt Whitman, whose texts he used for Sea Drift and Once through a Populous City.


Krupa was astonished that Delius could have been born of Dutch parents in Bradford, England, write his marvelous early music in the United States, live the better part of his life in Grez-sur-Loing in France, and speak nothing but German in his home. Gene revealed a hitherto unseen excitement in putting the composer's life before us. (He would later laugh on discovering that I shared Delius' birthday, January 29.)


It was the longest non-stop conversation I'd had with him, and he began opening up some of his memories. He spoke of a time when he was a kid, playing in a speakeasy in Chicago. It was brought to his attention that Maurice Ravel was in the audience. History, it seemed, had stepped right on his toes. That visit started another love affair for Gene, one that culminated in his recording of Ravel's Bolero in Japan. The recording was never released because Ravel's one remaining relative, a brother, sat heavily on the composer's estate. Gene never did tell me what departures he'd made from the score.


Most surprising to me, as a student of music concerned with its historical periods, was Gene's knowledge of what had gone before. Even as a kid, he said, he'd been interested in and inclined towards "serious" music. So were his confreres. Wasn't Gershwin a departure? he'd ask. And what of Paul Whiteman's efforts? He'd laugh that chuckle of his but never allow himself a guffaw. Then he'd draw attention to the obvious differences between the freer jazz playing and written music. Having been in the pit band put together by Red Nichols for Gershwin's Strike up the Band on Broadway, he had more than an adequate idea of how the wedding of the seemingly disparate elements of the "played" and "written" was to be effected. Among the movers of his generation, he was one of those who favored the marriage of "serious" music and jazz and never disparaged attempts at a Third Stream. This was of enormous value to me, then, because I leaned toward it myself. Once I mentioned Stan Kenton. Gene commended the adventurous nature of what that California orchestra was doing. But he was put off by the martial quality that came from those blocks of brass. He was not disposed to the materials, either, preferring the work of Woody Herman's and Duke Ellington's bands.


I wonder now whether there'll be any more Krupas or Woodies or Dukes. There may not be, in fact. Will they be missed? I will miss them, mused the war-weary typist. We've witnessed the battle of the camera and the turntable over the last sixty years, and though the phonograph record/tape has made enormous strides, they are small beside the gains of motion pictures and television. Not to mention that there no longer are dance halls and cabarets, and there are too few jazz clubs. The extinction of the latter means there'll be no places to woodshed. For the new recording artist, the making of an album is not the end but the beginning of a now-larger process. The videotape of the song, the actuating of it, is the new culmination. There lies the defeat. The LP was a complete parcel of entertainment. The pictures you saw were of your own mind's making, like the fantasies of the young. Sinatra sang a song and you saw the face of your own loved one in your mind's eye. You added the lazily falling snow when Nat Cole painted a warm familial setting in The Christmas Song. No more is that the case. It's as if a great bell tolled the knell of all that was musical and precious. What must it be like to be raised with the "pictures" on the boob tube?


Bill Finnegan once predicted: "Soon, people will be dancing by themselves in ballrooms and clubs." He said it in the old Webster Hall RCA studio, now gone, to Larry Elgart and me. It made us shudder, then laugh shallowly. How else could two dinosaurs react to their own imminent extinction?


Krupa tried his best to keep his band alive. "But going to jail," he said to me, "meant going through one fortune I'd saved and it took darn near another one to put it back together again." Worse was the damage to his morale when, in order to reinstate himself, he had to become a sideman in the Tommy Dorsey orchestra. Though he respected Dorsey's musicianship immensely, "I couldn't stomach the man, personally, Chappie. Too self-centered." Being a glamorous ex-con of newsworthy status, Gene no doubt brought out as many people as the band did.

Somewhere on the path he was traveling, it became clear to him that he needn't bother leading a big band any more. After the stay in jail, he said, he found he'd lost the degree of understanding necessary to be surrogate father to a group of young players. "The problems never end, Chappie. Musicians are great human beings, but face it: we're all kids! And I don't mean Boy Scouts, either."
The other side of it was that Gene didn't have the inclination to adapt to small-group drumming either. He tried, sure, but night after night of restraining oneself is not fulfilling. He'd smile and say, "Tonight, the way I feel, I'd love to have sixteen guys out there with us...and push the walls back!"


He was frugal, but I overlooked that because he wasn't greedy. The two years I was with him, though, were a searching time for him. He told me — straight out — that he was looking to make a deal for the rights to his life story, hoping that the movie monies would provide for him in his slow autumn walk. When we worked Hollywood, he was always in the company of a screen-writer, retelling the story. It took a toll on him. The memories no longer had any sweetness for him. Confronted with the residue of his past, he found himself unable to bring order to it. There was always a Why? on his face, though he hadn't an inkling that it was there.


By the end of the Vegas gig, we'd worked out every wrinkle in the group and could have sleepwalked through the performances that month in California. Norman Granz recorded an album with the new group, which now featured the English-born (and now late) John Drew on bass. Thus for the first time I got the chance to hear the group "from out front", as it were. I was brought down by my own work, but the Old Man had a better knowledge of how talent matures, and he encouraged me, bolstering my sagging ego. On one ballad I played so many double-time figures I could only say, "Why so many goddamn notes?" Gene said, "It'll all come together one day, Chappie. But it won't if you don't go at it seriously." I told him I thought I sounded like a guy killing snakes with a Louisville Slugger. "What do you think people want to hear?" he said. "Lullabyes? Hell. Keep on playin' with that kind of drive. It'll come together, don't worry. You've got a good problem. You've got more energy in one finger than most piano players have in their whole body."


I perceive now that acting as Gene did — responsively — is the largest part of leadership. What he offered wasn't unqualified back-patting but an attempt to infuse bristling youth with a dose of much-needed patience. It was within his capabilities to understand my adolescence. Why, I'm still not sure. Oddly, he'd had no experience in child-rearing, never having had a family of his own.


Gene was a product of his own making — the self-made man of American myth. But is it myth? And who, having witnessed the unexpected emergence of talents of such large artistic dimension, could not applaud jazz for serving the commonweal, as the Church of medieval times raised up the peasant-born to the penultimate seat of power and influence? Jazz is truly a wonder of magnitude. It can even make a piece of well-wrought written music sound quite parochial. When Gene Krupa and the other burgeoning talents were confined to bordellos and speakeasies, the heartbeat of the American experience remained in limbo. But once the hats of respectability were tipped as jazz passed by the reviewing stand of life, the system proved it could loose the sources of its strength. What a terrible reminder to the social scientists, too — to find out that it is neither our minds nor a polling place that brought us together. It is shared aspirations in the same language that does it. Regionalism. Nonsense. When Louis Armstrong ventured north, bringing his New Orleans-born "Dixie", he found a Chicago version, a dialect of the music, already in existence. Jazz had proved it is the homogenizing influence, and the social historians have myopically passed over this fact.


When you enjoy the people you're playing with, you naturally perform to your limit, and sometimes even touch on the tomorrow side of your talent. I grew while I was with Gene's group. But by the end of a year and a half, I knew it was time to move on. And so I took leave of the quartet. Such partings were familiar to a man like Gene. I was pregnant with ideas I had held inside for that period of playing and traveling. I learned a lesson from my grinding dissatisfaction: the score pad was where my talent should be directed. In a musical sense I had, to my sadness, passed the group by. I couldn't go back, either. Writing was the way I'd begin making my own personal history, and I am reminded that the most important events in an artist's life are those that transpire inside oneself, the invisible journeying and mental mountain-climbing. Artistic endeavor is reduced to a war between two or more parts of the self. The playing of jazz was at that point too diverting. When you play every night, you don't listen to what others are playing. And so I became a listener and reaped the rewards of hearing others speak.


I would have loved to have done some writing for Gene, had he seen fit to record a special album. But it was not to be. Gene looked on recording as something worth only perfunctory effort. "It's dollars and cents, Chappie." He thought that his name or likeness sold the albums; what was the point in loading up the initial cost?


In that year, 1955, the Old Man settled before my watchful eyes. He was in his fifties and secretly unhappy with what was happening to his life. He never gave me the idea we were doing one thing of productive purpose, other than pleasing ourselves. The audience was an invited undemanding adjunct. It was as if the Old Man knew the hotels and clubs were paying for his celebrity and little else. We drew the head of the Nevada State Police narcotics squad. He came in night after night to watch for dilated pupils.


The Jazz at the Philharmonic tour that fall lifted Gene's spirits, at least for a while. But the traveling paled them. I often watched that pointless drum battle with Buddy Rich on every concert, and wondered what it was doing to his ego. Buddy was like some great meat-grinder, gobbling up Gene's solos, cresting his triumph in traded fours and eights and ending with an unbelievable flourish. Gene took it in the finest of manners. He didn't think music had a thing to do with competition. He had a way of carrying himself correctly when he walked on, and used that strut of a sort to the fullest at the close of those demoralizing drum wars. I broached the subject to him once. Just once. "Anyone playing with Bud is going to get blown away, Chappie. And remember, the audience isn't as perceptive as you are." His answer was matter-of-fact, with no hint of malice.


No one cared less than Gene about press notices. There is a danger in listening to what is said about your talent by non-players. Gene never gave them even a momentary attention.


I let him down one night in Vegas. I got thoroughly sloshed and had to be carried out of the Last Frontier. And who did the carrying? You guessed it. Gene tried to get my six-foot-one through the outer door sideways and ran my head and feet into the frame. It served me right.


After that night, I was cut off in the Gay Nineties room. But Gene, a merciful judge, saw to it that I could have a taste in our band room. And he never counted my drinks. He accepted that everyone slips, and he didn't carry your mistakes around inside him. What I did was one occasion to him, nothing more.


I believe his Catholicism kept his judging of others to the minimum. If you made an apology, he cleaned the slate. But then, Gene never chalked a thing like that on a mental blackboard in the first place.


His wife Ethel had only antipathy for musicians, seeing them as wayward and malicious little boys. Wonder of wonders, though, she liked me very much. As young as I was, she thought my lapses were excusable. Not so those of Gene or Eddie Shu.


One afternoon, when we were already late getting on the road for a gig in Connecticut, she insisted that "this young fellow have a sandwich" before we left their Yonkers home. Gene bitched about her "mothering concern" and the time, but he didn't get the last word. I was made to "sit down and eat it slowly." She was a fiercely dominating person, and I did as I was told. My colleagues in overcoats grumbled through clenched teeth as I finished the repast in record time and she told Gene to take better care of the "kids" working for him. "A good meal'd kill that skinny kid," she said of me, digging at the Old Man. I figured that once we were in the station wagon and on our way, I'd hear about it. But he didn't mention it. Months later I asked him about that little scene. "Better she's on your case, Chappie, than on mine,'" he said with a chuckle. By then I had witnessed a few of her verbal assaults on him, particularly when we brought him home behind a pint of Black and White scotch. But I never heard him bad-mouth her. Not ever.


Then, during the JATP tour, he became very detached. His eyes seemed far away in some other time and place. I asked about this obliqueness, and the conversation turned to Ethel. "She's very ill, Chappie." He stared out of the plane's window into the infinity of space, as if trying to decipher a future out there, his handsome face screwing up, the eyebrows knitting. "The doctors are lying to me. They say she's got an inner-ear infection. She's got a problem with her balance, don'cha see? But I know. It's a brain tumor." The last four words bled out of him. I let the subject lie there where he'd dropped it, and made useless remarks about worrying not meaning a damn thing, then pushed the button on my seat and reclined, feigning that nap time was upon me. We never spoke of her again until the day she passed away.


With all the trouble being married to Ethel entailed — and I got a notion of how hard she had tried him when they were divorced, from people who were close to him — he remarried her to put himself back into the Church's fold and to enjoy again the consolations of the Sacraments. To people outside the Church, the remarriage was viewed as a disaster. It smelled of farce. To the Old Man, however, it was all quite simple: he had contracted with God — to him a living God, a caring God, a right-here-and-now God. No amount of worldly knowledge, no rationalization, could alter his moral position. I certainly wasn't going to question the right or wrong of it. Gene believed it idiotic to take wife after wife, praying to hit on the right one. I tended to agree with him. Now of course I am convinced that the ordinances and Sacraments are not to be taken lightly. But even at the time, it struck me, this moral posture of Krupa's, that doing the right thing doesn't always make one feel good. And the difference is all one need understand to gain insight into the Old Man's decision. Life shows us, only too often, that what makes one feel good is not necessarily right for us. I need only mention booze, of which I have consumed my share, drugs, and promiscuity.



I was made to see, in a clear and distinct way, that there are higher laws and hard pathways. The world, of course, applauded someone who extricated himself from a "bad" marriage. Gene knew that. But he also knew that one cannot change one's mind except they step outside the Church's comfort. So he remarried her. He could not take the easier road because of his deeper commitment to his beliefs. Odd. Keeping a promise isn't worth much anymore, is it? But the Old Man was right for himself. The life outside is a consensus affair at best, and nothing in the streets does a wise man use except so far as he is disposed to make a hell of his morals and existence. It is always the will of men that disrupts things, no matter how politely one wishes to view one's fellows. We are responsible for making cesspools of our lives. What Gene bit off, he chewed.


He gave me the impression that he'd had a hell-raising youth. That this was in contrast to the behavior of his devout Polish Catholic immigrant parents hardly merited comment. He mentioned a younger brother, apple of his mother's eye, who disappeared. Gene said his brother was "beautiful". There was a suggestion that some deranged sexual pervert had abused and then disposed of him. But whatever happened, no trace of the boy was ever found. And this put Gene in a strange position in the family.


In strong Catholic tradition, every family "donates" a son or daughter to the church. A tithe to the cloth, in a manner of speaking. After the brother's disappearance, the family's eyes fell on Gene. And he was suddenly in turmoil. He had tastes for both the world and the spiritual. But in accord with family wishes, he spent a term as a novitiate in a seminary, during which it became clear to him, he said, that he was not worthy enough to wear the collar of the priesthood. His faith never faltered; but the muddy waters in which he found himself swimming didn't seem to be clearing. And at last he decided against going on.


In 1955, his rocky Catholicism embarrassed me, even though I sensed that it was only a matter of time until I would be confirmed in my own beliefs. But in those days, sitting in the front seat of the station wagon, hearing him braying at the words of some evangelist leaking out of the radio, his speech slurred by scotch, froze me. "There is only one true faith!" crowed our leader. Eddie Shu, a non-believer, took no umbrage at this, but Gene's intractable position abraded my liberalism, my live-and-let-live view of things. The only church-going I had done as a child was to an Evangelical/Reformed Lutheran church, a dissenting sect, to my mother, a closet Catholic of no small dimension. It was only in the last year of her life that she let me know her secret: she had always gone to Mass, unbeknownst to all of us! My father had left the Catholic fold and communed in a Presbyterian congregation.


And he and my mother, being at odds, let their children practice whatever we chose to, or not at all.


But to Gene, the Church strictures were the bottom line, whether you met that standard of behavior or not. He felt the Church itself was an empowered instrument of Almighty God. Now, having put much study into the subject of validity that split the Christian world in the late Fifteenth Century, I’ve come to see Gene's view — the Church's position as regards the Apostolic continuance and tradition — as correct. But in 1955, the constant harping on the one and only true faith really upset me.


No matter what Gene had done in his life, what profession he had pursued, his faith would still have been his rock, his consolation, and his hope. He was not a proselytizing zealot. He honored everyone's right to feel, to believe or not believe, in a manner consistent with one's own judgment. The syncretic form of Catholicism I came in time to embrace would be too "mystical" and too free-thinking — too "apologetic" in the theological sense - to suit the Old Man. He was hide-bound, for he credited the very existence of the Church as proof of its magisterium.


I was then fascinated by the writings of the convert Trappist monk Thomas Merton. Several of his other books were published after the success of his autobiographical Seven Storey Mountain. Always I bought two copies of his books, one for myself and one for the Old Man. I was never sure how much of Merton's mystical approach Gene took to heart, but Merton's abiding commitment consoled him.


For many musicians, music either has become or simply is their religion - - the way through which their deepest feelings are loosened and brought to the surface, hopefully transfigured. There is a substantial value in this, although the according of too much value to a means to an end is often self-defeating and diversionary. What lies within one is not always enchained for wrong reasons.


I have come to believe through thirty years of writing music that there is at its source the revelatory. Simply, I believe there is something else, outside or inside me, that plays the major role in the process. No doubt everybody who "creates" feels the otherworldliness of the process. The mysterious is never farther away than the next blank bar on the music pad. The real trouble comes when one is forced to ascribe authorship. To please my own doubts, I have come to think of myself as an instrument through which someone else's music is played. I am an aide and abettor of the spheres' ever-present sounds. If I be graced at all, it is in being able to hear in the chaos a hint of form and an incipient beauty.


Gene had no such grand pretentions. But he did see, as I do, a relation between spirit and sound. To ascribe a special grace to music wasn't what Gene would do. In fact he saw music-making as one of the many joys provided by Existence, i.e. God. For Gene, the religious state known as grace came only to those who found it of the utmost importance in their lives. His own faith struck down worldly measures and made his own success an anomaly to him.


I don't wish to mislead those who may not understand what being a Catholic of Gene's order entails, nor its salient characteristics. To Gene, making a friend unhappy had a direct bearing on how he thought he appeared in God's eye.


There are two seemingly opposed traditions in the written and oral history of the Church. One is the Pauline position. For St. Paul, reason, the use of the mind, was of little value to the discovery of faith, and at its worst an instrument of deception. He came down hard on the side of faith free, faith unencumbered, faith rooted in the fact that the "gift" Christ gave on Calvary had only to be believed and the inheritance collected. To Paul, the Passion and the Sacrifice cleaned the slate for Mankind with God. Then there is the Augustinian view, which is: God, in His wisdom, would not have created an entity as glorious as the human mind if it was not to be used to seek him! Therefore faith, through the use of the mind, must be able to withstand the assaults of reason. Fire to fight fire, as it were. In fact faith should be ennobled by the very process of reason.


These two positions were what Gene and I split hairs over, whether he knew it or not. I admit I envied him his faith. He saw my journeys as escapes into "esoterica" and, at best, "Words, words, words, Chappie." But then we needed different things. He was one of the fortunate believers. There are myriad pathways to faith, and I hadn't taken an easy one. But then no one gets to pick his path. Sometimes in my despair I feel with Nietzsche that "the only Christian who ever lived died on a cross." Ultimately we are shaped by our surrender to God's will.


The uneasiness that all devout people experience when the rules of men are imposed on them laid no less heavily on Gene Krupa. The optimism and idealism of the Christian ethic are burned by this worldly existence, with all its exigencies, into a smouldering relic. Morality mutates, and is no longer sound, and right or wrong are determined by the context. Subsequently, one is hard put to judge if religion doesn't further alienate the already alienated. Considering Gene's outlook, I am forced to say his rooting in the Church was both a boon and a bane.


The prophet of Islam was asked what was the one way to be secure in the eyes of Allah. "Speak evil of no one," he replied. Gene observed that rule, though he had no commerce with the thought of the man born in the Year of the Elephant. Whatever the Old Man felt about people, or questioned, it never got past his well-tended front teeth. His fairness rested on his acceptance of everyone's individuality. The confusion made life colorful to the Old Man, and he would never have endorsed uniformity.


He was so sensitive to the sensitivities of others. Once I tried to get him to come to my home in Westchester, not far from his modest house in Yonkers. He made every imaginable excuse for not coming. Finally I forced him to tell me the truth. And it was this: He felt that his emphysema would put us off our food. His wheezing by then had become constant. I couldn't get him to believe that it would not matter to us. He wouldn't budge. I told my wife why he wouldn't come. She was mystified. He was concerned what our kids might think. Such was the height of his deference. Such is the pride that lives in that tiny man, I told her.


Gene was a man who loved family life and had none of his own. He was sterile. It is impossible to know what damage this had done to him. He told me of trips to doctors and of ingesting substances supposed to make him potent. He even tried an extract of steer's testes. Why a man wants to go on in his progeny is something I have no ready answer for. It is too deeply encoded. As a way to defeat death, it would have little charm for Gene. He believed in eternal life as promised by God. But his sterility affected him. When on some occasion a conversation turned to manly prowess, Gene deprecated himself, resolutely assigning himself the last place on any list of great lovers. He poked fun at himself. How he came to grips with all this, I do not know. And to make things worse, his conviction for a narcotics offense he did not commit ruled out his adopting children. It was only some years later after my time in his quartet that — with the aid of the Catholic Church — he finally did adopt two children. And as life would have it, they were his only regret when he passed away, for he had separated from his second wife and had only visitation rights to quell his anxieties.


"Geezus, Chappie, I adopted the kids so they'd finally have a home and family. Now they're shifted back and forth between us. What the hell did I go and do?"


It was the only subject we discussed during our last telephone conversation. He still would not break bread at my house, but he offered me a seat in his box at Shea Stadium to watch his beloved Mets. I couldn't get him to move on to another topic. He felt he'd let the kids down. No outs or rationalizations for Gene. And he said he had misjudged his wife, forgetting that "old men don't marry young women unless they're ready for problems." I tried to argue around things, but he'd have no part of it. "I'm a grown person, Chappie, and there's no excuse you could come up with that'd be good enough to get me off the hook. I made the damn mistake an' I'll have to live with it, and make the best of a bad situation." He paused, the portentous silence alive between us on the telephone line. "There's no one to blame...but myself, Chappie."


The worst part of writing about a departed friend is that you begin to miss them. It is painful. We may be ships that pass each other in the night, but don't overlook the great wakes we leave, and the affect, long after, of the ripples.


You don't get to know a person like Gene Krupa without gaining insight into the conflict between worldly goals and personal moral imperatives. I saw this private war from a near vantage point, and what became clear was that he was a complex man with absurdly simple needs and desires.


When a man of reputation says little about what is going on in his own profession, one may assume that he has critical opinions he deems better left unsaid. But that wasn't the case with Gene. It was rather a matter of his incapacity to pass judgment upon what others did, or did not do. When Gene offered praise, as he did on one occasion for the marvelous drumming of Art Blakey, he always prefaced his remarks by disqualifying them as objective evaluations. They were purely an expression of his taste, he said, and subjective. I asked him why he didn't make judgments of other drummers. It'd be pointless, he answered, to judge what it was they were doing if he wasn't privy to what it was they were aiming for. He refused to be presumptuous. And he never deviated from that.


We were listening one afternoon to an old album of his big band. He was extolling the arrangement and the arranger. I didn't care for the piece and said so. "Ah, but Chappie," he said, "it didn't set out to bowl everyone over. But what it set out to accomplish.. .it accomplished."


I told him, straight out, that it was second-class arranging.


And his eyes took on that twinkle. "Now," he said, "if you'd have written it, Chappie, I'd call it second-rate, too, because you've more to say than this other fellow." I didn't hear this as flattery. He wanted me to understand that there is perfection even when the journey isn't to the polar caps; that there is as much virtue in being featherweight champ as there is in being heavyweight champ. "Where your writing is taking you, Chappie," he said, "the air is very thin. A fall from up there can kill you."




It was such challenges that he offered to one's mind. Just when I thought I could easily say that the Old Man was only capable of seeing things simply, he'd turn the tables.


It is rare for an artist's personality to rank with his work. There are thousands of volumes of biography that do little to illuminate, though they paint disturbing personal portraits. It is as if the biographers were screaming out a desire that the artist reach in his life the perfection of his work. But the artist is precisely the one whose personal life is likely to be a disaster. Why else would he seek beauty and try to encapsulate it? This applies to "creative" people. But the "re-creative" individual, like Gene Krupa, doesn't suffer from involuntary surges of newness and individuality or visions of the unattainable. It is within the power of such a person as Gene to enjoy life, to accomplish things he never thought he could. It is sort of a middle man's role, but it is not without degrees of freedom that, say, a symphony player never knows. Krupa could add to what was happening, join his oar with Gershwin's, as he did in the pit band of a Broadway show, or give a Mulligan a chance to write. These achievements were the brickwork of his ease and fulfillment. I am sure he enjoyed the knowledge that he had helped me along the way.


It is a fact that he partook of that special world of dreams that made the usualness of day-to-day living a bane to him. It never sat on him as heavily as it might a creative person, whose visions never sleep, but he had tasted it, and one is never the same after that. My father called the world of music the only way one could glimpse paradise while still alive. He said that once you had looked through that portal, nothing in the world would ever mean as much as it once did.


Gene knew his limitations better than most men, and handled them in worthy fashion. Though he wasn't a pedagogue, he liked to teach, and had many students in the school he ran with his friend Cozy Cole. Teaching rudiments gave him the greatest pleasure. He knew that their mastery was the only way to escape frustration. "Too many ideas, Chappie. These kids got too many ideas an' no tools to realize them with. It's everybody's problem in the beginning." He played no favorites among his students. Kids with little or no gift got a share of his joy and encouragement. The sheer making of music was Gene's end-all and be-all. If you could play well enough to play with others, by his reckoning, you were a lucky person.


The last years of his life found him in the grip of leukemia. It doesn't take you in one swoop; you just feel it tapping your strength away, daily and monthly. True to his stylish and graceful way, he made light of it to me, saying he'd live with it. Being unable to get him out of his home, I decided to drive up to Yonkers and surprise him. At the time I had several pressing writing chores and I couldn't get a day to myself. My mother called to tell me not to go up one particular day because she'd heard on the radio that Gene had checked himself into a hospital for transfusions. She said it wasn't bad, though.


The next day was Sunday, if memory serves me. She called and said he'd gone home and was in satisfactory condition. Then she berated me for not making time to visit him. Well, I missed going the next day too, waking late on Monday afternoon after writing almost all night. But on Tuesday morning I was up like a shot, bathed and dressed, and starting out the door when the phone rang. It was my mother.


"What are you doing up so early?"


"I'm on my way up to see the Old Man."


There was a long pause and her sigh cut into me.


"Don't bother, son. He passed away last night."


She then read me out in her inimitable fashion, reminding me that friendship is a damn sight more important than earning a living. I finally slowed her down by reminding her that I was a grown person.


I went with her to Gene's wake. I can still feel his tiny hands under my own hand, the fingers intertwined with a Rosary in death's repose, as I said a prayer and squeezed my good-bye to him in the coffin. Charlie Ventura broke down before the bier, words fighting tears in a near holler. "You made me what I am, Gene. I'd be nothin' except for you! Nothin’!


I looked toward my mother and caught her brushing a tear away.


"He wasn't too bad a stepfather to you either, Jocko."