Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Yeagley's Defense of Racist "Indian" Sports Mascots Widely Condemned

A visit Yeagley made a few months ago to defend the notorious "Chief Illini" mascot failed miserably. The main reason was poor planning on his part. Yeagley only showed after the decision had already been made to drop the stereotyped "chief" as mascot.

Yeagley also met with scathing local reaction, especially in the school's paper. Only two people defended Yeagley's stance, both of them open racists. One of them was a white supremacist defending the superiority of whites, and the other only dropped in to make a racist comment against Natives. Yeagley spent much of several weeks revisiting the site, vainly trying to defend his racism and his impersonation of a Comanche.



Johnny FactChecker
posted 3/12/07 @ 2:45 AM EST
Here's a quote from the web-site of the "source" of this story, Mr. Yeagley:

"There will never be a black president. There will never be a brown president. There won't even be a woman president. Nor should there be. The White House of the United States is forever white male. And rightfully so." http://badeagle.com/journal/

Erika, I hope you're happy with the story you decided to run. You've given voice to a person who thinks your piece on him is inherently worth less than my comment about it, simply because you're a woman and I'm a white man. Well done, I hope you're proud of your work.


This brought a defense of Yeagley by an unapologetic white supremacist.


To Johnny FactChecker:

It was the white man who is largely responsible for the society we live in today. The man is giving white males their props...

And don't point out just the negatives - we're tired of apologizing for them, because, if you balance them out against the positives, white males have been key at producing a society that is unparalleled in human history...The majority of the economic, social, technical, etc., developments have come from white males.


That defense failed to convince anyone, and only brought more criticism.


You paint a pretty picture, but you're leaving out a few negatives in this modern-day society that you claim white males have created: ignorance, greed, vanity and violence. Don't be so quick to say that the world is great because the white man made it so. No race, creed or gender is perfect and it's both naive and arrogant to claim that we should put the white man on a pedastal when he has created an equal number of positive and negative things.

Jimmy Yellowhorse
OUOTE: "Richard Poe, colleague of Yeagley as well as New York Times best-selling author, said Yeagley is one of the strongest, influential voices on the American Indian mascot debate."

WTF - that is bunch of crap and both Poe and Yeagley know it. In the Native Community Yeagley is an idiot - and he and [everyone else] knows it.

He knows the dance was insulting which is why he has not been welcomed at many events in parts of the Native Community.

Don't trust this man at all - he is what many Natives call an "APPLE."


David Velarde Jr.
posted 3/12/07 @ 11:33 AM EST

David A Yeagley is a bozo and if the term enemy scout comes to mind then it's apt. Native Americans throughout our history have had their leaders killed by their own people and Mr. Yeagley fits that description. Their is nothing noble about the Chief's stupid, nonsensical dance during halftime performances.


Donna Delgadillo
posted 3/12/07 @ 1:36 PM EST

David Yeagley was mistakenly enrolled as a Comanche because his STEP-MOTHER is a Comanche. He is not really native.


glenda deer
posted 3/12/07 @ 1:20 PM EST

More ramblings from idiot David Yeagley...? If someone punched ya in the nose, and it bled. You wouldn't be Indian anymore, Yeagley...Just a thought...


posted 3/12/07 @ 2:17 PM EST


All I can say is, do a google search on this guy. Make sure you include "groups," to get the various USENET archive content.

He's quite a character, to put it mildly.

Thanks to the DI for providing me with some entertainment this morning though, the search is proving... fascinating.


Lisa Boucher
posted 3/12/07 @ 4:31 PM EST

Wow, you guys gave this doofus press? Have you even looked at his site?

I can't wait to see whose lunatic ramblings you'll print next. Maybe the Time Cube guy should get wider coverage!


posted 3/13/07 @ 9:51 AM EST

This guys is not even really Native. He is a total idiot and knows nothing about Native American Dance and Culture. As others have said - this guys is nuts and not to be trusted at all.


posted 3/16/07 @ 6:29 PM EST

You are a fake and a fraud and you know it! Time will prove it to the rest of the world, real Indians already know you for what you are.

You will do anything to kiss the back sides of whites to further your warped view of the way things should be.


Censored Truth
posted 3/16/07 @ 2:25 PM EST

My goodness! I can't believe the Daily Illini has sunken to scrapping the bottom of the barrel by giving voice to David Yeagley. He is a self-hating individual who just happens to be enrolled in the Comanche Nation. The only people within Indian country who give this man any vindication are those people who are just as self-hating towards their Indian identity. Trust me, there are Comanches who wish they didn't have to claim him as being part of their tribe. He was on Bill O'Reilly and he referred to Blacks, Mexicans, and Indians as "Darkies."


posted 3/16/07 @ 11:09 PM EST

David Yeagley is a known racist in the American Indian community and beyond. You should have read his website and his numerous racist postings that he has on his forum (and elsewhere) before using him for a story. He has this weird obsession/fear with black people (or darkies as he likes to call them), denigrates his own race and just absolutely adores anything done by white people (including slavery and the Holocaust.) The press likes him because he's Indian and goes against what Indians usually say but the truth is even his own Comanche tribe barely tolerates him. Using him as the sole source does nothing but damage your argument. I still can't believe that you used him as a source.


posted 3/27/07 @ 9:18 PM EST

This guy is a loon. No one takes the guy seriously in the Native community. He only gets press by those publications that are far away from Oklahoma and know nothing of his radical views yet.


This was followed by yet another racist coming forward to defend Yeagley.


posted 3/27/07 @ 9:57 PM EST

...I guess they want Native Americans who disagree with them to stay on the reservation and learn to deal blackjack.


"Regular Guy's" racism did nothing to stop the storm of criticism against Yeagley.


posted 3/29/07 @ 6:35 PM EST






posted 3/30/07 @ 10:04 AM EST

How did this farce of a person become so well quoted and listened to? Certainly no one in indian country gives him the time of day...What would David Yeagley know about anything tradtional when he wasn't raised red? Just because someone has a "drop" of ambrosia doesn't mean they're psychedelic. It just means David Yeagley is a psycho, and EVERY word out of his mouth should be questioned. He's doing more to damage his own people than we do to ourselves. And we're 12K strong! Get a clue, David. Numunu could give a shit about you - you latecoming red apple! Hey David: nah thine ah moo thine...comanche enough to understand?


posted 4/05/07 @ 2:37 PM EST

Everyone knows you're a fraud and a racist white playing Indian. If it's libel why haven't you sued? Because a lawsuit would expose you!

Monday, July 23, 2007

American Indian Artists Reject Yeagley, Say He Is a Mediocre Musician, a "Delusional...Media Whore"

Is it any wonder Yeagley lashes out at American Indians to blame them for his own life filled with failure? As a child, Yeagley was hailed by some as a prodigy. As an adult he spent his time being a lifelong student with no accomplishments.

Yeagley is now a senior citizen witn little in his life, no family, few friends or supporters outside of white supremacists and a tiny number of apple Indians, repeatedly rejected by the Comanche he falsely alleges to be his people. Even his musical career is virtually nonexistent. Conspicuously, very few of his music works were ever recorded until AFTER far right reactionaries like Horowitz turned him into a professional token.

And now it's become obvious why his career never went anywhere in over four decades. More than a few of the more successful and talented Native musicians say his work was, quite simply, not very good. Many want nothing to do with him.

From Brent Michael Davids of www.badeagle.org.
[I've rearranged the article slightly, putting Davids's critique of Yeagley's music at the end.]

Native Museums Are Not Fooled

Yeagley is basically a media whore for ill purposes, taking a highly questionable and unverified claim to a drop of Comanche blood, along with a degree in playing the piano, to the gross heights of white supremacy and misogyny. His unearned and rather egocentric demeanor is Yeagley’s way of clawing out some attention for himself and crackbrained agenda. His musical claims have been repeatedly proven as lackluster and inflated, serving moreover to pad his own media resume and continue his lunacy.

But, in retrospect, Yeagley is starting at least in part to be recognized for what he is, delusional. He was uninvited to the National Museum of the American Indian because of his derogatory mischaracterizations of the Museum, and the negative associations with his anti-Indian stance; The NMAI promised to never have him back. Even the two American Indian violinists invited by Yeagley to perform his work at his sole NMAI appearance, were justifiably disinterested.

And now, it appears that the Comanche Nation’s new Museum has followed the lead of the NMAI, declining to even consider Yeagley’s participation there. When asked if Yeagley would be associated with the Museum’s opening activities, the response from the Museum was “No, absolutely not,” citing the need to disassociate the Museum with the negativity generated by Yeagley’s activities. Bravo to the Comanche Nation Museum.

So it seems that Native People are not so easily fooled by Yeagley’s mental contortions, though sometimes amusing to watch. Yeagley’s puffed up image in the media, his self-aggrandizing, is not being gullibly taken in by as many folks as in previous years. That is a hopeful note for all of the Web Sites who regularly correct Yeagley’s misinformation and half-truths, including this one. Yeagley’s abuse of his piano degree as a means to further his deluded agenda, is as mediocre as his “new” harmonic theory, and we can be thankful that more people are starting to realize it.

As for his music, it seems to me that perhaps Yeagley has spent hours pouring over his "new" theory of harmonic development, but in doing so has mostly sidestepped the development of other important aspects such as rhythm and orchestration. But I’m not Yeagley’s teacher, and am not intending to give Yeagley advice with my comments. Quite simply, it is of interest to note the non-Indian approaches Yeagley has utilized in forming his compositions, as well as some apparent weaknesses of the craft involved. He may have received a D.M.A. for playing the piano, but he is a student of composing with much to learn.

Music and meaning are subjective and communal activities, so those who see greater value in Yeagley’s work have simply to claim a diverse world where differing opinions coexist (you know, a "cosmopolitan" world), and they are justified in claiming so. As for my own opinion of Yeagley’s efforts, I see some room for improvement and further study. Obviously, there is also much room for Yeagley to improve regarding all things American Indian as well. It is unfortunate for legitimate musicians and American Indian musicians in particular, that Yeagley's piano degree continues to be utilized as a media ploy for his promotion of white supremacy and misogyny.

[Here is Davids' review of Yeagley's latest work.]

I did give a listen to his recent You Tube upload. My initial reaction is that it’s not-too-bad compositionally, but also not-too-great.

His harmonic language (his self-attributed-but-never-described harmonic theory) seems adequate, and an acceptable effort. If he were my student, he’d get an acceptable grade on that aspect of his composition. There are a couple weaknesses though, too, that could be improved upon: rhythm and orchestration.

Rhythmically, the piece is rather middle-of-the-road in quality, seemingly reliant on a series of steady pulses of regular beats with little variation. One can listen to the beginning for awhile and by reaching the end will have heard almost no change in rhythm throughout. If you, either as a musician or non-musician, reach the final notes of this music finding yourself rather uninspired, generally speaking, one of the reasons for this effect is the rhythmic monotony.

A similar critique of the orchestration is warranted, as the ranges of the instruments are never utilized to full capacity in the composition. The higher range of the upper instruments and the lower range of the bass instruments remain largely unused, rendering a middle-of-the-road outcome. Great music has satisfying ups and downs, like a musical roller coaster ride generating excitement for an audience. Yeagley's orchestration seems excessively committed to the mid-range and remains a lackluster effort as a result.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Yeagley Cries That He is a "Victim" For Having His Lies Exposed, Jealously Attacks Native Musicians Who Have Passed On

It seems the Piano Doctor is getting even more defensive now that people discover just how much of his claims about his music are based on lies and jealousy of more talented performers.

Notice that probably the most famous and respected Native musician today, R. Carlos Nakai, rejected Yeagley. It's pretty obvious that Yeagley is just jealous. Nakai plays for huge audiences, both Native and non-Native. Yeagley can't find a place that will even book him. He's not even allowed back where he played before as a pity case, at the Nat'l Museum of the American Indian, after alienating virtually everyone there.

Notice also that Yeagley shows yet again he does not have the slightest clue about, or belief in, Native traditions of respect for the recently passed on, such as the revered Louis Ballard.

Instead he's spent much of the past several days viciously denigrating the memory of Ballard. No surprise to me. He's also very cowardly attacked the memory of my friend Mike Two Horses precisely because Mike spent much of his time as the founder of CERTAIN tracking and working against anti Indian and white supremacist groups that Yeagley embraces.

Thanks again to BM Davids for taking down Yeagley yet again.

From www.badeagle.org

Part III of Yeagley’s fake opera claims
from the Bad Eagle journal

David Yeagley — “When I say I wrote the first classical music for American Indian flute, I mean that I have written and recorded music for the flute which is classical in content... The famous Louis Ballard... wrote a piece called "Why the Duck Has a Short Tale." It isn't identified or described as a flute concerto” (7-16-07).

Despite Yeagley’s limited google searches, it is indeed a composed classical work for Indian flute, indicated in the printed music. Ballard’s writing for Indian flute was not pentatonic, nor some Indian style flute melody. As Louis always pointed out when asked: “The music I write is 100% Louis W. Ballard music.” He faxed me a copy of the Phoenix Symphony program of “Why the Duck Has a Short Tale,” and it clearly shows the work as an Indian flute concerto. Sorry that web searches do not provide for such detail, but there you have it nonetheless, the web lackey method of doing research.

David Yeagley — “[Ballard] wrote a piece called "Ritmo Indio," which did include an American Indian flute, but not as focus... the flute part is insignificant, and isn't listed in the instrumentation. It uses only the natural pentatonic scale inherent. The music for the flute is therefore not "classical" at all. The ensemble music is more on the Contemporary side, rather than classical in style. Again, writing for classical instruments does not mean the music is classical. Classical refers to content, nature, character, etc., not the instrumentation” (7-16-07).

Actually, as I have performed the Indian flute part in "Ritmo Indio," I must say that it is listed in the instrumentation; Yeagley is obviously looking at something other than the printed score which clearly lists the instruments including Indian wood flute, a “flageolet” style Indian wooden flute. Again, "Ritmo Indio" does not center around a pentatonic scale, and it is 100% Louis W. Ballard in character, not traditional American Indian; and, the Indian flute part is completely written out in printed notation the same as any other classical flute part.

What’s even more puzzling about Yeagley’s false claims above is the “contemporary” versus “classical” comment, because Yeagley himself is a contemporary composer, also not composing in “classical” style. In addition to his list of requirements for classical music, Yeagley’s omitting an important component: pitch. More than “content,” “nature,” and “character” (whatever Yeagley means by using those nonmusical terms), it is pitch that largely determines classical music.

In fact, almost all of 18th Century counterpoint studies CENTER on pitch and harmonic development as a foundation. Therefore, by Yeagley’s own declaration of a self-created new harmonic theory, he is well outside the accepted norm for “classical” pitch development, and his music is nowhere near classical.

David Yeagley — “Classical music, as a term, represents the highest order of musical activity. It is the top term. Therefore, it is highly abused and regularly usurped. People want to think they have the value, without the work” (7-16-07).

Classical is not the “top term;” classical music is not the highest order of music in some imaginary stratosphere. Classical music is merely a circumstantial type of music produced with a set of parameters particular to a specific era in history. It has no superior intrinsic position and is of no greater importance than is any other type of great music.

Yeagley is trying to “usurp” a higher and mightier glory for his classical (nonexistent) brotherhood than is warranted. It is not others who are usurping, it is Yeagley crying the victim again (“classical music is under attack from those trying to tear it down,” that sort of Yeagley malarkey). Yeagley loves to cry ‘victim’ whenever he feels his meager pontificating is shown to be a fool’s errand.

David Yeagley — “DeMars' music is not really classical either, but in the pop style of John Williams and the movie score venue--all luscious and sensual, but without musical gray matter. Entertaining, but without intellectual interest. It certainly represents no "classical" music for the Indian flute. If the New York Philharmonic were backing up Nakai, it wouldn't mean he was playing classical music. He can't” (7-16-07).

Actually, DeMars doesn’t compose pop style, but in a constructed method of his own design that he calls a “tapestry” method, by weaving the musical material around as if one were creating a fabric of sound. As I also know DeMars personally and am familiar with his techniques, I must say Yeagley is greatly diminishing DeMars’ efforts and creativity with a rather reductionist censure. In truth, DeMars’ accomplishments in classical music far outshine Yeagley’s.

Additionally, R. Carlos Nakai is very practiced playing classical music on Indian flutes as his many recordings show. He performs written music for American Indian flute often, in various settings and with many classical ensembles. Nakai’s first instrument (before flute) was classical trumpet; he reads and writes ‘written’ music in the classical sense. I suspect Yeagley is simply spewing sour grapes (above) after his visit with Nakai in Arizona a couple years ago was rather unfruitful for Yeagley. Rather than agreeing to perform Yeagley’s flute music, it appears that Nakai has declined to take up any opportunities that Yeagley offered.

It should be noted however, that Nakai is classically trained and does perform “classically” on his flutes, and Yeagley has misrepresented and disparaged Nakai’s abilities and accomplishments. Jealously once again is showing in Yeagley’s demeanor. Just like Yeagley’s green-faced loathing of Redford’s Sundance Institute (which dismissed Yeagley’s entry into their competitive film scoring program), Yeagley is simply spewing ‘sour grapes’ towards a superior Indian flutist with classical chops that exceed his own.

David Yeagley — “Unfortunately, for all Ballard's serious accomplishments, he never showed any real interest in other Indian composers until the last three years of his life. In fact, he was averse to the idea of an Indian composers cadre. He made no effort to encourage young Indians to become composers. He simply went about his own work, quite successfully” (7-16-07).

On this comment above Yeagley is way out of his league, both professionally and historically. Louis Ballard was a great educator; one of Ballard’s more famous accolades was teaching music at the Institute of American Indian Arts (IAIA) in Santa Fe, in the early 1960s. There he formed Indian marching bands, Indian classical choirs, and taught many American Indian students, such as well known musician/composer Joy Harjo and others.

As a dedicated educator, Dr. Ballard researched and assembled his comprehensive anthology “American Indian Music for the Classroom,” first published as a six-album set with textbook by Canyon Records and later released under a new name, "Native American Indian Songs," as a double-CD set with textbook under Ballard’s own Wakan label. Ballard was a supremely accomplished educator of Indian youth, and was in fact a mentor to me as well.

Yeagley’s damning words for Dr. Ballard’s legacy are especially revolting, especially for those of us who knew him to be a generous and gentle teacher in addition to a gracious and accomplished composer. Yes, Dr. Ballard recently passed away. I still retain Lou’s first letter to me (1979), with his characteristic encouragement typed at the letter’s conclusion, all in capital letters, “BE BRAVE, WRITE WELL AND LIVE LONG!” Dr. Ballard was a consummate educator, mentor and friend.

However, while the rest of Indian Country was mourning Dr. Ballard’s recent passing, Yeagley intentionally and continually blogged about Anna Nicole Smith not once but many times in a row. Even after Yeagley was chided by another American Indian composer, Raven Chacon, for ignoring Dr. Ballard, Yeagley quickly dismissed Chacon’s concern and continued with his Anna Nicole rant for several additional days. In this exchange (below), we clearly see that Yeagley’s pursuit of Anna is ostensibly disgusting, considering that Dr. Ballard had just passed away (pay attention to the dates):

David Yeagley — “Anna Nicole Who?: By public demand, Bad Eagle must comment on the passing of Anna Nicole... Bad Eagle has presented much commentary on women and womanhood, and it seems that Anna Nicole qualifies for at least a mention... All she has was a body, at least in the beginning. She birthed two children that we know of, but, any woman can do that... Revelation 22:15 says the whoremongers are outside the gates. Heaven is not theirs... However 'willing' the woman is found to be, she is the man's responsibility. It's like abortion” (2-11-07).

Raven Chacon — David, Perhaps you didn't check your email. Louis Ballard has passed on. Much more newsworthy to Native America than Anna Nicole Smith” (2-11-07)

David Yeagley — “Raven, I got your first email about Ballard. I'm going to prepare a memorial essay for him. These things can't be rushed. Also, BadEagle has a lot of forums on Indian matters. Have you checked them out? Our idea here is that what Indians think about the world is important! Fancy dancin', eh?” (2-11-07)

David Yeagley — “I don't think Anna (Vicki)'s mother loved her at all. Women who love their children don't push five fathers in their face. I don't hink [sic!] Anna loved her children, either” (2-12-07).

David Yeagley — “Anna Nicole's Valentine: Who's the father? This is the legacy Anna Nicole Smith... Let the white race take a good look at this. If it were a black woman, or any woman of "color," there would be no such concern, no such life, and no such story, no matter how many fathers, or how much doubt about each... And we haven't even gone in to the matter of that blubbery body that developed after Vickie's porn debuts” (2-14-07)

David Yeagley — “Anna Angst Syndrome: ...Everything about her story was foul... The soul of every human being is outraged, whether the anger is fully conscious or not. The story will continue, ad infinitum, because it calls forth ...the natural rage for right” (1-15-07)

The “memorial essay” that Yeagley flippantly promised to Raven Chacon was never written, but Yeagley made sure to promote his blog forums to Chacon. Nothing like a little self-promotion in a time of tragedy. Then Yeagley went right back to blogging about Anna. No memorial. No consideration. No honor. Only misdirection and obfuscation.

Playing ‘the victim’ yet again, Yeagley attempts to defend his erroneous claims by throwing mud at every other American Indian composer for not recognizing Yeagley’s fantastical accomplishment of being the “first” composer to write chromatically for Indian wood flute. Like clockwork, the martyr complex resurfaces in Yeagley’s rants, attempting to set himself up as the great misunderstood composer that no other Indian composer has the capacity to comprehend.

Yeagley eagerly contrasts all other American Indian composers against himself and apparently we all fall short, for "this" reason or "that" one. Her music is not “really” classical, or his music is too “popular” to be classical, etc. All extremely narrow boxes that Yeagley alone has defined, precisely to weed out everyone but himself. Yeagley is "the first" you see; the first to compose chromatically for the wood flute.

David Yeagley — “When I said I wrote the first classical music for American Indian flute and orchesta [sic!], I meant just that... Unlike other people who play or write for the Indian flute, my music involves all the notes, not just the pentatonic scale inherent. Therefore, it is the first classical music written for the American Indian flute, and the first recorded” (7-16-07).

It is unfortunate for Yeagley that he does not know the music field very well, before attempting to define and write about it. For example, R. Carlos Nakai plays flutes chromatically (not limited to pentatonic scales) and has done so for quite a number of years — long before Yeagley conveniently “turned Indian” for his own musical exploitation and commercialization.

Vince Redhouse also plays flute chromatically, rather well in fact. Vince’s expertise illustrates yet another example of Yeagley’s erroneous claims of writing the only chromatically played Indian flute music. The audio CD that Vince sent me stands in direct opposition to Yeagley's uniformed claims. There are other examples of classical (and chromatic) American Indian flute players as well.

David Yeagley — “James Pellerite was the only flutist I knew that was then able to play the American Indian flute in a classical manner, as a classical instrument” (7-16-07).

Apparently, Yeagley is not too savvy about the availability of American Indian flutists in the classical music field. I, too, have been performing chromatically-sophisticated compositions on American Indian flute since 1987. I have even performed Chopin on my wood flutes; as proof I offer an American Indian flute arrangement of Chopin’s final piano Nocturne that I performed at the Joyce Theater in New York city.

As a comparison, first listen to a traditional Lakota Song on wood flute using a non-chromatic (diatonic) scale. Then, listen to the fully chromatic (12-tone) playing of the Chopin Nocturne on Indian wood flute. The two examples are easily identified as American Indian flute music, but the Chopin Nocturne is clearly being played chromatically. Quite simply, Yeagley’s claims to exclusivity in this arena are not true. Whatever opinion one has about Yeagley's compositions, he was certainly not the first to compose chromatically for Indian flute.

MP3: Lakota Song on American Indian Flute

MP3: Chopin Nocturne on American Indian Flute

Do I believe his outrageous claims of prowess about flute music, grand operas, and exclusive harmonic theories? Absolutely not. Yeagley’s approach is a classic case of tearing others down to try building himself up. Yeagley mischaracterizes George Quincy as a non-classical composer; Quincy’s too “popular” you see, but it turns out Quincy is a classical composer after all. Nakai cannot play written (chromatic) music according to Yeagley, but it turns out that Nakai really can.

The only way, it seems, that Yeagley can toot his own horn is by dressing down the career accomplishments of seasoned composers such as Dr. Ballard, R. Carlos Nakai, George Quincy, Raven Chacon, and myself. It appears that even funerals will not deter Yeagley’s self-idolizing behavior.

Yeagley’s victimhood approach, combined with his extremely “boxed” and outdated views of so-called ‘classical music’ are probably why Yeagley remains a marginal figure in the field of contemporary composition at best. Maybe a little less mudslinging at other composers and a bit more study of composition might better suit Yeagley’s budding career. But he so loves to play the unappreciated martyr, we will probably just be shaking our heads at Yeagley's malicious antics far into the future.

Monday, July 16, 2007

Yet More of Yeagley's Lies About His Holocaust Opera

Thanks again to Brent Michael Davids' tearing apart Yeagley's desperate lies about his imagined musical "firsts."

Much like yeagley has repeatedly lied about being Comanche, lied about being a conservatives, lied about why he was fired from his only teaching job, it seems he's spent much of his life lying about alleged musical "accomplishments."

From www.badeagle.org

In our previous article I pointed out the false claims of Yeagley’s puffed up self-aggrandizing as a composer, and that critique (unfortunately for Yeagley) stands. Mostly though, I recognize a pattern in Yeagley’s blog these days: musical purity is akin to powwow purity is akin to racial purity — it’s all a fool’s errand in the end. Going backwards to some “time-honored” (as Yeagley constantly insists) “pure” era, backwards to an era without impure mixing, is an imagined scenario. Such a place never existed, and anyone setting themselves on a voyage to find such a place is (repeat after me) “on a fool’s errand.”

David Yeagley — “yes, I've written the first classical music for the American Indian flute” (7-13-07).

Actually, the first classical music for American Indian flute was a work called “Why The Duck Has A Short Tail” by Dr. Louis W. Ballard, that was commissioned and premiered in 1969 by the Phoenix Symphony Orchestra. Dr. Ballard wrote this work to feature the Indian flute in front of the orchestra, in other words, it is an American Indian flute “concerto” (a concerto is a work that features a soloist with orchestra).

David Yeagley — “I have the first solo album of an American Indian classical composer... I do put a lot of weight on the word ‘classical’” (7-13-07).

There are several American Indian classical composers who have released albums (cassettes, CDs, etc.) prior to Yeagley’s release in 2004. Off the top of my head, George Quincy (Choctaw) released several albums, the earliest in 2003...

A GRAMMY-winning American Indian flutist composing a long while in classical music is R. Carlos Nakai, who has been released on tiny insignificant labels such as Columbia and BMG, in addition to others like Silver Wave and Canyon Records. Nakai has 27 albums in commercial distribution on many labels since the early 1980s, and has sold well over 2,000,000 units worldwide.

David Yeagley — “I've invested in a new harmonic system, but my compositional prodedures [sic!] are classical, in the historical, European sense... In classical music, there are compositional procedures to be observed... The content of the music has to be there for it to be ‘classical’” (7-13-07).

Today’s composers invent their own harmonic theories often, as new harmonic theories are: (a) considered common practice, (b) not of noteworthy significance, and (c) certainly not notable for a composer’s biography. My own students create their own theories routinely, not that they are revolutionary or new, most harmonic theories are not new in fact. Harmonic theories are built on mathematically-defined relationships, so any ‘new’ harmonic theories would necessarily be accompanied by a revolutionary mathematical theory.

Yeagley has put forth no groundbreaking “E=MC2” type theory, let alone allow for a peer review of his harmonic claims by describing his theory to other composers. I suspect, Yeagley never will reveal it; but if it does exist, it is most likely a commonplace variation of preexisting harmonic theories and mathematics that have been around for centuries. Even more, in order to compose “classical” music, one would necessarily have been born in the Mozart era, the “classical” period. Yeagley might be technically considered a “Neoclassical” composer or “neoclassicist,” but whether he’s another Mozart I would highly question. Most reasonable people recognize mainly two kinds of music, ‘good music’ and (to be kind) ‘not-so-good music.’

These ‘classical’ vs. ‘popular’ music categories are rather useless, except to limit and constrain music to some ideal or imagined purity. Go to Brazil and the differences Yeagley tries to separate are all mixed up together, a country with a long and rich concert music tradition. Only in Yeagley’s imagined reality is there such a thing as pure “classical” music even in America, the cosmopolitan continent.

David Yeagley — “grand opera is a historical term, with specific meaning. A person who would dispute my claim that my opera Jacek is the first grand opera on the Holocaust, simply doesn't know some basic terms of music history... I said I wrote the first grand opera on the Holocaust. I did” (7-13-07).

The first “grand” opera written by an American Indian composer was by Gertrude Bonnin (1876-1938), also known as Zitkala-Sa ("Red Bird" in Lakota) — some 87 years before Mr. Yeagley supposedly wrote his. As a classical violinist and classical composer, Bonnin's own Yankton Sioux heritage informed both her libretto and composition “The Sun Dance,” a “grand” opera co-composed with fellow musician William F. Hansen. Bonnin’s grand opera received it’s full production with orchestra, costumes, chorus, even dancers, in Orpheus Hall, Vernal, Utah, in 1913. In addition it should be noted that the first opera was composed by an Indian WOMAN composer.

Once more, Yeagley’s hope of writing the first grand “holocaust” opera is a pipe dream. Do I believe his claim? No way. Just google “grand,” “holocaust” and “opera” together and read the results. Yeagley’s claims are puffed up resume padding at best, and downright fabrications at worst. If he had even a finger of Mozart’s talent, maybe people would pay attention. However, as far as Neoclassical composition is concerned, Yeagley is (repeat after me) “on a fool’s errand.” Though he claims to have written an opera, it remains (technically and musically speaking) unfinished:

David Yeagley — “My opera ...has never been produced. (In fact, it isn't completely orchestrated. I've never had the support, I must say... I do have part of Scene 2 from ACT I recorded... Of course, my grand opera of classical music has not been produced. [David] Amram's involvement in popular music, jazz, etc., will forever bar him from the brotherhood of classical musicians” (7-13-07).

First, like I suggested in previous articles, an aria or a recit does not an opera make; and, without actually writing the orchestra music Yeagley’s so-called ‘opera’ remains nothing more than a compositional sketch: no orchestra = no opera.

Yeagley has (perhaps) composed a 'piano opera' (in some undefined state of completion) and is attempting to convince others that it is a "grand" opera scored for full orchestra (a requirement, technically speaking, of all grand operas). Yeagley’s claims are fantasy, and though he is free in America to pontificate freely, it is not necessary to actually believe him.

And second, I know David Amram personally and have many of his recordings, and he is absolutely a neoclassical composer. His compositions are jazz "influenced" but they are not jazz, they are well-constructed compositions for full orchestra. Amram plays concert piano and concert horn himself, and can also play jazz on both instruments. He is considered a crossover artist in performance, because how many other concert French Horn players do you know that can improvise like Winton Marsalis? Amram is called the "renaissance man" because of his immense talents as performer and composer; and he is 100% a classically-adept concert music composer, despite Yeagley's sophomoric attempt to "bar" David Amram from Yeagley's shadowy underground (nonexistent) "brotherhood."

In sum, Yeagley clamors on with a false sense of music “purity” the same way he pontificates about “pure” powwows of the past, and the lily-white “pureness” of America’s beginnings. America was never actually a white enterprise, not that Yeagley gives a hoot about historical accuracy (Yeagley aligns himself with the white supremacy movement). Yeagley’s idealistic notion of powwows as exclusively a “plains tribe” phenomena were shown as false (Yeagley is unfamiliar with powwow history).

And we can clearly see above, Yeagley’s own musical protests are not “classically” pure either — nor especially noteworthy. What Yeagley seems to be doing is padding his resume with jargon intended to obfuscate his lackluster professional activities. His degree is in piano performance; perhaps he "minored" in composition at some point? But he certainly did not fully complete any academic requirements to become a composition graduate. Again, this is America where one can speak freely, but nowhere is it required that anyone believe what Yeagley says.

So what's up with all Yeagley's "opera composer" malarkey? Basically, Yeagley is attempting to start up a 'sing-along' fan club — inviting the rest of us to join in — singing his praises. Does anyone know the words to "On A Fool's Errand?"

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

David Yeagley's Lies About His Holocaust Opera

Another pointed essay from Brent Michael Davids' www.badeagle.org pointing out one of Yeagley's more ridiculous lies.

Can a White Supremacist spawn the FIRST Holocaust Opera?
from the Bad Eagle journal

Can a White Supremacist spawn the FIRST Holocaust Opera? Well, as you have probably guessed already, Yeagley is prevaricating yet again. As you can easily see below — from the rather small assemblage of evidence to the contrary — Yeagley did not create the first Holocaust opera. And, I find it highly unlikely that any white supremacist including Yeagley could ever truly compose something noteworthy of that particular horror. Pray as loud as you wish, I simply do not believe him.

David Yeagley — “How a Comanche Indian Came to Write the First Opera About the Nazi Holocaust... the first grand opera on the Holocaust” (4-24-01)

David Yeagley — “There is a reason no Holocaust opera has ever been written before. What I have done is more modern than modernist... THIS is the Holocaust story... I made this as painful as possible... It is a strange opera, in this sense... constant increased disappointment... It is all quite dreadful” (1-14-05)

David Yeagley — “I want to let everyone know, I have composed the only grand opera on the Holocaust” (3-15-05)

David Yeagley — “Furthermore ...I created the first, and so far the only, grand opera on the Holocaust” (7-9-07)

For those of you "believers" who still insist on bowing in the church of Yeagley, I have a simple equation for you to consider: the probability of tumbling onto Yeagley’s blog is directly proportional to the muttonhead gymnastics being exhibited there, because anything is possible in Holy Yeagleyland if you don't know what you are talking about:

Viktor Ullman's Holocaust Opera

“A rare performance of an opera that was written in the Theresienstadt ghetto in Terezin, Czech Republic during World War II ... composed by Viktor Ullman.”
Hans Krasa’s Holocaust Opera

“...a charming piece by the Czech-Jewish composer Hans Krasa.”

Stefan Heucke’s Holocaust Opera

“Stefan Heucke, 47, the composer of the opera, said he had been interested in the topic since he read the 1977 memoir ''Playing for Time,'' the Holocaust survivor Fania Fénelon's portrait of the orchestra, which was led mainly by the conductor and violinist Alma Rosé, a niece of Gustav Mahler.”

Nicholas Maw’s Holocaust Opera

“Its complicated set, which takes in Auschwitz, including a train of cattle trucks that brought the heroine there, and Brooklyn streets and apartments, has been devised by Rob Howell, who won an Olivier award last year for his work with Nunn at the National on Troilus and Cressida...Nicholas Maw has delivered a great score.”

Cathy Mansfield's Holocaust Opera

“The opera follows a German Jewish family in Berlin... The extensive research Mansfield undertook for the opera brought her to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., ...What began nearly 30 years ago as a production produced at a community center has become the driving force in her life. Mansfield would like to take a year off to complete the work.”

David Amram’s Holocaust Opera

“David Amram has composed more than 100 orchestral and chamber music works... including the classic scores Splendor in The Grass and The Manchurian Candidate, two operas including the ground-breaking Holocaust opera... He has collaborated with Leonard Bernstein (who chose him as The New York Philharmonic's first composer-in-residence in 1966), Langston Hughes, Dizzy Gillespie, Dustin Hoffman, Willie Nelson, Thelonious Monk, Odetta, Elia Kazan, Arthur Miller, Charles Mingus, Lionel Hampton, E. G. Marshall, and Tito Puente, among others.

Joel Hoffman’s Holocaust Opera

Joel Hoffman, professor of composition, was commissioned by Hebrew Union College to write a piece ...his now-complete opera, is the culmination of more than two years of work. With the country entangled in war, Hoffman didn't realize that the opera he wrote would have such a timely message and theme... about the life of Mordechai Gebirtig ...who was killed in a concentration camp during World War II.”

And this list goes on and on ... on and on ... and on.

Saturday, July 07, 2007

Real Indian Women Oppose Yeagley

One of the more ridiculous claims in recent weeks came from Betty Ann Gross, an open racist of Lakota background who is one of Yeagley's extremely few supporters to actually be Native.

"Many Indian women support Dr. Yeagley."

Actually, as several people have pointed out, many of those "Indian women" are likely Yeagley himself, a white-racist-posing-as-part-Comanche and in turn posting online pretending to be Indian women. The speech patterns that most of the "Indian women" use at his forum are exactly identical to Yeagley's. Yeagley has a very UN-Indian way of speaking and writing. A rather strange case of cross dressing, or "cross writing" as one described it.

Yeagley seems to have a particular problem with Native women, especially with those who are strong and proud. That, plus the fact that Yeagley seems to be a lifelong virgin over fifty years old, seems to be behind his need to fabricate support from them by posing repeatedly online as numerous Indian women.

Actual Native women have proven to be some of his most dedicated and outspoken opponents, first Suzan Harjo, then Juanita Pahdopony, then Cinda Hughes, and now several others.


After Yeagley made a post attacking the Dalai Lama and praising whites as "courageous" for coming west and taking Native land by force-

Response by a real Indian Apache Woman:
And why do I have to attribute this to white people? Because you say so? Well, no I don't. They weren't courageous, they were idiotic and expected the US Army to protect them, which they did to a certain extent and you call that courage?

Apaches had a courage beyond anything white people ever had because we only had ourselves to protect us.

And not acknowledging the courage you claim white people is certainly not doing a discredit to the courage of the Apache people. I value the power of my people. I value that most Indian people here have the capacity to choose for themselves who should be honored and respected. YOU aren't giving Indian people that credit. You chastise them and write that we don't know about other religions. YOU believe that we are naive about such things. That, my friend, is a paternalistic attitude. YOU know better because we're just a bunch of friendly Indians.

And you're right we can't change what happened in the past, but by god I will remind you of it until the day my eyes close for the last time.

The Dalai Lama in NOT irrelevant anymore than JC nor is either better. That ideology is all in your head. He is just as revelant as you are David Yeagley whether you like it or not.

I don't know what this has to do with Indian women. Maybe you should try being with one to understand. Quit being so afraid of us. Perhaps you won't find your mother in one, but I bet you'll come pretty darn close if you could only get past those blinders you have on.


After Yeagley attacked an Aztec dancer at a powwow as a "Mexican chicken" and then went into a racist rant comparing them to "Negroes" -

It seems just mildly disrepectful to refer to someone as a 'Mexican chicken' just because they are wearing their traditional headress.

Also odd that he made the comparison with 'Negroes from New Orleans in their Mardi Gras costumes', as if he is saying Aztecs aren't Indians. They're not North American, but presumably if there are no 'north American Indian only' specifications on entry, there is no reason why an Aztec should not be present.

No wonder he doesn't like Aztecs, he'd probably prefer the Spaniards who massacred them.

He just likes to upset people, I think. When looking at his site I did notice how he emphasizes his learning, 'classical music' etc and other 'achievements.' Is he perhaps very insecure? When someone does that it gives me that impression. Pity he takes it out on everyone else though.



Ocahi Waste:

Don't you know yeagley's NDN Auntie hit him one too many times with the skillet, knocked the color right offa that boy and turned him against real NDN womenz for life.

But the whities sure do love him, ennit.


Cedarwood: He is an idiot...I think he is skeered of real ndn women.


Another Native woman had these words of support against one of Yeagley's fanatic racist followers-

DrAlCarroll, I just wanted you to know that you have my sympathy & total support in regards to John Martin. I've been following this since the beginning, when he came to both BE & indianz.com a few months ago. And how he disrespected everybody & everything in sight, including your elderly parents.

And I concur with what you said in another thread a while back, which was to the effect that he belongs in prison.

If he did to my family what he has done to yours, I would kill him. And that's no lie.

Nadine White

Finally, a Native man had these comments about Yeagley and his bigoted attacks on the Dalai Lama and Mexicans-

He obviously has a critical bolt missing in his brain. He's delusional and suffers from delusions of greatness but it's apparent that he hates the indian blood in his veins.

He needs to be in Ward 12, not on a soapbox.

What I HAVE read of him tho convinces me he has no indian blood of any kind. If he had one drop he couldn't think and spout like he does... He's 99.9999% white.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Strange Bedfellows: New Age Exploiter Promoter John Lekay and White Supremacist Supporter John Martin

Winston Churchill once said "There's nothing more exhilirating than getting sniped at to no effect." I think he meant it's always amusing to watch your self proclaimed enemies try and fail repeatedly to get at you. That is how I'm feeling more and more watching John Lekay constanty fall flat on his face.

Two articles and by my count more than fifty emails to nearly a dozen people, and the only person he can get to believe him is an open racist and white supremacist supporter facing criminal charges, John Martin. All that he's accomplished is convince more people that he is an obsessed and bizarre character who doesn't have any idea of what he's talking about.

Nearly all of them, you see, have in turn contacted me. The kinder comments people have sent me include things like, "Lekay needs help, professional help." "What's his problem?" "I will pray for the man because I feel sorry for him." The less kind comments, well, I'm starting to actually feel sorry for him too, so I won't publish them, especially the ones filled with profanity for Lekay.

This latest effort of his, of course, comes after more than forty posts on NAFPS where he just managed to convince everyone there that he's extremely longwinded, paranoid, and more than a little racist, not to mention a defender of New Age exploiters and other fringe characters out to do damage in Indian Country.

I don't think I've ever seen someone become so childish, petty, and paranoid over losing an argument online as Lekay. Most people would simply realize they aren't wanted and move on.

Lekay and John Martin apparently are now working together. So much for ideological principle. On the one side:

Lekay, a promoter of New Age fabricators about Native traditions such as Suzanne Dupree and Mala Pope, an English dilettante living in New York who imagines himself an expert in Native peoples and eco activist, promoter of conspiracy theorists who do enormous damage to Native causes like Kevin Arnett.

John Martin, who is white supremacist David Yeagley's biggest supporter, risking prison to deliver a series of more than a dozen death threats to myself, Brent Michael Davids, and others.

John Martin even recently sent his brother Joe Martin over to NAFPS under the screen name "Pit Bull" to defend Jimmy La Vallee, who makes his career posing as a therapist. Unlike John, Joe actually presented himself calmly and politely, though his defense of La Vallee fell flat.

How do two people on the opposite sides of the political spectrum justify working with someone they would both normally despise, denounce, and work against? How did Hitler and Stalin justify working together? The extreme left, like Lekay, and the extreme right, like Martin and Yeagley, are a lot more alike than they want to admit.

I will make the prediction right now: Lekay is so driven by his petty obsession, losing arguments repeatedly to myself and other NAFPS, that he will very soon interview Yeagley on his online "magazine."

Lekay once had a tiny bit of credibility for giving interviews that brought attention to Native environmental causes. That credibility began vanishing when he promoted dubious characters on the fringe like Suzanne Dupree and spiritual exploiters like Mala Pope.

Any shred of respect any Natives ever had for him is disappearing faster and faster when Lekay lines up with people like John Martin and his beloved leader David Yeagley, one of the most despised and mocked persons in all of Indian Country.