In honor of the uniquely individualistic U.K. drummer Tony Oxley, who died earlier today at 85, here’s an interview he did with me about Cecil Taylor, whom frequently availed himself of Oxley’s virtuoso services from the late ’80s into the early ’00s.
************
Tony Oxley (on Cecil Taylor) – (3-20-01):
TP: I am interested in what CT has indicated is an aesthetic and personal evolution in the last fifteen years, and it may be that your tonal personality is the one he feels the most affinity towards. So first: What was your first exposure to Cecil’s music?
OXLEY: It was in the ’60s, of course, with the legendary records Conquistador and Unit Structures. Of course, I heard something before that. I think it was from Denmark. I remember that showing up in the ’60s as well. But I think you’ll appreciate that living in Britain at that time, it was not easy to get this music. In fact, there were various people who worked on the Queen Mary who used to actually smuggle it back from New York — as well as equipment, American drums, Gretsch and stuff like that, which you couldn’t get here.
TP: People in the ship bands?
OXLEY: Yes. So a lot of this early culture and contributions of Cecil… I mean, it would have wonderful to be able hear…. On the few occasions he was working in those days, it would have been wonderful to be able to hear this live. but the real impact for me was Conquistador and Unit Structures.
TP: You became interested in speculative improvising at an early period, before those records came out. How did hearing that, if at all, affect the course of how you approach the drums and spontaneous composition?
OXLEY: Well, I found it very refreshing, very optimistic. For me personally… I can tell you that the people who were interested in that music in Britain who I knew used to use it as their standard-bearer, if you like. If they were trying to inform anyone to what was happening in New York with Cecil’s music, those two records would be the thing they would be talking about. Of course, people were starting to tape this stuff and send it to each other, because you could only get very few records. So the impact of it for me… It was an alternative, you see, that was not exploited over here in Europe. That really comes out of what went on before in New York, a continuation in some ways. Very surprising. For me, very different to Ornette Coleman, which was a bit more predictable, in a way. The rhythmic elements in Cecil’s work had a lot more possibilities, in my opinion. Ornette’s approach had quite a traditional rhythm moving behind it. It was well-commented-on. It was noticed over here. But Cecil seemed to give the space in every direction for what seemed to be the right thing to do at the time, and the right way to go, and how to respond to the way he was working. So I think there was a lot more openness in the rhythmic side of the music to match the harmonic side.
TP: When you’re referring to the music as a continuation of what went on before, are you referring to Cecil’s immersion in Bud Powell and the jazz tradition, or are you talking about the early roots of jazz music in the U.S.?
OXLEY: I don’t know if he comes out of Bud Powell in a direct line. I wouldn’t like to speculate about that. But I do know how much of an admirer of Thelonious Monk Cecil is. And there might have been some kind of connection between what he does and Thelonious Monk. Now, of course, that might seem ridiculous on first hearing — kind of the opposite. But influence works in many ways, and it does not work in imitating, in my view. The philosophy is the thing you learn from, not the imitation. I would hesitate to recommend anyone imitating. But that’s another question.
TP: If I may go on a tangent, who are the drummers whose aesthetic philosophy you assimilated when you were developing?
OXLEY: Of course, the big band era was very prominent when I was growing up. So consequently, the big band drummers were very prominent in the public eye. But for the more discriminating jazz listener who would be brave enough to look for small groups (because big bands really dominated the scene), I would have to say that, first of all, Art Blakey, and then Elvin Jones, and then Milford Graves in those plays were very influential in showing the real issues in American jazz music.
TP: The real issues?
OXLEY: Well ,the reality, if you like. What was important and how to do it. How they do it. Because they were all different. Roy Haynes was another very interesting player in my development for years. Of course, we’re always developing. We never really stop, I suppose.
TP: Was your development entirely through listening to records, or were you ever able to witness any of these people in Britain?
OXLEY: I did actually. Because Norman Granz used to send shows with four or five bands in them around Europe, and fortunately, they showed up in Sheffield, where I lived. So I was able to hear Monk and Blakey live during that period of time. But it wasn’t very easy to anticipate what might be coming, because you’d have Ella Fitzgerald on the bill, then Monk or Blakey…a variety of music. But never Cecil Taylor.
TP: But also in the ’60s, around the time Conquistador comes out, you’re the house drummer at Ronnie Scott’s.
OXLEY: That was in ’66. But in ’61 and ’62 and ’63, I did take some work, deputizing for the regular bands on the Queen Mary, and that meant three trips a year because there were three bands that needed to be deputized for. Of course, on those trips, with the 36-hour turnaround in New York, that 36 hours was consumed entirely by chasing around, looking for the best music we could find. So as a kind of pattern of activity, I would say to you that it would start in the late afternoon at the Metropole, listening to the Woody Herman Big Band. The Metropole was just one long bar; the band was all strung out along one line, like washing. There were mirrors on the opposite wall so they could see each other through the mirrors. And people stood at the bar, so that meant you’d two yards away from the trumpet section. That was unbelievable! Lift you off your feet. Then we’d move on to Birdland to hear Blakey. Then we’d move on to the Vanguard and hear Bill Evans or Miles Davis. Then we’d move to the Five Spot to hear the legendary quartet with Thelonious Monk. So doing that three times a year, hoping that they would be there… It wasn’t always Blakey at Birdland when we happened to be in town. But at the best times we had, it was such a ritual as that. And that was ’61-’62-’63, so quite early in my active professional life I was able to be exposed to some of the realities of New York at that time.
TP: And I guess you were able to bring that sensibility back to what you were doing in England.
OXLEY: Well, it couldn’t be ignored, could it. It was a very dramatic experience for me, I must confess.
TP: So in the ’60s you were able to function as both a straight-ahead, timekeeping drummer and as somebody interested in a more open-ended form of pulse and texture with the kit.
OXLEY: Well, at the same time, I was very interested… In ’62-’63 I was starting to work with Derek Bailey and Gavin Bryars. I’d previously been playing diatonically Classical music, i.e., Beethoven, Mozart, Prokofiev, Haydn, this kind of area. I was in the Army, and this was the kind of thing we used to be doing…heh-heh, apart from other things. Of course, when I came out of the Army, I continued my interest in what’s called Classical music, European Classical music. So that interest transferred itself to 12-tone music. So during this time, around ’63, I became very aware of Schoenberg and Anton Webern, and of course, that led to John Cage eventually. So this was happening at the same time as hearing the developments in improvised music, i.e., Cecil Taylor-Bill Dixon, and my interest was continuing to develop in what’s called Classical music, only the second Viennese School. So there were a lot of influences going on with me at that time. And I was very hungry as well to hear it. I suppose that might answer your question.
TP: Between then and when you wind up playing with Cecil, it’s another two decades. When were you first actually able to witness a performance by him?
OXLEY: It would be in the ’70s at Ronnie Scott’s. There was a production for a week at Ronnie Scott’s, and Cecil was included on the program with Sam Rivers, Jimmy Lyons and Andrew Cyrille.
TP: The Fondation Maeght recordings are from ’69.
OXLEY: It could have been. The date I don’t know. But it was in that area, and there was a whole week of television from Ronnie Scott’s, and Cecil was the program with that quartet. I think I’ve got a recording of it somewhere!
TP: What was your impression?
OXLEY: Well, I was more worried about how Cecil was going to find the piano. Because the kinds of pianos that he needs…really they have to be in very good condition. This has nothing other to do than that the way he approaches the music, the instrument has got to be in good shape. And I wasn’t so sure about the piano at Ronnie Scott’s holding up! We’re talking about the late ’60s now. But from the musical point of view, of course, I was very happy to be there and hear what waas happening. I remember speaking to Cecil, but of course he wouldn’t remember that. Many people were saying “hello” and “how’s things” and how’s… I remember asking him how was the piano.
So it was the ’70s when I first heard him live. Then I don’t remember him coming to Britain… .The impact of playing with him in 1988 kind of obliterated any preconceptions I might have had about what the music that he might be playing… It was such an impact, that all my concentrations went onto that and not so much an historical view.
TP: So in other words, it erased anything but the immediate moment of getting sound out.
OXLEY: Absolutely. I felt I needed all my concentration and effort, and to try to put out of my head anything that I’d heard him do with other people on record. And the only records I had were those two that I mentioned. I tried to put that out of my head in order to approach it with a cleaner palette.
TP: Does playing with him demand new strategies and approaches on your instrument?
OXLEY: The music speaks for itself, you know. When you’re playing with Cecil Taylor, there is only one Cecil Taylor. And when you become involved in the music, things happen that have nothing to do with strategy or even preparation. The best preparation I’d say is be fit and open your ears!
TP: I’ve heard you quoted that you have to have the stamina of an athlete…
OXLEY: …and the imagination of God! [LAUGHS] You can quote that, if you like. Well, it’s just to give a sincere answer to a kind of general question, ,to bring it into some kind of perspective. I think just recently, when we played in the Tonic, I think the power of his work and the power of his imagination was evident. I thought it was best in ’88 anyway to try to approach it as prepared and unprepared as possible. Let’s put it that way. It’s a contradiction, but…
TP: Over the years have you sustained that strategy of no-strategy? Do you go into each performance with him with that blank slate?
OXLEY: Well, I am fortunate, because I love to play with Cecil Taylor and I love to be with him — and so does my wife. We actually are always together when we are with Cecil.
The joy…and believe me, that word is very, very important when I have to describe the experience of playing with Cecil… The joy is so much more immense if you prepare yourself to go where the music will take you, and not try and make the music go where you want it perhaps, or think it might go. With Cecil you don’t have to have any of those worries. There is always something happening. So you can relax and have this experience of working… He has his language. I have my language. And we think, I hope…at least I think that the compatibility is quite special. That is one of the most important aspects to remember when you’re either listening or thinking about his music. That’s about the best way I can describe it.
TP: I conducted a Blindfold Test with Andrew Cyrille a couple of years ago, and I played him “Stylobate #2” from Berlin. Andrew stated this response, which I think was an interesting way of stating your various aesthetic approaches, and I’m curious about your response. Andrew said, “the drummer sounded as though he was matching color textures with Cecil’s panorama of sound colors and textures and dynamics, rather than playing his own contrasting rhythm as say a Max Roach would. So there wasn’t very much push-and-pull; there wasn’t the polarity which sometimes causes electricity, which brings forth another kind of feeling.” He said what you were doing was great, you fit very closely to what Cecil was doing, and there was “a certain kind of synthesis, a certain kind of unison, coming together.” So it indicated to me that Andrew will state very definite ideas, and the contrast, the opposition, perhaps the counterpoint brings forth a certain tension between the personalities, and that yours has more to do with creating a web of rhythm texture that dots the i’s and crosses the t’s.
OXLEY: Well, it would be acceptable to me, knowing Andrew and knowing how he works. I would imagine that’s how he would feel. I would find that absolutely acceptable from Andrew. Whether I agree with it or not is another story. But I’m certainly not surprised. It fits in with the way he approaches the music. His observations fit in with that.
TP: Without commenting on Andrew specifically, can you discuss your philosophy of playing this music? Do you have a philosophy of playing with Cecil Taylor?
OXLEY: No. As I say I don’t have a plan. I think by whatever grace, whether it’s the grace of God or the grace of whoever, we actually came to the point where we play together. Now, before that, I don’t know if he had heard me. I doubt it. So I don’t think there’s any answers to this question in that direction.
But I will say to you that when I was growing up, leaving school, I was a steelworker in Sheffield, and I think that that environment, which I paid close attention to, not only listening, but physically it wasn’t, shall we say, something you wanted to jump out of bed to do every morning…but anyway, it had to be done… The sounds and the rhythms of that kind of environment, I’m pretty sure, had more influence on me than I have ever appreciated, and I am starting to think now that maybe that has quite a significant role to play in the way I work with percussion. For the rest of it, we’ll wait for the book! [LAUGHS]
TP: Some of your interactions with Cecil are totally improvised and some would involve his notation, I imagine, with the larger ensemble perhaps.
OXLEY: Not very often.
TP: So you’re the wrong person to talk to about his notation..
OXLEY: Of course, I’ve been quite close to Cecil since ’88, and I’ve seen him in situations with ensembles. But to put it on a basic level, it would rather depend on the ensemble. If people come along and they’re well aware of Cecil… Why would they be up there, I suppose, if they weren’t? But if they come along with the right attitude and they want to be there…
TP: Trudy Morse said that one reasons she’s very proactive in instigating these workshops is because she wants to introduce as many musicians as possible to Cecil’s notation. And having seen a number of the sheets he was passing out, they’re graceful, poetic, dancelike…
OXLEY: You’re talking about this last project, and of course it would be difficult for me to comment about that because I wasn’t there.
TP: But there were people who had participated in projects of his from 1970 and 1973 who said that the notation was similar. I thought you’d be interesting to ask about it because of your immersion in modernist classical music?
OXLEY: It would be easier to talk to Cecil about that. Have you tried to approach him about that question? [ETC.] Cecil is one of the most generous, sensitive people I know. But it has to be respected that he also needs time to himself and he also has his way of dealing with a situation. He works at his own pace. But believe me, at the risk of repetition, he is one of the most generous and sensitive people I have ever had the privilege of working with and playing with. So it’s nothing other than having to catch him at the right time. Between you and me, when I’m ringing him, which is reasonably often, I can ring three or four times and not even get him on the phone, and the machine comes on, and I’ll leave him a message. He has his own way of working, and that I respect 100 percent because he gives me the same freedom also. If I’m not there, I’m not there.
TP: Let me ask you one more question that I raised in the fax. You addressed Cecil’s impact on the community of European improvisers in the ’60s. I’m wondering how his intense interaction with that community in the last 15 years has affected the music in Europe.
OXLEY: You mean personally or musically?
TP: Both perhaps.
OXLEY: It’s hard for me to speak for other people. But of course, I am aware of the people who have worked with him over here in various things, particularly in that production for FMP, the box, which accounts for quite a few people. I know quite a lot of them, and I know that the impact was quite surprising. There are different drummers in the duets who show different ways of approaching the music.
TP: More generally, can you describe the impact he’s had on the community?
OXLEY: Different people have different views on it, as far as I can gather, and I would only be prepared to speak for myself on that. Because people change their views. And the views that I heard in ’88 would probably be very different now.
TP: Without quoting anyone, can you tell me what views you heard in ’88?
OXLEY: This time he spent in Berlin I think left a mark in history that will never be erased, in my view. I think that’s about as much as I can say there. Musically, it was absolutely phenomenal. And after we finished…there were gigs being prepared even before he went there.
TP: I looked at the website. I counted 24 different gigs. Not individual dates, but gigs of varying length between 1988 and 1991.
OXLEY: Well, that’s only half of them that we did. There’s a 10-CD production coming out from London which I expect will be called “The London Trios.” If you think about that, that’s ten CDs, and go back to the box and also go back to the productions Jost Gebers made outside of the box, which I think there are 7 CDs that I’m on… If you look at that amount of work and that amount of playing, it’s quite a phenomenal achievement, when you think about it.
[ETC.]
TP: You used to use an enormous…
OXLEY: A cowbell.
TP: Well, not just a cowbell. Your drumset incorporated things that normally wouldn’t be found. Do you still have such an expansive tonal palette in your drumkit, or have you pared it down?
OXLEY: Well, I’ve cut it down, but not from when you heard it in Sweet Basil. I cut it down from the late ’60s when I had electronics as well. I actually devised a system of having live electronics with the kit, which there are some records around. Pity you don’t know them.. But it’s an interesting way of working, and I found it great. I worked with that until about ’78 or ’80. If you’ve got February Papers… Some of Howard Riley’s recordings; I played the electronic stuff with his trio. But anyway, around ’80 I gave up the electronics, and went back to playing acoustic entirely, and that’s the kit I used at Sweet Basil. More or less. You change a few things here and there, bring a few different things in. If you have a sound you want to reproduce, then you have to find a way of doing it. If you have to make something, then you make it and then, of course, you add it to your language.
[-30-]
Today Is The Question: Ted Panken on Music, Politics and the Arts 