Plans, Takes, and Mis-Takes • Klemp, Et Al

Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 4

Klemp, et al.Nathaniel Klemp, Ray McDermott, Jason Raley, Matthew Thibeault, Kimberly Powell and Daniel J. Levitin Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes

Summary This paper analyzes what may have been a mistake by “In Walked Bud,” from the album, Misterioso pianist Thelonious Monk playing a jazz solo in 1958. (1958). Our descriptive goal is to situate Even in a Monk composition designed for patterned Monk’s performance in relation to two kinds mayhem, a note can sound out of pattern. We reframe of data: most importantly, sequential data from the question of whether the note was a mistake and ask instead about how Monk handles the problem. Amaz- notes played before and after the difficult mo- ingly, he replays the note into a new pattern that res- ment; and secondly, comparative data from the ituates its jarring effect in retrospect. The mistake, or same solo played on two other occasions, one better, the mis-take, was “saved” by subsequent notes. in 1957, the other in 1959, both in remarkably Our analysis, supported by reflections from jazz musi- similar, but not identical ways, but neither of cians and the philosopher John Dewey, encourages a them showing any signs of the struggle that reformulation of plans, takes, and mis-takes as categories for the interpretation of contingency, surprise, and marked the 1958 recording. The ideal reader of repair in all human activities. A final section suggests this paper would listen to the recordings. that mistakes are essential to the practical plying and Artistic work is demanding because it lives playing of knowledge into performances, particularly off – indeed, it requires – difficult moments those that highlight learning. that performers can use, as John Dewey said, to throw back “the covers that hide the expres- A mistake is the most beautiful thing in the world. siveness of experienced things” and to build It is the only way you can get to some place you’ve “relationships that sum up and carry forward” never been before. I try to make as many as I can. (1934: 166, 104). In his artistic work on a Making a mistake is the only way that you can piano keyboard, Monk had to coordinate past grow. and future in a continually evolving activity Drummer E.W. Wainwright sequence rapidly executed in real time. Notes (conversation with Klemp, 2001) upon notes had to be made somehow to “sum up and carry forward.”1 Conceptions and systems of conceptions, ends in There are two reasons for borrowing Dew- view and plans, are constantly making and re- ey’s theoretical language to articulate Monk’s making as fast as those already in use reveal their situation and achievement. From Dewey’s weaknesses, defects and positive values. earliest work on perception (1896) and even John Dewey (1929b: 133-134) logic (1893), he always insisted that activities are organized in time, at a particular time, This paper analyzes a difficult moment in a jazz solo performance by pianist Thelonious 1 Dewey’s “sum up and carry forward” appears hereafter Monk (b. 1917, d. 1982) on a recording of with quotations marks, but without citation.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 4 10-10-2008 09:03:55 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 5 often at just the right time, and always with a of late (Sleeper, 1986; Hickman, 1992; Burke, simultaneous concern for both the future and 1994). John McDermott says that Dewey of- the past.2 The opening line of his mid-career fers “a metaphysics of transiency, in which essays on logic reported that the “key” to his human life is seen as a wandering, a traveling, work “lies in the passages regarding the tem- a bemusement which rocks side to side, com- poral development of experience” (1916b: 1), edy and tragedy, breakthrough and setback – and his late-in-life volumes address topics – yet, in all, a purposive, even progressive, trip” art, education, ethics, and logic, topics all too (2007: 157). The “transiency” is most appar- easy to treat statically – as on-going temporal ent in actual performances, in people rock- achievements. Change and uncertainty are ing “side to side,” and this paper uses Monk’s the only constants in Dewey’s thought, and “purposive, even progressive” solo as such an he identifies movement, direction, and rhythm opportunity.3 as essential resources for anyone figuring out A second reason for using Dewey is that what to do next. To those who listen care- his ideas on thinking, doing, and performing fully, jazz musicians (along with, from a long in real time are at the heart of his theories of list, poets, comedians, spies, and con artists), inquiry, knowledge, learning, and education. exemplify this view of life perhaps most mi- If Monk’s solo is a site for the exploration of raculously. Real time inhabits the iterative, temporality in the organization of behavior, it reflexive, and reticular work of sequencing ac- can be used to rethink learning and education tivities with activities. It is distinct from linear as well. Given his prominent place in educa- clock-time that passes by one pre-set unit at tional theory, it is surprising that Dewey thinks a time. In real time, a moment is momentary, of learning as secondary to the rest of what fleeting and without character, and it takes its people do, as less a thing in itself than a sidebar identity in a sequence of moments of which it to other and likely more important activities. is not just a part, but a constitutive part. Activi- Across his work, Dewey relentlessly wrote of ties help build their own environments, albeit learning as a progressive activity among activi- under conditions well structured in advance; ties rather than as a stockpile, the latter being by their very occurrence, they reflexively con- what he called “mere learning”: useful for tak- stitute the conditions of their own significance. ing tests in school perhaps, but rarely helpful Moments, like notes played on a keyboard, in pressing situations requiring growth. For become consequential – even momentous – Dewey, learning is “a necessary accompani- by their simultaneous connections to things that have already happened and are about to happen. 3 Attention to Dewey’s sensitivity to timing in human activities should not hide a sophisticated literature Dewey’s is not the only twentieth century combining linguistic and phenomenological analyses celebration of the relentless temporality of of music, talk, and body movement in various com- human activities (consider James, Bergson, binations (Schutz, 1953; Sudnow, 1978; Byers, 1985; Attali 1987; Kendon, 1990; McNeill, 1992, 2007; Feld Heidegger, G.H. Mead, Merleau-Ponty, Der- and Fox, 1994; Lindsay, 1996; Monson, 1996; Saw- rida), but its power is receiving appreciation yer, 2000; Erickson, 2004; Levitin 2006; Solis 2008). See the rich descriptions of “sequential relevance” in conversational analysis (Sacks, 1990), particularly on error repair (Schegloff 1992). Dewey and G.H. Mead 2 In this way, he presaged the work of the neuroscientists (1932) have an added attraction: that they make time Karl Lashley (1951) and Lashley’s student Donald Hebb and creativity central to any organization of activities (1949), whose pioneering advances related to the orga- while they simultaneously articulate theories of learn- nization of time in neural networks; see also Miller, ing, education, and democracy (e.g., Joas 1992; Bredo Galanter, and Pribram (1960). 1994, 1997; Manicas 1998; J. McDermott, 2007).

72972_outlines_r01.indd 5 10-10-2008 09:03:55 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 6 ment” to getting something done, something (particularly in rehearsal sessions). Monk’s other than learning for its own sake. In a late solo builds to a threatening moment, and a statement, he calls learning “a product,” but note gets played seemingly out of sequence. only to emphasize that it is secondary: What Dewey calls its “whence and how” – as in “whence and how the quality proceeds” Learning is the product of the exercise of powers (1934: 138) – gets disrupted and threatens needed to meet the demands of the activity in op- the discernable order.4 Any note might be eration … [a performer’s] primary aim is to do his a mistake or not depending on context, the work better, but learning is a necessary accompani- rules of harmony, the player’s intention or the ment, the more so as being largely the unconscious audience’s expectations. If not a wrong note effect of other acts and experiences. (1937: 238) played by mistake, it could have been a wrong note played intentionally, or a right note in a Even when conceived of as a product, learn- coherent scheme Monk had yet to display or ing, for Dewey, is secondary to getting on in even to discover. Whatever it was – never to life; it is not so much a product as a by-prod- be known for sure – Monk reshapes it into uct, a product bye and bye, of more pressing an opportunity for a new sense of “whence engagements. and how.” Whatever it might have been, it be- The bulk of this paper describes Monk or- comes, for a period of time immediately fol- ganizing his behavior in real time, and at the lowing its occurence, a challenge for Monk end we speculate briefly on the implications and his listeners. of Monk’s performance for Dewey’s attention Before describing Monk’s mis-take, we re- to, first, sequential organization and, second, frame the terms in our title to fit the demands of learning and education. We proceed in three analyzing improvisation. If a song has a plan, a sections: we derive categories for understand- particular performance constitutes a take, and ing Monk’s performance; then we use them any take is ripe for a mis-take. The more we in the description; finally, we focus on the listened to Monk, the more our analytic focus importance of time in theorizing activities, shifted from presumed plan to actual take. At particularly learning. first, we heard the music as a mere mock-up of what Monk had in mind; the plan seemed more real than the take, performance a pale copy of Terms, off and on key competence. “When arts follow fixed models,” complained Dewey, “and when the element of I made the wrong mistakes. individual invention in design is condemned Thelonious Monk, after a disappointing as caprice, forms and ends are necessarily ex- performance (wikiquote.org) ternal to the individual worker” (1929a: 92). When forms and ends, says Dewey, precede There were no wrong notes on his pi- “any particular realization,” the worker, the a-no had no wrong notes, oh no … artist, the person and their activities are ana- He played not one wrong note, not one. lytically pushed aside, and the world in which His pi-a-no had none, not one.

Chris Raschka, on Monk (1997: 6-9, 14-17) 4 Dewey’s “whence and how” (1934: 135) is a work- man’s take on William James’s more poetic “whence Notes that sound out of place are a constant and whither,” as in: “An activity-series is defined by its whence and whither” (James 1905: 257). “Whence threat to performance. Coordination can break and how” appears hereafter with quotations marks, but down, and wrong notes can halt a performance without citation.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 6 10-10-2008 09:03:55 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 7

events happen becomes invisible. The actor is “seeming.”6 When we refer to an apparent de- cut off: lost in thought, lost in ought. The more viation from patterns established by previous we listened to Monk, the more the world of his notes and used in turn, and in time – just in music reemerged. The music became analyti- time – to build a new pattern, we write the word cally more central than our version of his plans. in italics with a hyphen: mis-take. The differ- We were experiencing in our analysis what ence between a mistake and a mis-take is never Chuck Israels says he experiences in playing clear when a jarring note occurs, but it can jazz: “No matter what you’re doing or thinking become clear upon analysis in the same way it about beforehand, from the very moment the becomes clear to a performer: with effort, over performance begins, you plunge into that world time, in the course of renovation, with relation of sounds. It becomes your world instantly, and to what came before and after, with relation to your whole consciousness changes” (quoted “whence and how.” In the descriptive section, in Berliner, 1994: 348). Fingers and notes be- most every use of the term mis-take represents came the story. They had their own biography. as much an accomplishment for the analyst Monk produced the notes, but he was their ser- as it once was for the performer. We are not vant as well, for once played, he had to hew defending bad performances. Rather we are to their consequences. Monk both created and noticing that good and bad are difficult terms underwent their demands, and they told their to use without a specification of the context own story.5 Analytically, plans and their mis- and purpose at hand. takes grew small, and takes and mis-takes more By commonsense, a mistake is easy to prominent. Our analysis was overtaken by a understand; a clinker, like a missed line in a web of connections created, summed up, and recitation, interferes with how a performance carried forward by Monk. sounds and contrasts with a less strident note From here forward, we use the term mistake that did not occur, but should have in a more to refer to what might be heard as a wrong carefully planned or better played perfor- note; because we are unsure it is a mistake, mance. What originally made Monk’s perfor- or unsure of the grounds for calling it a mis- mance interesting was an apparent mistake. take, we usually modify it as “apparent” or Despite the dissonance and occasional melodic chaos of a typical Monk composition, there is great discipline, and a note can sound out of pattern. In the Misterioso solo of 1958, the 5 Music cognition theorists have similarly argued that music listening requires memory of the actual notes sequence of “whence and how,” both structure that have come before (absolute values) as well as their and its promise, were disrupted. roles and functions in the ongoing development of mu- Was the mistake one of plans or hands? We sical harmony and changing tonal centers (Narmour, 1990). It is a normal part of composition that new notes cannot answer the question, although we have retrospectively influence an understanding of those that tried. A better question to ask concerns how came before (Levitin, 2006). In jazz improvisation, the the performer uses what was right about the performer is the composer, and recontextualization can either be planned or executed in a post-hoc or ad hoc mistake to “sum up and carry forward” and basis. From an ethnomethodological tradition, consider David Sudnow: “Having a visual-conceptual means for going places, incorporated into a tactilely managed set 6 The words “apparent” and “seeming” do not modify of easeful maneuvers and the development of varieties the notes as much as they refer to the likely uncertainty of dexterities in engagement with the terrain, there was of Monk as he played and the resultant uncertainty of enough ‘jazziness’ to my actions that I felt at the piano our analysis. We are less interested in establishing just I was essentially doing what jazz players do” (1978: 34; what a mistake is than we are in raising the question for another take on embodiment, see also Bowman and of whether a mistake is a useful category to begin an Powell, 2007). analysis.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 7 10-10-2008 09:03:55 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 8 delivers a second excitement: that the mistake assumes an environment that stands predict- did not linger. A few seconds after hearing the ably still, enough for all eventualities to be mistake, we could no longer tell whether we anticipated, taken into account, and, upon re- had heard a mistake. In the language of jazz flection, appropriated. A student of planned theorists, the mistake was “saved” by subse- activity, complains Lucy Suchman, “need only quent notes (Berliner, 1994). The mistake was know the predisposition of the actor and the a mis-take. If a mis-take can be replayed into alternative courses that are available in order to an erasure of itself as a mistake, storehouse predict the action’s course. The action’s course theories of mastery can be replayed into de- is just the playing out of these antecedent fac- scriptions of the delicate and mutually enhanc- tors, knowable in advance of, and standing in a ing relations betweens skills and fast-paced determinative relationship to, the action itself” changing environments. (1987: 51). Such a view is inherently partial Jazz greats have strong advice along these and incomplete; it leaves no room for the lively lines. Saxophonist Don Byas reported pianist complexity of activities in time. Plans are an Art Tatum’s opinion: “Just remember there is object of analysis only for activities that unfold no such thing as a wrong note … What makes by decision tree and do not require fast action a note wrong is when you don’t know where in reflexively shifting environments. to go after that one. As long as you know how Plans (b). Jazz musicians must adjust to to get to the next note, there’s no such thing changing environments of their own making. as a wrong note. You hit any note you want They understand, and often articulate, that and it fits any chord” (in Taylor, 1993: 52).7 A plans are over-rated. It is not that they cannot, description of the notes making up, and taking or do not, play pieces identically across years, up, the immediate context of Monk’s apparent but they often abandon plans for nuanced in- mistake confirms Tatum’s wisdom. A mis-take novation; they tinker to make the song better, is rarely a lone event. For a skilled player, it is where “better” may either mean more musical a systematic development of whence it came, or more responsive to and reflective of the art- and it can be saved, in turn, by how it connects ists’ mood at the moment of performance. For to what follows. jazz musicians, a plan is less an exact calculus In the paragraphs that follow, we offer a for- for what must happen next and more a descrip- mulation of plans, takes, and mis-takes three tion of expectations not exactly followed while times each: (a) as commonly theorized, (b) as making last gasp adjustments to new patterns talked about by experienced jazz musicians cascading from a newly definite past to an who know better, and (c) as each has emerged emergent future. Berliner (1994) reminds us in our descriptive work. Figure 1 offers the that improvisation typically shifts between the same reformulations in summary form. performance of pre-composed ideas and those Plans (a). A plan is often understood as an conceived in the moment of performance. executive function that, once in place, gets Plans (c). A plan can be redefined as al- followed one step at a time. Miller, Galanter ways emergent and contingent, never exactly and Pribram defined a plan as “any hierarchi- as stated, and sensitive not just to surrounding cal process in the organism that can control environments, but to the very environments the order in which a sequence of operations of which it is partially constitutive. Human is to be performed” (1960: 17). This position engagements are organized this way. Suchman (1987) has offered a precise account: 7 Lester (1994) claims Tatum rarely made mistakes. If he did, he “saved” them faster than people could hear.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 8 10-10-2008 09:03:55 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 9 Figure 1. Terms, off and on key

By Common- By Jazz By Analytic Sense Talk Categories Plans Executive and Contingent Reflexively are determinative formulations: just consequential, a formulations “abandon the past part of what has idea and develop to be worked with a new one.”*

Takes Diminished Where the Reactive and are plans action is: “you emergent just keep weaving”; “let’s wrap it up.” Mis-takes Errors, or A problem to be An opportunity to are corrupted plans solved: “something save, improvise that happened”; “the and learn only way you can grow.”

* The five short quotes in this column are from jazz musicians cited in the text. They are general enough to be equally applicable to redefining Plans, Takes, or Mis-takes. The first quote is used in the text as part of a longer quote to comment on the word Take, but in this chart, with less context, it comments on Plans.

Plans are efficient formulations of situated ac- been played. Pianist Keith MacDonald stresses tions … As efficient formulations, however, the past, present, and future as the nexus where significance of plans turns on their relation back to he plays music. “Everything is a reaction to the unique circumstances and unarticulated prac- what was just done. When I improvise, I think tices of situated activities. (1987: 186) in phrases. If one of these phrases is inter- rupted, I abandon the past idea and develop Takes (a). A take is understood as a dependent a new one” (conversation with Klemp, 2000). and unruly child of the plan. Dictates from the Berliner cites drummer Max Roach to point: throne of competence are defiled by the realities of performance always limited by messy From the first note you hear, you are responding particulars – including one’s own or others’ to what you’ve just played: you just said this on mistakes – of moment. your instrument, and now that’s a constant. What Takes (b). Jazz musicians have a thicker follows from that? And then the next phrase is a analysis of a take. Information that guides constant. What follows from that? And so on and so forth. And finally, let’s wrap it up so that ev- performance can come from many places erybody understands that that’s what you’re doing. within a performance system. Along with a (1994: 192) preset plan, performers get information most generally from “vibes and venue” (Berliner, The last note played is not the only context for 1994) and most particularly from what has just what can be done next, but it is crucial.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 9 10-10-2008 09:03:56 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 10 Takes (c). A take is the site of reality, where long periods of activity, or else it is so empty organism-environment relations are worked as not to be an act of expression” (1934: 72). A on and worked out, where possibilities of and wrong note is errant only to what has already constraints on what can be played next define happened, and it can be made less errant by each other, where structure and emergence do rearranging what happens next. A mis-take is battle. From the beginning of a take, the Physi- in this way a spontaneous move in a system cal acoustic past is set. Anything that follows of moves in search of connections that carry must be integral to what has already happened, forward. but its retrospective contextual interpretation Recasting terms in our title weakens the is malleable. Anything that follows must “sum borders of their commonsense meanings and up” or face further revision. Pianist Randy reverses the analytic figure/ground that puts Halberstadt says, “You’ve probably heard the plans and mistakes first and actual activities axiom: there are no wrong notes in jazz. But and their consequences second. When we the most rigorous perspective is that there is listen to music, we hear neither plans, nor only one right note: the one that I hear at that mistakes, but takes in which expectations and moment” (1994). difficulties get worked on in the medium of Mis-takes (a). The standard view is that a notes, tones and rhythms. Notes live in con- mistake is the same as an error, a break from nection with each other. They make demands plan due to a faulty head or hand. It is to be on each other, and, if one note sticks out, the avoided, recontextualized, hidden, or conceded logic of their connections demands that they with chagrin as an embarrassment. be reset and realigned. Analyzing Monk from Mis-takes (b). Jazz performers know better. the perspective of the notes invites an account Consider Don Byas: of the “save.” A save can be understood as a cover-up, an There is no such thing as hitting a wrong note. effort to hide an embarrassment before others It’s just that when you hit that wrong note, you’ve notice and remember, but jazz musicians think got to know how to make it right … you just keep more productively. They do not let a mistake weaving and there’s no way in the world you interfere with the production of music. The can get lost. You hit one. It’s not right, you hit only mistake, warned Tatum, is to stop. A real another … As long as you keep going you’re all right, but don’t stop, because if you stop you are mistake leaves a musician without knowing in trouble. (in Taylor, 1993: 52). “where to go.” Pianist Herbie Hancock has reported a seeming mistake Miles Davis cleaned Performers do not have time to explain what up for him, for them, for the audience: has just happened. Their work is to continue in real time – the pulse of the rhythm section The music was building, the audience was right creates demands for new input every second. there with us, and at the peak of Miles’ solo on “So Questions of “what and why” pale before What” I played a really wrong chord. Miles took questions of “whence and how.” a breath and played a phrase that made my chord Mis-takes (c). A mis-take is a sensible move right. Miles didn’t hear it as wrong, but instead as something that happened. (in Eskow, 2002) within a system of moves so tuned to circumstances it can be used to explore the “whence and how,” the constraints and possibilities, of By this account, Hancock’s mistake was not a what happened before is articulated with what mistake for Miles Davis, but just “something happens next. Anything spontaneous, says that happened,” another in a continuous stream Dewey, even an errant note, is “the result of of musical events for the musician to react to

72972_outlines_r01.indd 10 10-10-2008 09:03:56 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 11 and bring to order. A save rebuilds connec- Monk’s style influenced most pianists who tions (across seconds of time and dozens of followed. His compositions, “Straight No notes) in relation to both a further past and a Chaser,” “Round Midnight,” and “Well You not yet patterned sequence of notes. A save is Needn’t,” have become standards of the jazz a learning moment for artists who challenge canon. Monk brought adventure to any con- themselves with problems. stant rhythmic or harmonic base: “instead of peacefully stating a key and a tempo, Monk sticks absolutely ambiguous chords in the A take, a mis-take, and a save most incomprehensible places” (De Wolfe, Working with Monk brought me close to a musical 1996: 61). architect of the highest order. I felt I learned from “In Walked Bud” was composed by Monk him in every way–through the senses, theoretically, in 1947 as a new melody over the harmony technically. I would talk to Monk about musical of the hit tune, “Blue Skies” (Gourse, 1997: problems, and he would sit at the piano and show 29). Using a traditional jazz quartet configura- me the answers just by playing them. tion, Monk’s recordings begin and end with a John Coltrane (1960) melody surrounding a middle of improvised saxophone, piano, bass, and drum solos. Along with Charlie Parker and Dizzy Gillespie, Monk’s melody weaves choppy, almost harsh Monk was in New York for the start of bebop – rhythmic textures together with rich melodic a 1940’s jazz movement marked by great ex- lines. The group plays the melody first, and perimentation, both tonal and rhythmic: tonal, then uses the chords as a framework for creat- “less symmetrical, more chromatic (that is, ing improvised rhythmic and melodic themes drew on all twelve notes of the octave)” before returning to the melody at the end. The (Szwed, 2001: 164); and rhythmic, seem- melody section (what jazz musicians call “the ingly “erratic” with “staggered, unusual use head”) is 32 bars long and can be divided into of silences … along with offbeat accents and four eight bar sections. “In Walked Bud” fol- sudden shifts in speed” (pp. 165-166). Monk lows the standard jazz AABA form with four pushed bebop perhaps further than anyone. sections. The A section is played twice, then Consider John Szwed’s description of Monk B (often called the “bridge”), and then A once playing in 1948 behind vibraphone master more. This AABA structure remains a con- Milt Jackson’s bluesy lead on the song “Mis- sistent chordal and harmonic structure over terioso” (not the album by the same title): which the group improvises throughout all three recordings we analyzed. As is standard A repeated interval of a seventh … breaks up the jazz practice, each performance begins and flow of Jackson’s solo, or restructures it, depend- ends with a statement of the head. ing on how you hear it. Monk’s solo on the other We examined Monk’s solo for evidence that hand is shocking in its resistance to the logic of he might be attempting to “save” a mis-take. conventional views. Phrases seem to end on the In jazz, as in conversation, there is no exact wrong note, the intervals he chooses sound wrong, he seems to fall behind at one point, and he re- calculus for what happens next – only well or- peatedly sounds crashing seconds. Then a return ganized constraints and possibilities negotiated to the melody, this time with only Jackson playing by participants in situ. Wanting to know what it, while Monk drops unpredictable single notes all Monk was attempting to do is a endless prob- over the keyboard, scattering the melody, turning lem for analysts, listeners, and participants a realistic painting into a pointalistic shocker … alike. Monk himself probably could not be (p. 174) certain. We cannot solve this problem, but we

72972_outlines_r01.indd 11 10-10-2008 09:03:56 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 12 can circumscribe it, literally, to write around ing (1958). The second recording carries the it. Posterity has left us with three live record- apparent mistake – likely it was a surprise to ings of Monk’s solo on “In Walked Bud,” listeners, and perhaps to Monk – but what from the albums Live at the Five Spot (1957), makes it marked are the notes that follow the Misterioso (1958), and San Francisco Holiday mistake and make it a mis-take. Together, the (1959). Within these versions, we have a Ro- three versions of the theme, and the responses setta Stone of performed jazz. They reveal less to how they were played, provide an analytic what Monk had in mind than the “whence and baseline, if not for identifying wrong notes, how” of his fingers in systematically various then at least for highlighting the conditions for contexts. On each recording, he elaborates and their occurrence and, more importantly, their reshapes part of his improvised solo in nearly transformation. identical ways. The identical shows how much The first and third lines of Figure 3 offer structure and well-rehearsed constraint move transcriptions of the unmarked performances with Monk from one performance to the next, (beginning at 4:41 on San Francisco Holiday and the nearly shows how much each perfor- and 7:32 on Live at the Five Spot). The theme mance is contingent and emergent. lasts for approximately 18 seconds. The tran- The solo fragment consists of a series of scripts cover the 16 measures of the first two licks (jazz parlance for a short phrase or motif) A sections, each containing four iterations of played over the first two A sections of the song a lick. In the transcript, each lick is numbered (the first 16 bars). It is based on a series of re- (L1 to L8). peated triplet figures terminating each time by Figure 3 shows that the licks on the un- referring to a note from the head. In all three marked recordings (1957, 1959) begin and performances, the fragment lasts through the conclude at the same time. These recordings first two A sections (see Figure 2). In the B add context to the middle performance (1958) section, the improvisations diverge from the with the marked note – the mis-take – and its initial pattern, recapitulating during the final emergence and repair. The second and marked A section. theme is made more complex when Monk Finding common motifs across solos en- strikes the mis-take that falls outside the pat- ables us to establish an outline of what linguists tern of the unmarked theme during the sixth call marked and unmarked pairs. Unmarked lick (Figure 3, measure 11). The errant note pairings are unremarkable, as expected, un- makes the 1958 recording less identical to the eventful, without modification, and marked other two; the nearly in the nearly identical pairings are different, in need of comment, and threatens to run amok. Monk uses the tension modified. The first and third recordings (1957, and dissonance of the mis-take to develop 1959) are unmarked and offer a patterned con- what follows: he “saves” the mis-take by in- trast set for the analysis of the second record- troducing half-step dissonance (minor seconds

Figure 2. Diagram of each recording. H indicates the head (melody). Each box represents a cycle of the AABA structure. X marks the solos transcribed in Figure 3.

Minutes 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

5 Spot H Sax (John Coltrane) Monk Bass Drums H 11”11’ Misteriso H Sax (John Griffin) Monk Bass Drums H 11”20’ SF Holiday H Sax (Charlie Rouse) Monk H 7”09’

72972_outlines_r01.indd 12 10-10-2008 09:03:56 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 13

Figure 3. “In Walked Bud” (three takes, played by Thelonious Monk)

I. Five Spot (unmarked, 1957)

II. SF Holiday (unmarked, 1959)

III. Misterioso (the mis-take, 1958) displaced second lick

5 I. Five Spot

II. SF Holiday

III. Misterioso no third lick

9 I. Five Spot

II. SF Holiday indicates dissonant note

III. Misterioso

The mistake

13 I. Five Spot

II. SF Holiday

III. Misterioso

chords consisting of two notes played a half- dissonance plays a dominant role from lick six step apart) that alter the rhythm of the pat- through the end of the solo. Monk is known tern and echo the dissonance that looms from for his use of minor seconds, perhaps in an ef- Monk’s original mis-take. The use of half-step fort to emancipate himself from the rigid pitch

72972_outlines_r01.indd 13 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 14 class choices imposed by a fixed-pitch instru- We begin with what precedes the mis-take ment, such as the piano, and in an attempt to in Figure 3. Monk’s mis-take begins long be- emulate the continuous pitch choices available fore the offending note, just as it ends long on wind instruments such as the saxophone after it. L1 begins on the first beat of the A and the human voice. We offer now a more section, exactly the same point as before. After systematic account of the structure of both the that, a difference emerges. L2 is played two unmarked and unmarked themes. beats later than before. That is, Monk waits The unmarked theme: The most apparent two beats and shifts the start of L2 to the third similarity in the two performances is the sym- bar. The changes further diverge from the un- metry of rhythmic couplets. In both takes, the marked themes at the end of L2. Instead of starting point of each lick is identical. L1, L3, playing a single descending eighth note figure L5, and L7 start on the first beat of the first bar, at the end of the lick, he prolongs the ending and are coupled with L2, L4, and L6, respec- of L2 by repeating himself (twice, using differ- tively, which begin on the third beat of the fol- ent notes). With the delay in L2, he starts L4 lowing bar. Each couplet is followed by a bar of before it begins in the two unmarked themes. rest, as the drums and bass mark time (measure Instead of playing L3, as per the unmarked four, eight, twelve, and sixteen). One excep- themes, he plays L4 earlier. The first A section, where the lick is displaced slightly in time tion closes earlier, with the consequence that and the notes changed can be seen in L8. there are two additional beats of silence in the Along with rhythmic symmetry, the un- piano part before L5 (measures 7 and 8). The marked themes share tonal and melodic rhythmic irregularities alter the structure of the qualities. Some licks employ slightly differ- solo and the starting point of each lick, and ent rhythms, but all begin with a short triplet results in a three lick first A section – a clear figure. At L1 Monk plays a descending three- departure from the four-lick A section of the note pattern twice. Each of these patterns is unmarked theme. composed of the same three notes (A flat, G, The second phrase returns to the structure and F). While these triplet patterns are not al- of the unmarked themes. Monk begins L5 ways played in exactly the same way, the first on the first beat of the measure. At the end two beats of Monk’s licks never stray from of the lick, where the eighth note interval is these three notes. played, he introduces a half-step dissonance The marked or more complex theme: (when two notes a half step apart are played Figure 3 also offers a transcription of the together). Just before he plays the second to marked performance from 1958. Similar the last note of L5 (see boxed note following to the other two in its basic melodic and L5), he strikes the note a half-step below to rhythmic structure, the most apparent dif- create a more dissonant sound (this is often ference is the divergent note in L6 (on the called a ‘grace note’ or ‘blue note’). This sets Misterioso recording, the transcription begins up L6 in which the mis-take occurs. During at 6:53, and the mis-take happens at 7:04). the second descending triplet of L6, Monk The triplet figure is shifted up a whole-step strikes a jarring note a whole-step above all on the keyboard. Instead of playing A flat at other notes in the pattern. In all variations, the start of the triplet, Monk plays a B flat. the first two beats of Monk’s lick are limited It breaks the triplet pattern found throughout to three notes (A flat, G, and F). In L6 of the all the themes, and the intriguing changes that marked theme, Monk moves up a whole-step both precede and follow the irregular note to begin the second descending triplet on a make it worthy of analysis. B-flat, a note he does not play in other itera-

72972_outlines_r01.indd 14 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 15 tions. For the first time listener, a whole step becomes not so much a momentary interrup- jump is a shocking deviation. Not only does tion of his improvisational imagination as an the mis-take break the pattern set by previous occasion for a new take, a reconceptualization iterations, it is made more prominent by the of where he is going melodically and harmoni- sharp accent. cally, one that swallows the mis-take by devel- Following the mis-take, Monk plays another oping the harsh dissonance of the wrong note. half-step chord to recreate the dissonance and In L7 and L8, Monk increases the amount of then an even more extreme dissonant half-step tension and dissonance and transforms the chord in the second to last note of L6 (see mis-take into a seemingly intentional aspect second boxed note in L6). Instead of playing of the dissonant pattern. a half-step chord as just prior to and following the mis-take, Monk plays a minor second chord, which consists of the melody note and The Sequential Organization the note a half-step below. By playing the two of Activities notes as a chord, Monk creates an even stron- [The] vital part is thinking while you’re moving, ger dissonance. and once the momentum has been started, I don’t Following L6, Monk continues to develop like to break it. I’m concerned with the continuity and expand the half-step dissonance. In L7, in motion … he strikes two more grace notes located a half If you’re not affected and influenced by your own step below the note in the pattern (see the notes when you improvise, then you’re missing the two boxed notes in L7). Finally, in L8, Monk whole essential point. substitutes dissonant half-step chords for the Saxophonist Lee Konitz descending triplet lines he normally plays. (in Berliner, 1994: 193) Instead of playing the three notes separately, he clumps the first two notes together into a Timing is a primary consideration in all human dissonant chord and then plays the third note activities, but lived time, time as it is handled alone. He returns to the dissonant sound in by people in their dealings with each other the third beat of the lick (see the third boxed and the world, is not central enough to main- note at L8) by repeating the half-step chord stream social and behavioral science inquiries. one last time and then completes L8 as in the Dewey’s metaphysics of transiency offers a two unmarked themes. The general pattern that definition of time operated on and experi- emerges after the mistake creates a new envi- enced by people living lives: “the organized ronment enabling the hearer to locate the mis- and organizing medium of the rhythmic ebb take as the beginning of a larger pattern that and flow of expectant impulse, forward and fuses the dissonance of the mistake with the retracted movement, resistance and suspense, existing melody. Monk creates a coordination with fulfillment and consummation” (1934: of parts and a whole in which a future follow- 23). By contrast, in the social sciences, time ing a mistake has the opportunity to reshape is simple duration; it marks off intervals be- the past preceding the mistake. fore and after a particular event. By a method- Following his mis-take, Monk does not con- ologically mandated metaphysics of assumed tinue the pattern set by the unmarked theme. stability, entities are frozen in time; they are The jarring dissonance of the mis-take seems what they are, they occur when they occur, and to reconstruct his improvisational plan; it then they are correlated, networked, shown to prompts him to change the normal pattern by be caused, and even explained. Their play in developing new melodic ideas. The mis-take time–not just when they might happen, but by

72972_outlines_r01.indd 15 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 16 the play of what “expectant impulse … [and] he could have been writing for Monk playing suspense” they happen – is rarely described decades later: or theorized.8 In this paper, we have analyzed a single The distinction of sensation and movement as stim- piano note – a seeming entity – and shown ulus and response respectively is not a distinction how its quality is sequentially dependent which can be regarded as descriptive of anything moment to moment on its “whence and how.” which holds of psychical events or existences as The note comes from a specific whence and such. The reflex arc theory … gives us literally an arc, instead of a circuit; and not giving us the builds to a specific whither, and the summing circuit of which it is an arc, does not enable us to up and carrying forward – the sumhow – gets place, to centre, the arc. This arc, again, falls apart done with dazzling speed. A single note can- into two separate existences having to be either not make a song. A single muscle cannot mechanically or externally adjusted to each other. make a moving finger. All movement and (1896: 147) performance demand coordination of a past and future with the circumstances of moment. With a change of only a few words, we can Sumhow is the primal take of engagement inscribe Dewey’s words on Monk’s mis-take: with the world. The terms organism and environment do The distinction of planning and playing as stimulus not gloss separate realities only occasionally and response respectively is not a distinction which brought into interaction in varying propor- can be regarded as descriptive of anything which tions. More than a century ago, Dewey added holds of psychical events or existences as such. A timing and reflexivity – what he called cir-

cuitry – to the analytically limiting divide Dewey book. He would often introduce the strengths between stimulus and response, between and weakness of both sides of a sensible, but misleading organism and environment. For Dewey, they dichotomy (like stimulus and response), then critique their easy opposition and the world that drives them relentlessly conduct activities with each other. asunder, and end by proposing a way to move beyond, Mutual adjustment and learning are constant to a more inclusive circuit of which the two sides are a and necessary. Stimulus and response live part. Theory/practice, nature/culture, individual/social, and ideal/real take a beating in most of his writings, in ongoing entanglements that render a but he would tackles new dualisms for each problem stimulus only in anticipation of a response addressed; see Democracy and Education (1916a) for and a response only in anticipation of a next 38 troublesome pairings and, for a commentary, Eliza- beth Flower’s “Dewey: Battling against Dualisms” (in stimulus. The insight came early to Dewey, Flower and Murphey, 1977). Substituting vocabulary but when he wrote the following key text,9 from other realms of activity into our borrowed text allows us to approximate Dewey’s view on still more dichotomies. European traditions were voicing the same com- 8 Fifty years ago, paying analytic attention to time dis- plaint. Lev Vytogsky, for example, critiqued any “at- tinguished ethnomethodology from mainstream sociol- tempt to occupy a middle ground between two extreme ogy and generative grammar (items in process) from perspectives,” because it “fails to gain a position above stochastic linguistics (items in arrangement), but most the other two and assumes a position between them. schools of social research have proceeded as if things To the extent that it overcomes the extremes of one could be studied out of time: in isolation or in simple perspective, it assumes the extremes of the other. It combination. rises above the first false theory by yielding to some 9 We borrow and manipulate a text from “The reflex arc extent to a second which is equally false. It overcomes in psychology” (Dewey, 1896). Perhaps Dewey’s most the extremes of the second by yielding to the first. This popular essay, it had great impact on psychology and type of theory has an inherent duality. By occupying philosophy early in the century and again at the start a position between two contradictory perspectives, it of the cognitive revolution in the l950s (see Miller, Gal- leads to a certain unification of these points of view” anter, and Pribram, 1960). The text could appear in any (1934: 197).

72972_outlines_r01.indd 16 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 17 cognitive learning theory10 … gives us literally a If coordination with emerging environ- plan and performance errors, instead of a circuit ments partially of our own making is the pri- and its mis-takes and repairs; and not giving us mal task, and if precariousness is a constant the circuit of which it is a momentary plan, does not enable us to coordinate, to time, the relations opportunity, what might learning and educa- among the notes. This planning and playing, again, tion be? Novelist (and trumpeter), Ralph El- falls apart into two separate existences having to be lison, insists that “dance halls and jam sessions either mechanically or externally adjusted to each along with recordings are the true academy other. (1896: 147; alterations in italics) for jazz” and that teaching it “formally might well have imposed stability upon a develop- By shifting the focus from plans and mistakes ing form” (2001: 23).11 Most learning hap- to takes, mis-takes, and saves, we can describe pens outside school. Languages acquire their musical activities as participants recognize, native speakers without school, technologi- identify, and use them to organize themselves. cal revolutions acquire their engineers by an This significant difference stresses the organ- invisible extracurricular hand, and most art ism in action without a resting place between forms take root in cracks between formal in- stimulus and response. Past and future push stitutions. Schools are organized to miss the and pull on each other – Dewey’s “forward and edgy, the up for grabs, the what’s happening retracted movement” – without relief. This is as now, and the what might happen tomorrow. true of talk as music. In conversational analy- To the extent that schools document the very sis, turns at talk are shown to be “recipient de- mistakes they repress and subsequently use signed,” “mutually constituted,” and held to- them to sort students institutionally, the very gether by self and other repair (Sacks, 1990; place that promises learning instead produces Schegloff, 1992, 1996). There is no immaculate also constant and often debilitating failure (see conception available to speakers, no immacu- Varenne and McDermott, 1998). late reception available to listeners. Planning to For Dewey, and for the jazz community, do anything in particular – in conversation or learning is ubiquitous and continuous. This in a jazz solo – brings risk and requires relent- would be a non-controversial position if less attention to repair. Cast a suspicious eye on learning were not taken, and mistaken, to plans and mistakes as autonomous phenomena. be a thing – an entity, and a measurable They occur, but only in time, in relation to vis- one – rather than something people must do ible and hearable other events, reflexively tied constantly in the course of getting their lives to what has happened, what is happening, and to “sum up and carry forward.” Progressive what is about to happen. thinking – whether in education or jazz – relies on accounts of learning as a point of 10 Cognitive theory is often a latter-day reflex arc theory, albeit with stimulus and response separated by a mental way-station (although see Footnote iv). In a predefined 11 On jazz as a teaching/learning community, see Berliner task, stimuli still show up first and responses second. (1994, especially Chapters 2-3). Cornell West (2004) Building models of decision-making minds inside S-R sums up and carries on: sequences does not break down the conceptual dis- … all foundational figures of the blues and jazz tance between organism and environment, a distance heritage … created and enacted a profound democratic that might systematically misrepresent how organism- paideia – a cultivation of critical citizenry – in the environment relations work in real time. Dewey’s re- midst of the darkness of America. If the blues is the flexive circuitry of efference and afference (stimulus an struggle against pain for transcendence, then, as Duke anticipation of response and response an anticipation Ellington proclaimed, “jazz is freedom.” (pp. 91-2) of stimulus) remains methodologically unavailable to On appreciating the complex place of music in experimental psychologies that rely on a predefined a distant community, see Ebron’s (2002) careful task. exposition.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 17 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 18

reorganization in the real-time pull and push The distinction of learning and doing as stimu- of past and future. Learning is best understood lus and response respectively is not a distinction as more in the moment, than in a stockpile which can be regarded as descriptive of anything of competencies. Learning is less a state of which holds of psychical events or existences as mastery than a constant process of disrup- such. A cognitive theory … gives us literally a learner, instead of a circuit of engagements in real tion and renovation, the momentary product, time; and not giving us the circuit of which it is a as Dewey said, of “the exercise of powers learner, does not enable us to situate, to nurture, needed to meet the demands of the activity the learner. This learner, again, falls apart into two in operation,” operation after operation (1937: separate existences having to be either mechani- 238).12 cally or externally adjusted to each other. (1896: Isolated and recorded mistakes rarely lead 147; alterations in italics) to “relationships that sum up and carry forward.” They rarely reshape the flow of activities. In schools, students are too often tracked Children and teachers sometimes know bet- and diagnosed and spend their days arranging ter than to separate learning from doing, but not getting caught not knowing something. rarely have means to alter their situation, the If schools catch and record mistakes and use very situation schools have created with static them to sort kids institutionally, the very place ideas about plans and mistakes. Jazz musi- that promises learning produces also constant cians know better than to separate learning and often debilitating failure.13 from doing, and for a few moments in 1958, We rewrote Dewey’s argument for a cir- Monk did some things that organized an envi- cuitry connecting stimulus and response to ronment – a circuit of engagements – in which critique the division between planning and learning could happen: nothing for sure, not playing, and we can rewrite the same text to in the stockpile sense of learning, but possibly critique the duality of learning and doing: learning in process for Monk, or his musicians, or their listeners decades later. We can use jazz to rework analytic instincts around sequence and learning with an articulation of engagements that celebrate the possibility of learning. 1 2 Dewey complained that for Aristotle, and for contem- Dewey’s project was to complicate the divi- porary school based theories, “learning meant growth of knowledge, and growth belongs in the region of sions between stimulus and response, between becoming, change, and hence is inferior to possession plan and play, between doing and learning, and of knowledge” (1920: 31; italics in the original). For it is fun to think that, in a verbally vague and Dewey, learning also means growth in the context of becoming and change, but this makes learning a con- musically precise way, it was Monk’s project stant and in no way an inferior state. as well. 13 For improvisation as a complex coordinated social practice in which mis-takes are organized for the good of all, see Powell (2005) on taiko drumming and Thi- Acknowledgements beault’s (2007) contrastive analysis of learning by eye (violin) and ear (fiddle) – the same instrument named This paper began when Levitin analyzed for twice for its bifurcated social functions – in and out of a his class at Stanford University a wrong note music school. Attention to mistakes can keep a learner from hearing the work. A better alternative is to steer played by McCoy Tyner. McDermott was a stu- the performer to take “his or her lead from the work. dent in that class and became excited by simi- The work, so to speak, also speaks, and at times it is larities in the analysis of mistakes in jazz and the artist who listens” (Eisner 2002: 77-78). Mistakes are not a focus among Balinese musicians (McPhee, repair in social interaction. Powell and Naoki 1955). Ueno aided the analysis of Tyner’s mistake,

72972_outlines_r01.indd 18 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 19 and Fred Erickson gave valuable advice. Raley Dewey, John. 1916a. Democracy and Education. introduced Monk’s wrong note as a more com- New York: Macmillan. Dewey, John. 1916b. Essays in Experimental plex object of analysis. Klemp transcribed and Logic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. wrote detailed descriptions of the three Monk Dewey, John. 1917. The need for a recovery of recordings, and Paul Berliner discussed them philosophy. In J. McDermott (ed.), The Phi- with us. Thibeault created a second transcript losophy of John Dewey. Chicago: University and transformed the visuals. McDermott car- of Chicago Press, 1981. ried the final voice, but everyone contributed Dewey, John. 1920. Reconstruction in Philosophy. thinking and editing. Nick Fiori, Reed Stevens, New York: Henry Holt. and Scott Stonington offered great comments. Dewey, John. 1929a. Experience and Nature. Sec- Eric Bredo, Shelley Goldman and Morten Nis- ond edition. New York: Dover, 1958. sen pushed us on learning. Roy Pea supplied Dewey, John. 1929b. The Quest for Certainty. J.A. Boydston (ed.), John Dewey: Later Works, vol. the nice quotes from Monk and Coltrane. 4. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1984. Dewey, John. 1934. Art as Experience. New York: References Perigree Book, 1980. Attali, Jacques. 1987. Noise: The Political Econo- Dewey, John. 1937. What is learning? In J.A. my of Music. Minneapolis: University of Min- Boydston (ed.), John Dewey: The Later Works, nesota Press. vol. 11: 1935-1937. Carbondale: Southern Il- Berliner, Paul. 1994. Thinking in Jazz: The Infinite linois University Press, 1991. Art of Improvisation. Chicago: University of De Wilde, Laurent. 1996. Monk. New York: Mar- Chicago Press. lowe, 1997. Bowman, Wayne and Kimberly Powell. 2007. The Ebron, Paulla. 2002. Performing Africa. Princeton: body in a state of music. In L. Bresler (ed.), Princeton University Press. International Handbook of Research in Arts Eisner, Elliott. 2002. The Arts and the Creation of Education. Dortrecht: Springer Press. Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press. Bredo, Eric. 1994. Reconstructing educational Ellison, Ralph. 2001. Living with Music. New psychology: Situated cognition and Dewey- York: Modern Library. ian pragmatism. Educational Psychologist 29: Erickson, Frederick. 2004. Talk and Social Theo- 23-35. ry. Malden: Polity Press. Bredo, Eric. 1997. The social construction of Eskow, Gary. 2002. Herbie Hancock. Mix (Janu- learning. In G. Phye (ed.), Handbook of Aca- ary 1). demic Learning: Construction of Knowledge. Feld, Steven and Aaron Fox. 1994. Music and New York: Academic Press. language. Annual Review of Anthropology 23: Burke, Tom. 1994. Dewey’s New Logic. Chicago: 25-53. University of Chicago Press. Flower, Elizabeth and Murray Murphey. 1977. A Byers, Paul. 1985. Conversation: A context for History of Philosophy in America. 2 volumes. language. Nagoya Gakuin Daigaku Gaikokugo New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons. Kyoiku Kiyo 13: 27-41. Gourse, Leslie. 1997. Straight, No Chaser: The Coltrane, John. 1960. Coltrane on Coltrane. Down- Life and Genius of Thelonious Monk. New beat (September 29). York: Schirmer. Dewey, John. 1893. The superstition of necessity. Halberstadt, R. 1996. Metaphors for the Musician: Monist 3: 362-379. Perspectives from a Jazz Pianist. Petaluma, Dewey, John. 1896. The reflex arc in psychol- CA: Sher Music. ogy. In J. McDermott (ed.), The Philosophy of Hebb, Donald. 1949. The Organization of Behav- John Dewey. Chicago: University of Chicago ior: A Neuropsychological Theory. New York: Press, 1981. Wiley.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 19 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes • Klemp, et al. 20 Hickman, Larry. 1992. John Dewey’s Pragmatic Narmour, Eugene. 1990. The Analysis and Cogni- Technology. Bloomington: Indiana University tion of Basic Melodic Structures: The Impli- Press. cation-Realization Model. Chicago: University James, William. 1905. The experience of activity. of Chicago Press. In W. James, Essays in Radical Empiricism. Powell, Kimberly. 2005. The ensemble art of Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976. the solo: The social and cultural construction James, William. 1912. Essays in Radical Empiri- of artistic practice and identity in a Japanese cism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, American taiko ensemble. Journal of Arts and 1976. Learning Research 21: 273-295. Joas, Hans. 1992. The Creativity of Action. Chi- Raschka, Chris. 1997. Mysterious Thelonious. cago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. New York: Scholastic. Kendon, Adam. 1990. Conducting Interaction. Sacks, Harvey. 1990. Lectures on Conversation. London: Cambridge University Press. London: Blackwell. Lashley, Karl. 1951. The problem of serial order Sawyer, Keith. 2000. Improvisation and the cre- in behavior. In L.A. Jeffress (Ed.), Cerebral ative process. The Journal of Aesthetics and Mechanisms in Behavior. New York: Wiley. Art Criticism 58: 149-161. Lave, Jean. 1988. Cognition in Practice. London: Schegloff, Emanuel. 1992. Repair after next Cambridge University Press. turn. American Journal of Sociology 98: Lave, Jean and Ray McDermott. 2002. Estranged 1295-1345. labor learning. Outlines: Critical Social Stud- Schegloff, Emanuel. 1996. Confirming allusions: ies 4: 19-48. Toward an empirical account of action. Ameri- Lester, James. 1994. Too Marvelous for Words: can Journal of Sociology 102: 161-216. The Life and Genius of Art Tatum. Oxford: Schutz, Alfred. 1953. Making music together. So- Oxford University Press. cial Research 18: 76-97. Levitin, Daniel. 2006. This Is Your Brain on Sleeper, Ralph. 1986. The Necessity of Pragma- Music. New York: Dutton. tism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lindsay, Shawn. 1996. Hand drumming: An essay Solis, Gabriel. 2008. Monk’s Music: Thelonious in practical knowledge. In M. Jackson (ed.), Monk and Jazz History in the Making. Berke- Things as They Are. Bloomington: Indiana ley: University of California Press. University Press. Suchman, Lucy. 1987. Plans and Situated Action. Manicas, Peter. 1998. Dewey and American social London: Cambridge University Press. science. In L. Hickman (ed.), Reading Dewey. Sudnow, David. 1978. Ways of the Hand. Cam- Bloomington: Indiana University Press. bridge: Harvard University Press. McDermott, John. 2007. The Drama of Possibility. Szwed, John. 2000. Jazz 101: A Complete Guide New York: Fordham University Press. to Learning and Loving Jazz. New York: Hy- McNeill, David. 1992. Mind and Hand. Chicago: perion. University of Chicago Press. Taylor, Arthur. 1993. Notes and Tones: Musician- McNeill, David. 2007. Gesture and Thought. Chi- to-Musician Interviews. Cambridge, MA: Da cago: University of Chicago Press. Capo Press. McPhee, Colin. 1955. Music and children in Bali. Thibeault, Matthew. 2007. Music Making Lives: In M. Mead and M. Wolfenstein (eds.), Chil- Score and Setting in the Musical Experiences dren and Contemporary Cultures. Chicago: of High School Students. Unpublished disserta- University of Chicago Press. tion, Stanford University. Mead, George Herbert. 1932. The Philosophy of Timpanaro, Sebastiano. 1976. The Freudian Slip. the Present. Chicago: University of Chicago New York: Verso. Press. Varenne, Hervé and Ray McDermott. 1998. Suc- Monson, Ingrid. 1996. Saying Something: Jazz cessful Failure. Boulder: Westview. Improvisation and Interaction. Chicago: Uni- Vygotsky, Lev. 1934. Thinking and speech. In versity of Chicago Press. R. Rieber and A. Carton (eds.), The Collected

72972_outlines_r01.indd 20 10-10-2008 09:03:57 Critical Social Studies • No. 1 • 2008 21 Works of Lev Vygotsky, volume 1. New York: Plenum Press, 1987. West, Cornell. 2004. Democracy Matters. New York: Penguin.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 21 10-10-2008 09:03:57