Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Lefties, more history, and other Eccentricities

It's been an interesting evening, with knowing about all of these fascinating recording stars. I had a very pleasant but rather short conversation with my dear friend Jack Stanley, about the early studio pianists, and what's doing in the places we're at. I will get into that subject a little later in this post. 


Being a lefty, I find that finding out about other lefties a fascinating thing really, and many famous historical figures of the past have been left-handed. This recessive gene had long been suppressed through the ages, due to religious connotations with those who write with their left hand, and this is why it's something we don't really hear about too often. Some examples of fellow lefties include Charlie Chaplin, W. C. Fields, Winston Churchill(love it!)Leonardo DaVinci, and Benjamin Franklin! Lefties have long been studied by doctors and researchers, as they have long been believed to have special abilities that those who naturally write with their right hand do not have. Natural lefties first pick up a writing utensil with their left hand, rather than their right hand, it is their first instinct to pick up the thing with their left hand. From there, that's how it remains. 

Why did I get into this? Well because I have long had theories of which of these great old performers and recording stars were lefties. It can make a significant difference sometimes. Now here's the only person who I am almost 100% sure of being a lefty:
Ben R. Harney. Why? Well there's a picture of him from around 1890 out in Kentucky of him holding a banjo left handed. That's all the indication, or proof, I would need to know that this is true. Every other trait of Harney is that of a lefty, and those who are so, usually are the most creative of people who ever live in their eras. Harney was the most creative and progressive of the earliest Rag-Time pianists and performers, doing all of his own original acts and music. Harney was certainly a genius in his own way. And was a lefty! Which makes him even more interesting  as a character. Usually the best Rag-Time pianists are made when they're lefties anyhow, just saying...

Now another who I am really starting to think was a lefty was:
Freddy Hylands. 
Why? Well, first of all, hear all of those notes he plays in his Rag-Time paired with the right hand patterns he played. Secondly, look at that part of the Hylands Spencer and Yeager logo:

 I'm referring to the slogan part of it. This part:

Yes, that part. 
Now the reason I think that Hylands did this part is because of all the notes and the comical and creative nature of it.  It isn't in the same hand as the beautiful script of Len Spencer just below it. It's the work of a true eccentric, and that Hylands probably knew how to write music better than most of those involved in the firm. I'm not saying that he was the neatest when doing this, but he was certainly very skilled at doing this. Look at how that treble clef is drawn, it's very left-leaning, and that is unusual. Hylands also must have been a lefty because of how he played. There's too much going on most of the time for most people to understand sometimes, not even people who heard him play back then probably knew what was going on when he played something very complicated. Since he was so eager for attention, he practically owned the rhythm that any song was played at, as his rhythm was purposely unsteady sometimes, or he was drunk, which was another problem with him. His playing is the work of a lefty, by how his left hand was always perfect in its own way, very strong, complicated, yet simple somewhat. I have enough examples of his playing on other posts here, so I don't really need to put up any more of them. 
Save for the last 15 seconds of this cylinder here!
So perfect! Every bass note can be clearly heard. 



Now into the second part of this post. I was speaking with Jack Stanley not long ago this evening, and I asked the question of where he first  heard of Fred Hylands, as I am still trying to solve the mystery as to why he is forgotten so widely. Jack told me that he met with Jim Walsh back in 1978 at a gathering of all record collectors and historians, which just happened to include Walsh in the bunch. I don't think I've mentioned on this blog that it's important to note that Walsh was a true eccentric, who talked in a southern dialect that was hard to understand, and told all sorts of weird stories, some that didn't have to do with early recording. Once he got through the bizarre side of Walsh, all the collectors began to converse about the two main studio pianists of the 1890's-1900's. It began first with Banta, just as any one of those conversations would. Frank P. Banta, the much more well-known and praised of the early studio pianists, they spoke of Banta's high praise by the studio artists for a while, until someone mentioned Fred Hylands. Jack could not easily recall who it was that mentioned him first, but it might have been Walsh himself. Now that is interesting. If it was indeed Walsh who said this, that would indicate that he did indeed know about Hylands, and that he was a studio pianist for Columbia. It's really interesting though, you cannot find Hylands anywhere in Walsh's writing nor in any of his files that are kept by the Library of Congress. Hmm. Why is this so? It's clear that he knew about him, and that he wasn't forgotten, but who told him of this?
You know what, it just occurred to me that Billy Muarry made a bunch of records with Hylands between 1902 and 1904. Here are two of them:
Murray singing "The Whistling Coon"from 1903(amazing accompaniment, all around!)
Now, if it was Murray who told Walsh of Hylands(which he probably did at some point) he would only have known him toward the end of his term as studio pianist, which would be a whole lot different than someone like Len Spencer telling tales of working with Hylands. Murray saw him in his decline, not at the height of his recording term, which would be 1898 to 1901. Murray came in just after that obviously. He saw Hylands a little more "Ragged"(like physically, not musically...) and beat-up from working there. In fact, I don't think very many of the artists who worked with Hylands in the 1890's were living after 1930(0ther than Dan W. Quinn obviously), they were all dying off by 1920, which was before Walsh was out there writing down interviews and gathering mounds of information. So there really isn't a great example out there of describing what working with Hylands was like before 1900. Quinn was probably more likely to have spoken of Hylands more than Murray, as he saw more of him, and had to work with him ore regularly. Murray worked with him in a very short timeframe and probably only remembered him because of how much of a thing it was dealing with him. Something about Hylands stuck with those few recording pioneers for decades, with Joe Belmont, Dan Quinn, George Schweinfest, Billy Murray, Byron Harlan, Steve Porter, Henry Burr, S. H. Dudley, Albert Campbell, and all the rest of the recording stars who lived past 1930. 


No comments:

Post a Comment