Machine Gun

[Nick M]

Peter Brotzmann and a bunch of other luminaries. 1968 and socio-political ferment in the air. Cacophonous noise ensued. But is it art?

Some good comments here:

http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/peter_brotzmann/machine_gun/

I'm assuming that at least some people will know this album and I'm curious to know what people make of it. I bought it on a recommendation from a free-jazz-digging friend. The first time I ever played it, I had the mother of all hangovers - I knew it was meant to be noisy and brutal and some masochistic impulse made me listen to it as I lay in bed groaning and trying to keep the previous night's booze down. Unfortunately this means I cannot now hear it without feeling a lurching nausea. Total artistic success, or not?

[Andy Wilson]

an awesome, historically defining album.
the question isn't "is this art" - more like "are things that *aren't* like this, art"?

i bet you any odds you like that you will soon want to hear this album again....

[Nick M]

Oh, the "is this art" was just a throwaway rhetorical device, not a serious question.

But anwyay- yep, now that I've thought about this album, I'm going to have to dig it out again soon.

But OK, just for the sake of exposition- why is it "historically defining"?

[Andy Wilson]

it's a key album in the history of euro-improv. i guess witht he benefit of hindsight it stands out as a turning point, but i'm not sure how many albums it sold at the time or who was taking notice back then. ps. my reply on 'is this art' was also completely rhetorical.

[Ian Land]

I recommend trying Borbetomagus with a hangover :-)