"Is Jazz Dead" - book review

David Mason · From: Cambridge, MD, USA

I just got this book by Stuart Nicholson out of the library inter-library loan system, and it's pretty interesting. He goes into Wynton Marsalis's war on modernity, why the mid and low-level paying jobs have dried up, the lack of paying apprentice-type gigs, the effect of music schools churning out billions of technicians with the souls of wombats etc. (I added the "wombat part myself)

The full title of the book is: "Is Jazz Dead? (or has it moved to an new address)" - apparently there is a lot of new and interesting things going on with jazz music overseas, especially in Europe, especially in Norway. Gentlemen, prefer blondes?

Ron Castle · From: West Hurley,NY

if this is a question I'd have to say ALMOST,
at least here in the USA

Bob Hoffnar · From: Austin, Tx

Plenty of jazz in nyc. The Brooklyn jazz scene is turning into something special. Lots of clubs and lots of gigs. Its not really a bop or fusion thing though. I worked with a Norwegian jazz band called "In the Country" recently. They were truly great. Sorta like a streched out Chopin improv.
I don't what it is about NYC but the regular Joe's that hang out in bars here want to hear jazz.

------------------
Bob
upcoming gigs
My Website

David Doggett · Posted 10 Aug 2006 8:29 pm

Jazz has become the classical music of the African-American middle and upper classes. In Philly they nurture it as a still living part of black history. There are a handful of clubs where the old timers and a few young players play. There are various jazz festivals in the area - mostly frequented by older middle-class African Americans. They flock to the Cape May, NJ Jazz festival twice a year. But I don't think many musicians are making a living at it. It's all a conservation effort by aging fans and musicians trying to keep it going while juggling day jobs. The old-timers are retired or on social security. To make a living at it you have to get out of Philly and play the national festivals, and go to Europe. It's a tough existence that takes a lot of aggressive self-promotion and mobility. Jazz isn't dead, but it is on life-support.

------------------
Student of the Steel: Zum uni, Fender tube amps, squareneck and roundneck resos, tenor sax, keyboards

Dave Mudgett · From: Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee

To my eyes, jazz is like many well-established American music styles. It is no longer the flavor-of-the-month much of anywhere - NYC may be an exception, and seems to do well there, by the listings I see of clubs that feature jazz. Overall, I think "real" jazz, blues, rockabilly, traditional country, bluegrass, and other older styles seem to be alive and healthy, but play to much smaller audiences than they used to.

A lot of high schools and universities have jazz clubs or jazz bands. For example, here at Penn State, there's a student-run jazz club, which sponsors some very nice jazz concerts. The local high school has a very high quality jazz band, and I've known some excellent players who came out of it. It's not the mainstream music scene, to be sure, but jazz still has a reasonable critical mass.

Personally, I think this is OK. It doesn't bother me a whit that jazz or any of these other styles don't generally play to arenas with thousands of screaming fans. As long as it's possible to still find some clubs that feature them, the quality of the music is good, and enough people come to keep it going, I'm happy. Sure, I'd like to see more, but they are not dead.

In this country, there is an obsession with being big. Big audiences, big money, big attention in the press, big egos, and so on. All these styles of music were created, and were best, IMO, when they were small. Then they got big, and in order to placate the desire for big rewards and attention, they had to change to the point where they weren't at all the same. IMO, big mainstream popular music has only rarely ever been particularly interesting, musically. I understand that musicians want to make lots of money and get wide respect, but it really has nothing to do with music. Music does not exist to create a money-making career for musicians. It exists for its own reasons, and some musicians can make a career of it.

All my opinions, of course.

Mike Shefrin · Posted 11 Aug 2006 9:16 am

Dave, Very astute summing up of the situation and I couldn't agree with you more. New York is an exception though.We have alot of good jazz here.

[This message was edited by Mike Shefrin on 13 August 2006 at 12:21 PM.]

David Mason · From: Cambridge, MD, USA

Dave M., one of the points that Nicholson makes is that the "big is better" mentality means that a system which supports a few big superstars has pulled a lot of the support and access to audiences away from smaller and more local artists.

Dave Mudgett · From: Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee

I agree that focusing on the "big" music stars funnels money away from everything else. That is a national phenomenon since the 80s. It's true in music, science, engineering for sure - fields I've been involved with since the early 70s. But I think it pervades the society as a whole.

That is the modern U.S. philosophy - to be #1. #2 doesn't get the real recognition. The runner up in the World Series or Super Bowl agonizes about why they didn't win. We tend to remember the gold medal winner, but unless there was something special about the personality of the silver and bronze medal winners, they are usually quickly forgotten. And remember that there are often only milliseconds of difference in their times (so to speak), luck played a heavy role in their success, and all are champions.

So - the solution, IMO, is to simply play the game and survive to play another day. It means becoming self-sufficient - able to survive no matter what kind of crazy turn in trends occurs. There are plenty of people out there doing that now. As long as that happens, jazz, blues, country, and so on, will be impossible to stamp out, no matter what the suits do. IMHO.

Ron Castle · From: West Hurley,NY

Bob Hoffnar wrote:"Plenty of jazz in nyc."
True - but what's it paying? Can you scratch
out a living without a day job? Maybe a few can but nothing like it was back in the late 50's or 60's.And NYC is really the exception anyway.
For Jazz to be a real viable & living part of the music biz it needs a broader base then a few clubs in Bklyn & downtown NY. It only survives at all because there will always be some who want to play more - explore more, but the overwhelming majority of folks just dont want to hear it. The steady stream of
"Marsalis Re-hash" does nothing to educate or
stimulate the public to seek out true inventiveness
Maybe I'm just a bit jaded and overly nostalgic for the days when you could catch Miles at the Vanguard at 8pm, Trane at the Halfnote at 11 and then wander over to see
Monk or Roland Kirk at 1AM at the 5SPOT.
But who am I to say- seeing as I'm hiding up here in the mountains 100 miles from the center of the Jazz world- or whats left of it.

Steinar Gregertsen · From: Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.

Shane Reilly · From: Melbourne, Australia

Jazz will never die.We must constantly redefine "what is jazz",and after such definition some will cry "jazz is dead", but it will continue to evolve as life does.Jazz tradition will never die either as it is woven into the history books,both musical and cultural and will continue to be studied the world over.There's plenty of happening jazz here in Melbourne Australia,It's tough to survive only on jazz but even Bird played functions.I see a lot of great talent out there right now.They've studied the greats and are living in the now.Check out Christian Scott on trumpet.His album "Rewind This" is Fearless!That is jazz and it's kicking and screaming "I AM ALIVE".Also,if you don't have Brian Blade's album "Perceptual" I'd highly recomend it.It has some great playing by Dave Easley on steel.Didn't Bird,Ornette,Dolphy,Miles(electric) et al. already kill jazz?The real question is "What is Jazz?"When you find an answer poke it with a stick and if it bites your a**....It's probably jazz.

Cheers, Shane.

Bill McCloskey · From: Nanuet, NY

"For Jazz to be a real viable & living part of the music biz it needs a broader base then a few clubs in Bklyn & downtown NY"

Kidding right? We now have Jazz at lincoln center which has at least 3 stages playing jazz 7 days a week. Just pick up a copy of Jazz Player's listing. There are more jazz clubs than just about any other kind of music in New York. The Brooklyn scene has gained a lot of publicity, including a recent big write up in the NY Times.

And then there are the summer jazz festivals, the week long jazz events in NY. Joe Lovano's event. Man, jazz is every where. My guess is that there are a lot more Jazz clubs in Manhattan than country bars in Nashville.

Jim Cohen · From: Philadelphia, PA

There are great people playing the clubs in NYC for sure. I must say, though, that whenever I see a lineup of a so-called "Jazz Festival" it's almost always chock full of "Smooth Jazz" artists. Sure what is called "jazz" will evolve and get redefined, but if it gets redefined to include Kenny G, then I'm outta there. (Just like "country music" getting redefined to include rock.)

David Doggett · Posted 13 Aug 2006 8:15 pm

Bill has a point. At the new Kimmel Center for the Arts here in Philly (home of the Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra), jazz is second only to classical music in the number of performances. So in a sense jazz has moved into the fine arts and conservatory category. When you put that together with the festivals all over the country, there is a lot of jazz being played outside of the traditional club setting.

Um...Jim has a point too. Yuk.

Dave Mudgett · From: Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee

I'm not convinced that the change in focus and big $$$ from clubs - where the important jazz really developed - to highbrow jazz at places like the Lincoln or Kimmel Centers is necessarily the pot o' gold at the end of the rainbow. The question, I think, is whether or not the music will really grow robustly. I still think - yes - but because independent and hardheaded artists go their own way, not because of Lincoln Center endowments. Don't get me wrong - I generally prefer old-school mainstream jazz also, but I would not like to see it become a preservationist movement just to make it palatable to the upper-echelon masses.

But at least I don't think we'll be seeing Kenny G at the Lincoln Center Jazz Series if Marsalis is in charge.

Cliff Kane · From: the late great golden state

"Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny."
Frank Zappa

Mike Shefrin · Posted 13 Aug 2006 9:08 pm

This probably belongs in humor but....
Kenny G, Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are
all standing in front of you and you have a
loaded gun, but you only have two bullets.
What do you do?.........
.
.
.
.
.
Shoot Kenny G twice.

[This message was edited by Mike Shefrin on 13 August 2006 at 10:12 PM.]

Ron Castle · From: West Hurley,NY

Jazz at Lincoln Center under the influence of
Winton Marsalis is probably the biggest hit to the 'vitality' of Jazz at its core. There are more festivals and concerts now but much of the music is 'fusion-ac' (as in muzac) or so called easy listing pap. (Joe Lovano being a rare exception)
The problem for Jazz is the current quality of the music and the lack of an inovation-encouraging environment, not the lack of venues currently featuring re-hashed re-rolled young technicians playing bland
un-inspired music.
Certainly there are some folks doing really creative things but for the most part the festivals, concerts and many of the so-called Jazz-clubs are presenting music that in no way could be considered an 'art form'.
I have no problem listening to original Basie or Ellington charts played beautifully, but I don't want to hear modern day hacks re-writing Basie and Ellington style music,
no more that I want to hear someone imitating
Mozart Symphonies- nor do I want to hear an endless stream of sax players trying to impress with 'Trane-like 'ribbons of scales'.
Just my opinion- perhaps I'm a bit too jaded.