Out of Notes: Signification, Interpretation, and the Problem of Miles Davis

Abstract

A flurry of posthumous tributes to Miles almost managed to conceal the fact that jazz critics and historians have never known how to explain the power and appeal of his playing.2 Of course, there has been no lack of writing about Davis, and no shortage of praise for his accomplishments. For example, Musician magazine, which covers jazz but is not primarily devoted to it, launched a cover story with the extraordinary statement, the entire recording age, no one has meant more to music than Miles Davis.3 But histories of jazz, biographies of Davis, and jazz journalism often beg the question of why he ought to be so highly regarded: there is a curious absence of engagement with Davis's music, and especially with his trumpet playing. Miles has always been difficult to deal with critically: along with his controversial personal life, and his even more controversial decision to go electric around 1969, has long been infamous for missing more notes than any other major trumpet player. While nearly everyone acknowledges his historical importance as a bandleader and a musical innovator, and for decades, large audiences flocked to his concerts, critics have always been made uncomfortable by his mistakes, the cracked and missed notes common in his performances. The problem of Miles Davis is the problem presents to both critics and historians: How are we to account for such glaring defects in the performances of someone who is indisputably one of the most important musicians in the history of jazz? Often, critics simply ignore the mistakes. In his history of jazz, Frank Tirro delicately avoided any mention of the controversies