Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3958Re: When did Jazz die?

Expand Messages
  • tommersl
    Mar 18, 2007
      --- In RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com, "Patrice Champarou"
      <patrice.champarou@...> wrote:
      >
      > I am afraid I still do not understand the question (or did it
      contain the
      > reply already?)
      >

      Hi Patrice, the question is when Jazz died. It contained a suggestion
      but it is open for a discussion.

      > I suppose everyone is free to fix their own limits to what they
      consider as
      > real jazz,

      So everything can be real Jazz. A picture on the wall or a baby's cry.

      > and I guess there will be as many different replies as members on
      > this list. Some will even consider there is no real difference between
      > Lester Young and Archie Shepp, others will declare that jazz started
      dying
      > in the 30's (wasn't Morton's piece called "Dirty, Dirty, Dirty" a
      parody of
      > swing?) but I doubt this can lead us anywhere.

      Sure there are several views lets hear it!


      > This is no place for me to explain why I consider John Coltrane's
      Alabama as
      > a masterpiece or why Thelonious Monk is the one I would take to the
      desert
      > island.

      It doesn't need to be a Jazz in order to be a masterpiece. Speaking
      and evaluating from the Jazz point of view is interesting.

      > I reject the idea of "downgrading" just as much as the concept of
      > "progress" applied to music,

      Interesting, but the progress is what many critics over the years
      demanded. They didn't prove how often a music should "progress", but
      they wanted it to progress at their will otherwise it was out of date
      and something new was state of the art.

      > and if the original question concerned the
      > evolution of styles, I doubt that marketing purposes or the
      introduction of
      > long-playing recording by Blue Note played a greater part than what the
      > musicians wished to play and what the audience expected to hear.

      Blue Note that were looking for progress and bebop they got to a dead
      end in 1965 and sold themselves.


      > And as far as more and more jazz lovers turning to musicians of the
      past,
      > why complain? It is no-one's fault if there haven't been any Mortons
      or J.S.
      > Bachs for a while, it is just the way music changes - and you won't
      force
      > the African-American audience to support styles that were clearly
      related to
      > segregation, prohibition, depression and misery, and the most
      incredible
      > unequality - this is purely intellectual nostalgia which only wealthy
      > intellectual whites can afford, just like regretting the good old
      times of
      > hard work from sun to sun on the Mississippi Delta plantations which
      > produced such fascinating blues!
      >

      Here is a 1920's quote from Roger Pryor Dodge "Much as Jazz is
      supposed to dominate our modern music, it's really rare in it's pure
      state... The only feasible way to hear good jazz in quantity is
      through phonograph records"
      Now, can we say in 1926 he was talking about a purely intellectual
      nostalgia when he said in 1926 that the place to find real Jazz is on
      records? Or maybe we see a progress as he describes it in his article
      as Paul Whiteman syncopating the classics, in my words, a process of
      adding Jazz elements to Classical themes so it will "ring a bell" that
      it is Jazz but not contain really the Jazz art, like a Pavlov's Dog
      that hear the bell and think he is about to get a real meal.
      Tommersl
    • Show all 30 messages in this topic