The New York Times on European New Jazz

[Mel]

Below is an article from the New York Times on the Web. I thought it might be of interest.

June 3, 2001

Europeans Cut in With a New Jazz Sound and Beat

By STUART NICHOLSON

LONDON -- FOR years Americans have regarded European jazz with the same tolerant smile they reserve for Japanese baseball. But something is stirring in the Old World. A generation of musicians is emerging from Europe's jazz underground, and now they're raising a tolerant smile at the mention of American jazz. Talk to them about the current state of the music, and it's as if an old and dear friend has passed away. They believe American jazz is retreating into the past while Europe is moving the music into the 21st century.

The highly praised Norwegian pianist Bugge Wesseltoft spoke for many recently when he said: "I think American jazz somehow has really stopped, maybe in the late 70's, early 80's. I haven't heard one interesting American record in the last 20 years. It's like a museum, presenting stuff that's already been done."

In the past, European musicians largely marched in step to whatever developments were coming out of America, striving to keep abreast of successive shocks announcing the new beginning with ragtime. But now a small group of musicians, most notably in France and Scandinavia, is taking the creative initiative and going its own way with the music. These musicians are embracing the liberating potential of jazz as dance music, taking elements from the European house, techno, drum 'n' bass and jungle scenes, and in so doing are re-establishing jazz's long lost links with popular culture. It is unlikely, however, that the new music will be in evidence at this year's JVC Jazz Festival, which begins in two weeks.

The music, called the European new jazz by musicians and critics, is not strictly acoustic, like much of mainstream American jazz, yet neither is it completely electronic. Bending improvisation around familiar and unfamiliar sounds and rhythms, this European jazz is moving out of the jazz club and into club culture, and young people are willing to line up around the block to hear it. While there have been experiments by American jazz musicians in combining jazz and hip-hop, like Miles Davis's "Doo Bop," Gary Thomas's "Overkill" and Don Byron's "Nu Blaxploitation," the results merely confirmed the seeming incompatibility of jazz and rap. In contrast, drum 'n' bass is not too far removed from driving jazz rhythms and can easily accommodate jazz improvisation. This reliance on specifically European club-culture styles differentiates the new music from the kind of experimental jazz coming from the Chicago underground and the New York downtown scene.

A feature of the European jazz is that the rhythms are a mixture of acoustic and sampled sounds. Electric basses are out, upright basses are in, and drum kits are pared down to snare, bass drum, high-hat and cymbals. Turntables and samples create haunting, often ambient backdrops against which the improviser plies his craft. The Norwegian trumpet player Nils Petter Molvaer, who has studied North African styles, makes music that is a mix of ethnic roots and modernity. In his playing, the minimalistic grooves of European house easily relate to African music. Similarly, some accents in rhythms like 7/8 and 9/16 are based in an old tradition of North African ethnic music; when played with electronic delays, they appear to make the rhythms float within the ambient soundscape.

Not surprisingly this new European music has raised cries of "is this jazz?" from purists both in America and in Europe. That question always greets experimentation in any artistic genre. Fans of New Orleans traditionalism similarly railed at the popularity of the big bands in the 30's and be-bop in the 40's. Even today, free jazz and Miles Davis's electric music, for some, hold a tenuous place in jazz history.

Certainly, European new jazz is not what jazz was but is a vision of what it can be. Nor does it compete with jazz's past achievements in the way today's jazz mainstream is doing. If jazz history tells us anything, it is that the music, until the last decade or so, has always been a reflection of its time. The new European jazz is unmistakably music of today.

"European jazz has liberated straight- ahead jazz from its harbor and has sailed away," said the French pianist Laurent de Wilde, who played on the New York scene for several years. "Keeping tradition is a great thing, but it's not the only thing. You have to keep tradition but at the same time keep evolving."

Therein lies a fascinating European paradox. At the turn of the 20th century, many European artists blamed "the tradition" of Western culture for stifling creativity, particularly in classical music. The composer Darius Milhaud and other French artists of his generation, including Ravel and the Paris-based Stravinsky, looked beyond European traditions to the vitality and exuberance of jazz . Milhaud's 1923 ballet "La Création du Monde" was hailed for its strong jazz influences. Now jazz itself is looking beyond its boundaries for a new vitality and exuberance.

In France, the enigmatic Ludovic Navarre's group, St. Germain, has had considerable success in combining French house music and jazz. Released last year, the group's album "Tourist" has already sold more than 600,000 copies, mostly in Europe. To put this figure into context, sales of 10,000 in the jazz world represent a hit record. In bars, restaurants, clubs and clothing stores across Europe, St. Germain's "Rose Rouge" has become ubiquitous with its insistent 4/4 vamp and the now-famous sample of Marlena Shaw singing "I want you to get it together."

With fluent, lively improvisation from the trumpeter Pascal Ohse, the saxophonist and flutist Edouard Labor, the keyboard player Alexander Destrez and the guitarist and reggae pioneer Ernest Ranglin, St. Germain is reaching young audiences in a way that has relevance for them, through dance — just as jazz did in the Swing Era. This idea was not lost on Jazz at Lincoln Center, which presented the "For Dancers Only" tour last year. But the title of the tour says it all: it was taken from a 1937 hit record by the Jimmie Lunceford Orchestra.

The flute virtuoso Malik Mezzadri, who has occasionally played in St. Germain, said recently: "St. Germain has changed the way the public thinks about jazz in France — don't put it in a box. You listen, you dance, this is what my generation wants, the dance."

Mr. Mezzadri is a charismatic figure on the Paris jazz scene. Mere mention of his name is enough to fill any club there, and the makeup of the musicians and the music on his latest album, "Magic Malik," reflect the racial diversity of Paris, that most cosmopolitan of European cities. "In my band, I have South American, African and Cuban musicians," he said. "I grew up in the West Indies, in Guadeloupe, and this is a population that came from Africa, with slaves." His music is rhythmically unambiguous while bursting with pan-ethnic frissons.

Something of the excitement of the current Parisian jazz scene is captured on "Candombe" from the saxophonist Julien Lourau's album "Gambit," which was recorded live at the New Morning Club last year. With Mr. Mezzadri as a featured sideman, the music is intense and compelling as Mr. Lourau's tenor sax riffs mediate the ebb and flow of the powerful drum 'n' bass- influenced grooves. "I want to play for people my own age and even younger because I think jazz is not elitist," Mr. Lourau said.


The new crop of Scandinavian jazz artists was inspired by an earlier generation, particularly the Norwegian saxophonist Jan Garbarek, who achieved international recognition on the Munich-based ECM label run by Manfred Eicher. In the mid-90's, young musicians like Mr. Wesseltoft, Mr. Movaer, the drummer Audun Kleive and the guitarist Eivind Aarset, all of whom are Norwegian, rejected the contemplative calm of what Mr. Eicher called the "Nordic tone" and began experimenting with dance-based grooves. Mr. Wesseltoft formed his own record label, Jazzland, and his album, "New Conception of Jazz," sold more than 40,000 copies across Europe — remarkable sales for a small independent label. "Jazz is American, of course," he said. "But I feel the techno and electronics scene is more European. The beats I'm using, the grooves, I feel I'm not stealing from the black American music scene."

In 1998 Mr. Aarset recorded "Electronique Noir" and created one of the best post- Miles albums. "My approach has come out of the Nordic jazz thing inspired by people like Jan Garbarek and Terje Rypdal, and the serious ECM approach to music mixed with techno beats," he said.

Mr. Molvaer's 1997 album, "Khmer," has sold more than 100,000 copies in Europe. It led to Mr. Molvaer's nomination for the prestigious Nordic Council Music Prize 2000 and several awards, including the annual prize of the German Record Critics, and was voted Jazz Record of the Year by LA Weekly.

One of the most talked about groups currently on the European circuit is the Esbjorn Svensson Trio (or E.S.T., as they call themselves), which saw its latest album, "Good Morning Susie Soho," shoot to No. 15 on the pop album chart in the group's native Sweden, alongside the likes of Madonna and Radiohead — a significant achievement for a jazz piano trio. Highlights of this album, along with those from his 1999 release, "From Gargarin's Point of View," are to be issued by Sony Jazz in the United States in August as "Somewhere Else Before."

Curiously, British jazz musicians have only tentatively embraced the club-culture rhythms that largely emanated from London. The saxophonist Courtney Pine is the best-known exception. His album, "Back in the Day," shows that he has moved a considerable distance from the 1980's, when he was seen as Europe's Wynton Marsalis. (He even recorded with Mr. Marsalis's father, Ellis). His latest album uses samples and computer-generated rhythm tracks, underpinning some torrid soloing on soprano and tenor saxophone.

ALL these Europeans readily acknowledge that jazz is America's gift to the world. But what impact will this fast-changing European scene have on American jazz? Initially, the effect is most likely to be felt financially. Money, as Cyndi Lauper once famously sang, changes everything. Europe has historically been a key market for American jazz in album sales, in its extensive festival circuit and in year-round gigs. Just how important was once highlighted by a comment made by George Wein, the producer of the JVC festival: "No Europe, no jazz."

If American jazz remains fixed in the certainties of the mainstream, European jazz musicians may move into the space long occupied by Americans. Indeed, Mr. Svensson is doing just that. Recently he was on the cover of two major German jazz magazines as well as the influential French magazine Jazzman. He was also hailed by the German news weekly Der Spiegel as "The Future of Jazz Piano" (along with the American pianist Brad Mheldau), and his "Good Morning Susie Soho" was named album of the year in a poll conducted by the critics of the British magazine Jazzwise, an award that has hitherto been the province of American jazz albums.

The emergence of the European new jazz poses the intriguing question of whether American jazz can maintain its stance without lapsing even further into high-art marginality, given its dependence on the European market. As the American saxophonist and clarinetist Michael Moore, who now lives in the Netherlands, put it recently: "In America there's more pressure to be conformist, and players can work a lot more if they play tunes in a traditional way. In Europe there's a larger audience that grew up listening to experimental jazz over a 25- year period, and they appreciate not hearing the same thing all the time."

Suddenly there is real possibility that the stewardship of the music may no longer remain exclusively American. "Europe is going to be the place for jazz," Mr. Svensson said. "We're ready now. We like to sound different."�*�*

Stuart Nicholson is a London-based music critic and author. His most recent book is ``Reminiscing in Tempo: A Portrait of Duke Ellington'' (Northeastern University Press).
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information
�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*

[Clamato]

OK, for those of you who have read the piece by Stuart Nicholson and also may have read the November Jazziz piece on E.S.T., this is my opinion about the whole issue of Europe v America in terms of innovative jazz. I think Mr. Nicholson is highly misinformed and his piece is , well, I want to say he has oversimplified to the point of spreading propaganda. At the worst, the article is complete BULLSHIT. To imply that there have been no interesting CDs released by Americans since the 80's must mean that Mr. Nicholson just doesn't seek out any new artists. Hey, Nicholson. Here's a partial list of American artists who aren't named Wynton Marsalis who are doing stuff that doesn't "retreat into the past".
Kurt Rosenwinkle
Mark Turner
David Gilmore
Steve Coleman
Jason Moran
Tyshawn Sorey
Robin Eubanks
Greg Osby
David Binney
Dave Douglas
Ralph Alessi
Lonnie Plaxico
Gary Thomas( while I'm mentioning him , in the article, it says that" While there have been experiments by American jazz musicians in combining jazz and hip-hop, like Miles Davis's "Doo Bop," Gary Thomas's "Overkill" and Don Byron's "Nu Blaxploitation," the results merely confirmed the seeming incompatibility of jazz and rap." I appear on Gary Thomas' Overkill, and we had 3 sucessful tours in Europe.The Europeans SEEMED to like it. Why are Jazz and Rap incompatible but Jazz and Drum and Bass compatible( as N goes on to say)? It seems arbirtrary to me.I doubt N knows about the artists that influenced that particular CD, they are as diverse as Snoop Dogg, Dr. Dre, and Billy Harper, not to mention Messian.)

I could go on listing musicians unknown to Nicholson, but I think now is a good time to discuss the notions of what is "new" and "different" and what really isn't, and why it even matters.
I was unfamiliar with Bugge Wesseltoft and Laurent De Wilde, two musicians mentioned in the piece who feel that European jazz musicians are
pushing the boundaries more than American musicians in general. I searched them out on the web and listened to a few sound samples. Since we are all over generalizing here, I will say first that I think Wesseltoft and De Wilde are obviously fine musicians, but essentially they are playing a form of fusion( some call it jazz rock), Which is a product of the American music scene of the 70's. Which was 30 years ago. So who is really living in the past? Fender Rhodes is not new. Playing hip jazz lines over funk beats is not new. Synthesizers are not new. What Nicholson should say is that these Europeans have more recent point of departure than SOME American musicians. Namely the Wyntons and Marcus Robertses. ( I'm not bashing them either, I think they have their place and a right to their stylistic preference and belief. Marsalis and Roberts inspired me in my early days.)Futhermore, the use of electronics and turntables and hip hop or techno beats, without there being a foundation of quality improvisation or composition or performance,is just gimmickry. Chick Corea, Stanely Clarke, Lenny White, Herbie Hancock, Wayne Shorter, Joe Zawinul( an Austrian)all had serious roots in the JAZZ TRADITION. Yet they were all forward thinking, and they had a foundation in their approach which made their musical concept strong, regardless of what instruments or electronics they used. Herbie can swing and play over chord changes with the best of them.
Can the aforementioned Wesseltoft and De Wilde? Maybe nobody cares, and I don't expect them to sit down and wail on Stablemates.And if they can , cool. But this article is so back and white I felt the need to present a different side. Playing angular lines over beats in not new, whether Europeans or Americans are doing it. But how well is it being done? is the question.

I think part of what's going on here is that since Europe truly has supported jazz more than the U.S. in terms of festivals, touring, and funding, that European musicians want more appreciation. And I am not saying that they don't deserve it. I have made 4 recordings of my own with various European musicians( 2 duo recordings on Steeplechase with Jesper Bodilsen, a great Danish Bass Player, and 2 CDs for Fresh Sound with Perico SamBeat,Mario Rossy, and Marc Miralta from Spain. These labels don't do any promotion, so you probably didn't hear about it, and I'm sure Nicholson didn't get any free copies, so he doesn't know anything about it either.It's to bad he didn't mention these European musicians, who to me know the tradition and are also forward thinking as well>).
I think there is some nationalism , some snobbery, and some deluded thinking going on here. Not to mention possibly some anti Americanism due to , what's his name, I think it has a W in it somewhere. (I talked to one European Jazz Producer who didn't want to come to New York anymore because of the invasion ofIraq. I had to explain to him that I seriously doubt that any musician recording for his label could possibly be in favor of the war. He had a hard time with that.)
Don't forget that European musicians have it a lot easier than American musicians who move to New York.Yes, musicians in Europe have tons more funding and I imagine it's a lot less competitive on a local or national level. Can we help it that New York continues to be the Mecca of Jazz musicians, despite dwindling audiences, funds, and support from Record Labels?I remember a great Danish saxophone player who moved to New York in the late 90's. He had already won the equivelent of a "grammy" in Denmark, yet wanted to try his luck in the Big Apple. Well, the only gig he did was a gig I called him for at Smalls, and I paid him a grand total of 30 U.S.Dollars. Within 6 months, the Great Dane said,
"Fuck this"( How do you say it in Danish?)and moved right back to Copenhagen, and jumped right back into touring and making award winning recordings. Yea, the support sucks for Jazz here, is that our fault?Also, Is it our fault that many of the musicians really doing some innovative, or at the very least not super straight ahead, don't see the light of day due to the Diana Kralls and Jane Monheits blocking the view? ( I've considered moving to Europe considering how bad it is for creative music in this country.)

I may explore my displeasure with the lack of fairness in Nicholson's article at a later time, when I have a chance to do more research. But finally, I must mention the Esborn Svennson Trio, who I think are good players, but hardly worthy of the "future of Jazz" award. Again, here we are led to believe that because you draw from influences later than 1960, that you are an innovator. Poppycock! It sounds like Keith Jarrettfrom the 70's(30 years ago) to me. WHich is fine in and of itself. So I don't but the last paragraph-"Suddenly there is real possibility that the stewardship of the music may no longer remain exclusively American. "Europe is going to be the place for jazz," Mr. Svensson said. "We're ready now. We like to sound different."----Sure, you don't sound like Oscar Peterson or Earl "Fatha" Hines , but innovative and different, hardly. Electronics, Schmelectronics! What's really going on in the music?(By the way,I always find it funny that artists who are so overhyped always sound really arrogant when they are quoted in articles. WHy is that?) Anyway, my point is, don't shit in my mouth and call it an ice cream sundae, ok.

By the way, if you had mentioned Christof Schwitzer, or Akamoon, or Nils Wogram, these are some Europeans who I think are doing something possibly innovative- Or a least with an even more recent point of departure.
And Don't believe the Hype! There are plenty of forward thinking Jazz musicians from the USA.
George Colligan
PS Don't get the wrong idea. I love Europe and Jazz musicians form Europe. I think anybody can learn to play. But just the notion that Europeans are forward thinking in Jazz and Americans aren't remined me of going to Discos in Germany and Switzerland in the late 90's. People were still dancing to ABBA and Culture Club. Doesn't that say it all?
GC
PPS I do think socially Europeans are way ahead of America. Check out a book called THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE and it will change the way you think about World politics.
GC

:)

[Morgan Childs]

Man, totally... this shit is wack, to put it bluntly. I would rather listen to Jason Moran's "Modernistic" record than anything I've heard Bugge Wesseltoft do. And I'm not knocking him... I think his stuff is pretty rad, actually. But it's a huge hubris to suggest what he's doing is groundbreaking and forward looking, and what Jason (or any of the guys George mentioned... including George himself!) are any less forward looking.

[John Doheny]

Right on George. You've made every argument I wish I'd made about this kind of stuff, and with much more clarity and authority than I could have mustered.

The next time I get into a hassle about these things on this board, I'm just going to cut and paste your post. With appropriate credit of course.

(By the way,I always find it funny that artists who are so overhyped always sound really arrogant when they are quoted in articles.

Perfect!

[John Doheny]

Incidentally, I had a curious sense of Deja Vu reading that thing. It's like I've read it before somewhere. It seems like there's one of these "Europeans are taking" articles in the NYTs about every three years.

[John Doheny]

Sorry. That should be "Europeans are taking over."

[LAZZ]

Stuart Nicholson is a lovely chap doing a great job.
I disagree with the validity of his point of view as much as the rest of you - but he has been doing a terrific piece of work these last several years stirring up controversy and getting a pile of ink printed about "jazz" and getting people arguing - sole purpose of mission.
And don't go kidding yourselves about who he hasn't heard of - he does know his stuff - he's just taken a particular line 'cos it gets him regular writing commissions. Tough to do. Well done Stuart.
(There are absolutely amazing players in Europe thouigh - none of which he mentions.)
P.S. I've never known a late '90s euro-disco play ABBA or Culture Club !!
What sort of joints were you going to, Clamato?
Good heavens !

[Clamato]

I admit, one of these discos was in Eisenach, which is the former East Germany, so I guess that's to be expected. But Iv'e been in Luzerne and Lisbon, and they either played the crappy 80's stuff( Not to say it's all crappy...some of it is down right Wagnerian compared to today's pop music)or bad techno. And that's bad, because techno is already bad to begin with.( My apologies to techno fans reading this board.)My point is that I don't assume that Europeans are neccessarily on the cutting edge.The ones that are were not mentioned by Nicholson. He just mentioned people who are popular. I think he's more lazy than vindictive. As are most journalists these days." Oh, here's a press release....USHER IS BEST MUSICIAN OF THE 21ST CENTURY......I guess it MUST be TRUE! HOORAY!"
Nobody's actually thinking for themselves anymore.Maybe it's always been about PR. ( When was THE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS with Burt Lancaster released, in the 50's?)
I think it's a drag that we musicians bust our balls to learn this music-going to expensive music schools, going to sit in at clubs, transcribing solos, making little in the way of real compensation for the most part( compared to the same amount of study in other fields, like Doctors and Lawyers), and then somebody who took Creative Writing 101 and owns Kind of Blue and The Ken Burns JAZZ thing can be taken seriously as a jazz critic. If I started writing in Law Journals about my new take on Brown vs. Board of Education and Plessy Vs Ferguson, would anybody pay attention?
OK I'm ranting again......take a deep breath.......

[mike rud]

I was really struck by what you said here, Clamato:


I think it's a drag that we musicians bust our balls to learn this music-going to expensive music schools, going to sit in at clubs, transcribing solos, making little in the way of real compensation for the most part( compared to the same amount of study in other fields, like Doctors and Lawyers), and then somebody who took Creative Writing 101 and owns Kind of Blue and The Ken Burns JAZZ thing can be taken seriously as a jazz critic. If I started writing in Law Journals about my new take on Brown vs. Board of Education and Plessy Vs Ferguson, would anybody pay attention?

I once got a less-than-glowing review from Mark Miller at the Globe and Mail, and boy was he in my bad books for about a year after that! For a while after that I was fond of saying that critics were simply the most articulate portion of the failed artists. But as the years have passed since then, I've come to agree with many of the criticisms he made of my record.

Your analogy to the law made me laugh and nod in agreement. But then as I thought it over, it struck me as not really being a very true analogy, since law is not being offered for public consumption, as a form of aesthetic experience.

I mean, when I play a gig I get a little hot under the collar when someone with no experience as a musician comes up to me and starts negatively evaluating my performance. I feel like Dr. Evil, when someone called him "Mr. Evil" and he replied

"That's Doctor evil; I didn't spend eight years in evil medical school to be called 'Mister'"

But am I not asking for the audience's approval by the very act of getting up on stage? If someone says they like my playing, I'm not all that curious about their credentials as a listener. But when I'm honest with myself, I can't help but notice that my concern with their qualifications as a judge varies in direct proportion with their disaproval!

The same trend applies to whether people agree with my musical tastes. If you and I are having a converstion about how great Charlie Christian is, I'm ashamed to say that I'm not all that concerned with your reasons for agreeing with me; I'm just happy that you do. But just start telling me you prefer Ben Monder, and suddenly I'm very concerned with what your opinion is based on, and whether you have any credentials as a musician.

If I want to write intelliegently about law, it looks more legit for me to do so the more legal credentials I have, since the law is so technical that only lawyers have the expertise to realy get into law as a subject matter.

But art which is presented for public appreciation is manifestly saying "Here! This is for you. Take this, and we hope you like it." And if the audience didn't have the legitimate option of disapproving, then that audience's approval would be meaningless. If the audience's approval of the music were predicated on the audience's expertise, there'd never be a show.

Now critics probably need to be more like the audience than they are like the musicians, since it's the audience for whom the critic writes. At the very least I thnk the critics need to be aware of the audiences needs and preferences. Musicians tend to have what one famous psychologist called "a mind debauched by learning". We are so familiar with the music, that we mostly assume that the audience is right there with us.

So maybe one of the functions of the critic is to make the audience more aware of how the art works, and make the artist more aware of the public's perception of them. I'm sure different critics see their role differently. Quite a few critics have been big, big boosters for the music.

If you've never done it, go to the Vancouver Public Library and check out Ralph Gleason's Jazz Casual series. There's a critic really paying a very great deal of respect to musicians and their art, along with a ton of great live playing footage and fascinating interviews. I'm sure Gleason was as much a booster as he was a filter.

Between helping remind the artist of what the audience needs, promoting the artists they find worthy, and helping the public understand, maybe critics are something we should think twice before ostracizing.

"...the fate of art that tries to do without criticism is instructive."

Northrop Frye

[Yodi2]

Wow! Mike I totally dig your perspectives!

[Guy]

Mike, once again proving why he's the smartest guy I know (except for that ridiculous CBC argument he was making earlier!... See, his point above stands. When he agrees with me, he's brilliant; when he doesn't, less so).

I have no training in music beyond high school so don't feel particularly qualified in reviewing it (although I have on occasion). But I am blown away in talking to some really great young jazz musicians when I mention some fabulous player or singer in history and they've never heard of him or her! Part of being a reviewer is having a historical perspective. I review comedy for a living and have never performed outside of weddings and one roast. I'm sure some comics think the same thing -- that if you've never done it, you have no right reviewing it. And yet most of them have little historical perspective. Besides, comics/musicians are too busy doing their craft to write about it.

And when you look in history at the great players and critics, none of them were school trained. The musicians learned by playing, not in the classroom.

[John Doheny]

And when you look in history at the great players and critics, none of them were school trained. The musicians learned by playing, not in the classroom.

Well, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. While it may be true that the graduate school of jazz is the bandstand I think you'd be surprised how many jazz musicians have a B.mus degree or some amount of formal training, including every musician on this board that I am personally aquainted with. The notion of jazz musician as Holy Primitive never did stand up to serious scrutiny. Even a lot of old school cats had post-secondary paper, Charles Brown, Wayne Shorter, Cannonball Adderly, all university educated guys. Jazz has always skewed towrds middle class people who can afford to pay for music lessons for their kids (even if 'middle class' meant butlers and household servants, like Duke Ellington's parents). Dexter Gordon's father was a doctor.

And who are these hot young players who don't know the history of the music anyway? I've sure never met em.

We need names, Guy.:-)

[John Doheny]

Show me a comedian who doesn't know the history of his craft, and I'll show you a comedian who ain't funny.


Brownie points to anyone who can tell me what famous comic I just paraphrased.

[Clamato]

I think Mike is right about the audience, but let's put it like this. If a food critic went to a 5 star Japanese restaurant that had an omikase tasting menu with special sashimi and exotic appetizers and such, and he had only eaten at places like McDonald's and Jack in the Box, then he is ill equipped to judge the Japanese restaurant. He has a limited perspective. He is supposed to relate the quality of a fine restaurant to people who might be less enlightened. Another analogy--a critic is like Consumer Reports for Jazz Music. In Consumer Reports,they have criteria which they base their evaluation of cars and other mechanical items. They couldn't just say" The 2005 Toyota Snatchmobiles are not worth your money due to the fact that they didn't seem to match my shoes and socks." I feel like a jazz critic who doesn't know his shit is giving laymen false and arbitrary information.Does that make sense?
You can get away with it in the arts because no one really cares about art, it's just about whether you are popular and can draw a crowd and sell CDs. :(

[Clamato]

I'll guess George Carlin?
Lenny Bruce?
Ruth Buzzy?

[John Doheny]

Soupy Sales.

[John Doheny]

I think we need to back up to the top of the thread and refresh ourselves.


Melody Diachin puts up an article from the NYT about how American jazz is old hat and no longer at the forefront, and Europeans are hip, happening, and the only jazz musicians worth listening to any more.

George Colligan counters with a list of interesting American modern-jazz players that the English dude who wrote the NYT article didn't mention, none of whom are named Wynton, and points out that a lot of what gets passed off as new and groundbreaking is only PERCEIVED as such by listeners too young to remember the 70s.

Morgan Childs thinks Bugge Wesseltoff can play, but to what end?

Colin Lazzerini then pops up to suggest that the English dude actually knows his stuff, but finds this Europe is Taking Over slant tends to excite editors and keep dem checks coming in.

Guy Mac posts in defence of European discos.

Mike Ruds suggests that audiences actually DO like what they like, regardless of what the critics say.

Yodi2 agrees with Mike, mostly because Mike is not John (damn good thing too. We're not the same size so he'd have to get all new clothes).

Guy Mac comes to the defence of critics, who after all aren't any more clueless than jazz musicians and comedians.

Doheny gripes, complains, chastizes, and poses a test to prove how much smarter he is than anyone else.

Colligen fails the test.

Doheny proves conclusively that he has no peer when it comes to useless trivia about washed-up Borscht-Belters.




There. Hope that muddifies the fuzzification.

[John Doheny]

I feel like a jazz critic who doesn't know his shit is giving laymen false and arbitrary information.Does that make sense?

All kidding aside, yes, it does make sense.

I was just talking with drummer Joe Poole about this. It's marketing, really. The jazz industry (if you can call the support structures and marketing agents anything so grandious as an 'industry') has become more like the pop music industry in the last 10 or 15 years. They covet the youth demographic, and seem to believe young people won't go for anything that might be perceived as old hat. Just look at the prose in jazzfest programs full of "hot young pianists," and "exciting, fresh singers." It's like gay porn. Hence this constant "new thing" stuff that pops up all the time. I remember hearing a John Scofield CD a few years ago (can't remember the title). The hype on it was that Scofield was "radically pushing the envelope on what can be called jazz." It was a damn good record, but no way was it anything revolutionary, unless you call the Crusaders mid 70s LPs with Larry Carlton revolutionary. But apparently the marketing guys felt that it wouldn't get any attention if it wasn't pushed as the new "Bitches Brew" or "A Love Supreme."

We concluded that for us, anyway, it was more important for music to be "good" than ersatz-new. There's only 12 notes. Ain't but so many different ways you can put them together.

[Guy]

John wrote:
Even a lot of old school cats had post-secondary paper, Charles Brown, Wayne Shorter, Cannonball Adderly, all university educated guys. Well, maybe you're right. But let's not let facts get in the way. I was thinking more older school cats like Roy Eldridge, Coleman Hawkins, Bix Beiderbecke, Louis Armstrong, Ray Brown, et. al. And of course they had music lessons. Hell, we've all had music lessons. The original argument was about going to expensive music schools and the like. And the straw man journalist who only owns Kind of Blue and the Ken Burns series. Of course he's easy to knock down, but I doubt if he exists. Most critics are life-long lovers of the art they cover and maybe even have played (but it's not necessary). Did you know Marke Andrews, for example, was a jazz drummer? That's close to being a musician!

John wrote:
Guy Mac posts in defence of European discos.
You can't pin that one on me! The record states otherwise.

John wrote:
And who are these hot young players who don't know the history of the music anyway? I've sure never met em. We need names, Guy.:-) You think I'm just making this up? I can think of two right off the bat. But I'll spare them the public embarrassment. And they're still great players.

John paraphrased:
Show me a comedian who doesn't know the history of his craft, and I'll show you a comedian who ain't funny.
I would have thought so, too, but it's just not the case.

[Jesse Cahill]

I had to stop reading buddy's article after the second paragraph. I've never been able to read music reviews of any sort (with the exception of Vice Magazine, but those don't have much to do with music), good, bad or indiferent.
I grudgingly except them as necessary, but I often feel like saying "here's my sticks MF...you try it"

Also, how can you not know the history of a music that's based on an aural tradition, and be "great" at it?

[mike rud]

I If a food critic went to a 5 star Japanese restaurant that had an omikase tasting menu with special sashimi and exotic appetizers and such, and he had only eaten at places like McDonald's and Jack in the Box, then he is ill equipped to judge the Japanese restaurant. He has a limited perspective. He is supposed to relate the quality of a fine restaurant to people who might be less enlightened.

Really good point. A critic does certainly need to know more about the art than her readers do. But maybe years of researching that art could qualify the critic as well as actually being a musician could. Maybe it could even qualify the critic better. I mean if you send me to review a Django Bates concert, you won't get a sympathetic review, and what's just as bad, you won't get a dispassionate, unbiased one either. My personal agenda as a musician might interfere too much.

Snatchmobiles ....

Tee hee ;)

I feel like a jazz critic who doesn't know his shit is giving laymen false and arbitrary information.Does that make sense?

It makes sense, absolutely. It would be tough to define such knowledge crisply, or ensure that critics have it, but it does make sense. Also, such knowledge is problematic from the perspective that occaisionally an art form changes from a groundswell of popular support, against the wishes of top critics.

...no one really cares about art, it's just about whether you are popular...

This reminds me of

"Nobody goes to the ballpark anymore. It's too crowded!"

-Yogi Bera

:D

Falsity and truth is a dicier proposal in art than it is in automotives, I think. If the new Snatchmobile gets 1000 miles to the gallon, well you can test that. Someone can say "hey, I prefer the new schlubmobile, even though it only gets four miles to the gallon" but they're clearly ignoring the primary function of a car, and I would encourage you to point and laugh at them.

Now as trained musicians, we can point to a phrase that Dexter Gordon plays, say concrete things about harmonic approach, and compare it to a lack of similar approach in some other musician. But even though we prefer the way Dexter's approach sounds, someone with a different idea of what music is about is free to disagree. They cannot be pointed to and laughed at.

[mike rud]

Also, how can you not know the history of a music that's based on an aural tradition, and be "great" at it?

This fellow walks the walk. When I think of how well Jesse knows the literature, I wish all the players and critics had his penchant for research.

[Ryga]

'And who are these hot young players who don't know the history of the music anyway? I've sure never met em.'

You don't really mean that John do you? I think more so now than ever we have an abundance of these young people. They're the ones that aren't buying CD's, they're downloading and for the most part can't give you much more history than they get with a download which is nothing. This is something I'm dealing with all the time in college where I teach. So I work through this with my students with blindfold tests. And I'm hoping to create the next critics with good ears, be they players in the end or not.

[John Doheny]

Oh I agree, Cam. There's plenty of students who don't know the history of the music. Some of them even have chops and can play.

But I wouldn't cross the street to hear em.

I meant GOOD players.:-)

[Yodi2]

oh John...lifes such a formula isnt it.

[John Doheny]

You think I'm just making this up? I can think of two right off the bat. But I'll spare them the public embarrassment. And they're still great players.

I can think of a couple right off the bat too. Maybe they're even the same people. i'd disagree that they're "great" though. I won't call their names, because I like them and have even hired them on occasion. They're good on a technical level, but their playing lacks depth, which, since they ARE good musicians, will eventually come, after they've aquired more experience and yes, understanding of the musics history and context. This isn't just a jazz thing. The best teachers I had at UBC always stressed the importance of knowing the history of a music before attempting to interpret it.

Most critics are life-long lovers of the art they cover and maybe even have played (but it's not necessary).

Right you are. This certainly applies to major publications. But I've also run across a few (and I bet you have too) whose only qualifications are they're friends with the publisher, have a cool record collection, and work cheap. Or in the case of the NYT article, engage in cheap polemics for the purpose of stirring up controversy. In that respect, as Lazz points out, the cat is doing us a favor. Look how much discussion this has generated. The only bad publicity is no publicity (this is why I could never understand the hostility towards Ken Burns Jazz series emminating from the pencil-neck jazz-geek set. So they didn't mention Dave Douglas. So what! Can somebody explain to me how 10 hours of prime time on jazz on national television is a BAD thing?!?)

There ARE unqualified, incompetent critics out there. I even had one compare me to Coltrane. Clearly he doesn't know what he's talking about.

But you'd best believe that blurb went up on my website the very next day.:)

[Yodi2]

See this is the biggest thing I took out of music school. Schools, by nature and by neccesity for a business model, have to create a formulaic approach to teaching music due the the neccesity of measurables. I walked out of school at the end saying I know less about life and why I love music then I did walking in because it was a false fabricated musical enviroment. The real world isnt as such. I find that individuals that leave that scholastic enviroment cling to it and its ideals because 4 - 6 years of it creates some level of comfort in how that system works, and the praise recieved in such a measureable situation.

Enter the real world, and the real consumer base. They might not know a thing about what mode you used over that change, but they know what the like and are prepared to pay for. No longer are you playing for your educated peers in some rep class at 2pm.

Really in the end, unless you plan to be a basement dweller, what the general public and the critics think, formally educated or not, is of concern to you. In the real world I am 99.9% sure there are plenty of non institution trained musicians that just play. I am sure they are well worth crossing the street to hear. To make such a broad sweeping statement such as John did in his previous post is just absurd. I bet those musicians have a more real and applicable education when it relates to the business of musical performance.

[John Doheny]

yodi I don't mean to be rude, but I'm starting to get a little tired of being turned into some kind of straw man for your simplistic arguments. If you can find ANYTHING, ANYWHERE, in any post I have ever written on this board where I have said "people who didn't go to music school suck" then I'll concede you have a point. If not then kindly make your argument without dragging me into it.

I'm sorry you had a bad time at music school. There were times when I did too. But I ultimately concluded that since I was surrounded by people who had been in the business of playing and teaching music much longer than I had, it was possible I might actually be able to learn something from them.

[Yodi2]

John says :

"Oh I agree, Cam. There's plenty of students who don't know the history of the music. Some of them even have chops and can play.

But I wouldn't cross the street to hear em.

I meant GOOD players.:-)"

[John Doheny]

How on god's green earth do you get "people who didn't go to music school suck" out of that?

Do you just interpret the stuff I write in ways that confirm your preconceived notion of who you think I am? Because that statement has absolutely nothing to do with what you're accusing me of saying. It's not some elitist rant. It's saying that people who play in a paricular genre need to spend time studying it's structure and history before they can interpret the style well.

This has very little to do with technique (beyond that necessary to play). you don't have to be Jaco Pastorius to play "Lady Madonna" but it's obvious Paul Mcartney made a serious study of traditional rock and roll (and in particular the music of Fats Domino) before he whipped that one off.


I'm going to say this one more time. You're welcome to make any argument here that you want, but please stop sticking words in my mouth to make your point. It pisses me off.

[Yodi2]

Actually music school was some of the best years of my life. Living in wonderland is fabulous. Miss it.

[Shonwise]

I think John and Cam have hit this one right on the head. It's important to be in school these days; it's something we have to respect. But remember, the school isn't selling you education, you don't go to school and shop for a degree. There's a great deal of work involved. It's also a place to figure yourself out, and learn to express yourself musically. The institutions make an effort to make sure you know your history and harmony. With that in mind, people who have themselves figured out early, and are truly involved in what they're learning can excell at music faster than any school can teach them. If you find something you really like, you will try to sound like that automatically.
I read a good quote in the liner notes to Soulive's "Next": every great musician is the sum of their record collection.

Graham

[Yodi2]

John this statement pretty much outlines your context.

Well, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. While it may be true that the graduate school of jazz is the bandstand I think you'd be surprised how many jazz musicians have a B.mus degree or some amount of formal training, including every musician on this board that I am personally aquainted with. The notion of jazz musician as Holy Primitive never did stand up to serious scrutiny. Even a lot of old school cats had post-secondary paper, Charles Brown, Wayne Shorter, Cannonball Adderly, all university educated guys.

As well thanks for the "simplistic" compliment. I believe the most powerful and effective things in life are quite simple.

[Jesse Cahill]

"I mean if you send me to review a Django Bates concert, you won't get a sympathetic review, and what's just as bad, you won't get a dispassionate, unbiased one either. My personal agenda as a musician might interfere too much"

That's an interesting point Mike. I know exactly what your saying.

As for what Cam had to say about his students, I think it's very true. I had a student bring me a song he was transcribing a while back, I asked him if he new what album it was from and who was in the band. He didn't know anything about it, other than the name of the track and the leader. The name of the track just happened to be the title of the recroding.

That's probably food for a whole different thread though.

[John Doheny]

Well, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. While it may be true that the graduate school of jazz is the bandstand I think you'd be surprised how many jazz musicians have a B.mus degree or some amount of formal training, including every musician on this board that I am personally aquainted with. The notion of jazz musician as Holy Primitive never did stand up to serious scrutiny. Even a lot of old school cats had post-secondary paper, Charles Brown, Wayne Shorter, Cannonball Adderly, all university educated guys.

I still don't see it Yodi. Where in there does it say "and the guys who DIDN'T go to university suck." Including Dexter Gordon, one of my favorite tenor players and a guy whom I have, to some extent, modelled my own playing after.

You've got this idea in your head of me as someone who embodies all the things you dislike about music and the arts. Sorry, but that person is not me.


Jessie, it's sounds like your student isn't very interested in jazz. Beyond getting the grade, anyway.:)

[LAZZ]

"I mean if you send me to review a Django Bates concert, you won't get a sympathetic review, and what's just as bad, you won't get a dispassionate, unbiased one either. My personal agenda as a musician might interfere too much"

Mike and Jesse - I'd be interested to understand more about your shared perspective on Master Bates, if it isn't too strenuous.
(I have a personal agenda involved here, too.)

[Yodi2]

Really in the end, unless you plan to be a basement dweller, what the general public and the critics think, formally educated or not, is of concern to you. In the real world I am 99.9% sure there are plenty of non institution trained musicians that just play. I am sure they are well worth crossing the street to hear. To make such a broad sweeping statement such as John did in his previous post is just absurd. I bet those musicians have a more real and applicable education when it relates to the business of musical performance.

Sorry John I am not taking the same drugs as you maybe? I dont see where I put the words in your mouth that non educated musicians suck. John you dont pass go my freind. Maybe you had a freudian slip?

[Jesse Cahill]

Lazz,

I wasn't offering anything with regards to Django Bates, I was agreeing with Mike about the whole "you won't get a dispassionate, unbiased one either. My personal agenda as a musician might interfere too much" thing.

[Jesse Cahill]

John,

This student seems quite into being a Jazz Drummer, he just downloads everything, I guess that's what high school kids do these days.

[LAZZ]

Maybe you had a freudian slip?

That should be "freudian slit".

And dearest Yodi2, please stop trying to bait our good friend JD so indiscriminately - it compromises your rehabilitation programme and gives completely the wrong impression about your essentially good nature and the depth of your compassion and understanding.

[Yodi2]

That should be "freudian slit".

I could be wrong for sure, but I cant find a definition of Freudian Slit anywhere. Are you sure? Ive always heard it as slip.

[LAZZ]

Ive always heard it as slip.
Come on, my lovely - give us a smile....

[BDavies]

After reading through the post's I though I would actaully say something about what the thread was actaully about. I really dig jazz music coming from both sides of the gamit. There are alot of great musicians on both sides of the atlantic. Now I might have an opinion different than other's because I lived in Amsterdam for two years studing jazz at the conservatorie there. Upon arrival there I got a bimpass, a year long acces pass to the bimhuis (www.bimhuis.nl, for anybody who has never heard of this club). i went to countless shows all the time. Reading through that article I was shocked about that one shot at american music being like a museum piece. I saw the Chris potter trio in concert and it was like nothing I had ever heard before. Deffinetly not anything for the smithsonian jazz affectionado. The best though I have to say was hearing guy's like Archie Sheep and the late Benny Bailey. These guy's would play with a rugged wisdom and style that wouldn't compare to anything coming out of anywhere. Musicians in europe may be doing more "hip" things with there music but I think that it has alot to do appreciation of Jazz. Europeans love jazz, ranging from the great big band's to the Miles legacy to the ICP and much more. Young people go to shows and buy albums from the musicians. There is a thriving scene all across europe. Here in Vancouver there is a great scene with so many good musicians, but the appreciation for good jazz by the masses is very minimal. There seems to be alot of "hipster's" in vancouver these day's who think it's cool to know who Coltrane is but ask them if they have ever seen Hugh Fraser's VEJI, or Brad Turner, and they'll just turn the other way and talk about DJ cash money or whatever. I think it's great that coastal jazz and blues brings great group's from europe over here, and the cellar brings in alot of great american jazz musicians. People need to go to these show's and here what kind of jazz is out there, not what kind of jazz is on there itunes, thats the greatest classroom availible. On the critic note, only the weak minded fall into the trap of believing that kind of bullshit. If you can't make up your own mind about what you like and don't like and just fall into the masses of top 40, billbord say's it's number one so I must like it, belive the critics viewpiont without seing the show for yourself, your an idiot. And of course, everybody has different opinions and likes so, figure it out for yourself. On the disco abba front, it's either dancable or not, but's it's mostly all shit so smoke one and get some earplugs and have a good time with your friends.

grts.

B

[LAZZ]

Let's provide a little overlooked context here, if you will indulge me.

This is about the UK scene over the last half-century - but my ears' memory suggests the core of it may also likely be true for the rest of Europe.

There never used to be academies or training facilities where one could study jazz per se. The learning environment was provided and supported largely by informal structures like the big bands thast survived through the post-war years and on into the tip of the '60s. These guys generally had come out of the forces where they did get some opportunities to learn and play parades and develop their chops and do dances and stuff and occasionally benefit from interaction with player-conscripts from across the pond. Several of 'em - more famously I guess folk like Ronnie Scott and Johnny Dankworth etcetera - had gigs on cruise ships during the '50s that enabled them to visit NY regularly and buy records, catch gigs, and pick up what they could from whoever they were lucky enough to make contact with. But by and large they had to stumble around and figure it all out for themselves. And there were a few clever bastards who made incredible strides somehow and were willing to share what they'd learned with their colleagues. Dankworth and chums even had a little club scene in Soho there for a while.

During the '60s all these characters were busy in studios and pits - while on the sidelines there grew-up a kind of alternative "free" experimental scene that provided a hot-bed of another unique and again kinda stumbling approach to making jazz music. John Stevens had a little club going for this stuff. And there was the People Band and a whole creative nexus centred around a teacher training college in North London called Trent Park - which gave us Mike Figgis and Mel Davis etcetera - and around the near revolutionary Hornsey College of Art (which gave us Terry Day etcetera) - and there was the Starting Gate pub where you could catch the hungry and youthful likes of McLaughlin and Holland and a bunch of other names you'd recognise, and then there was the small but crucial influx of players from South Africa like Dudu Pukwana and Mongezi Feza and Johnny Dyani and Chris McGregor etcetera. And we had Tubby Hayes and Phil Seaman and Shake Keane and Joe Harriott. Ronnie's opened up on Gerrard Street, too, where we had a chance to hear US players despite the tough Musicians' Union restrictions.

There is a lot more detail to all this jumble, I know - but largely there were no formal places to learn and study. Except maybe the diploma course in Leeds - where the pianos were kept locked up away from the jazzers - and a little later the courses offered at the Mabel Fletcher school in Liverpool. That's all I'm aware of anyway. But what I'm trying to describe is a circumstance in which there was little genre-education on offer, and in which a legacy began of the still whinnying experimental "squeaky-bonk" tradition of beatnik pretenders doing their best to be hip, while stalwarts like Michael Garrick and John Taylor de-coded in their own way all the modern theory and harmony that is now offered as the basic essential bread and butter of all the colleges and courses you guys have been able to attend.

So.
The last quarter of the last century did eventually see some courses open up at Guildhall and the Royal College and elsewhere, as well as those other initiatives offered as often as they could manage by Garrick and Dankworth etc - but that historically happened in the context of a pretty general self-conscious sense of inferiority compared to the "real thing" of the US music. But at least they now had the opportunity to learn all that stuff the we take for granted over here so easily.

Nonetheless - and about time too - there were developed finally some mighty fine players of their generation, whose names I will not trouble you with, who fed into the notorious "UK jazz boom" of the '80s (in which I played a not insignificant role) which was somehow a little more competitive and determined to demonstrate their individual worth in a more international arena. For good or ill. There are still legitimate qualifications regarding rhythm sections for instance - well, drummers particularly - and for reasons we won't go into here.

It was during this period that I first met Stuart Nicholson. And I found him knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and more than willing to promote and "boost" the notion that the UK had important players of its own., This was very important in historical context. He has now taken this ball and run with it in the wider terms of Euro-jazz in general - which is where he sails into dodgy waters with his extended flackery/thesis. But he is well respected and serves a positive function in those areas. Even if you and I disagree with him on many points. Just look at the writing he's done more recently for the Jazz Institute in Chicago for instance, or his books on Ella, Billie, and Duke, and then try and convince me he doean't know his stuff. And at least he owns opinions – unlike, say, Mark Miller, bless him, whose very worthy tome on jazz in Canada is rendered execrable by the absence of any sense of discrimination between the significant and the inconsequential.

Now, this dumb thesis of his, which any of us here can punch holes in easily with a flaccid noodle, which is largely complete bollocks (a colloquial english term for “context-free”), is one he’s been punting since around the end of the last millenium (I mean, look at the date on the NYT article that Mel posted – it’s from four years ago) in various journals on both sides of the atlantic and which he has eventually rendered into another new book called something like “Is Jazz Dead – or has it moved to another address?”. His approach to this area of “debate” (I’m a charitable guy) is intentionally provocative – and it’s a living: I mean, how many other guys do you know who work as hard making a living writing about jazz? And succeed in getting people arguing about it? In the NYT? And now here – with a piece nearly five years past its health warning.

It's an old issue and an old story - but Stuart has performed loyal and valiant service in the trenches and in all honesty is not that easily dismissed as a critic

There - that's my bit done.

As for this disco thing....
When I was a seasoned traveller throughout the jazz capitals of Europe I was impressed by the fact that you could be in Istanbul or Rome and yet the dance music played was pretty much the same everywhere - no ABBA or Culture Club but plenty of Mori Kante and Ofra Haza and the like - which I thought was pretty hip.

[mike rud]

What a tempest this thread has become!

After reading through the post's I though I would actaully say something about what the thread was actaully about.

Umm... sorry. I have a talent for tangents.

On the critic note, only the weak minded fall into the trap of believing that kind of bullshit. If you can't make up your own mind about what you like and don't like and just fall into the masses of top 40, billbord say's it's number one so I must like it, belive the critics viewpiont without seing the show for yourself, your an idiot.

Strong words alright. There is much truth in that, BDavies. But if I have 10 things I could go hear, and only enough cash or time to hear one thing, and I've never heard of any of the acts before, couldn't a critic be of some assistance to me there? I could pick at random, of course, but how is that better than seeing what a critic says? Couldn't someone with a strong mind read a critic, and still retain the ability to think it through for himself?

As for Django Bates, I don't know enough about him to comment meaningfully. About 10 years ago I heard a recording of his arrangement of 'New York, New York'. While I acknowledge and defend the rights of others to enjoy it, that sort of thing just holds very little value for me. Part of knowing who you are is knowing what you do and don't like.

There is so much in current jazz that I don't like, that I just don't often bother trying to find out about more modern stylists. Perhaps I suffer from the disorder that Yodi2 mentioned about schools etc. But I refuse to jive myself about what I like. I'm not closed-minded. It's worse than that; I'm incurious. But it's a free counrtry.

Now Yodi, you distinguished, like many before you have, between "school" and "the real world". Having studied and taught at a number of post-secondary music schools, I have to say, this distinction makes me feel awful. Personally, I too had a wonderful time in music school. I hate the idea that these schools are crushing people's creativity, or being perceived to do so. I hate the idea that students are being set up to fail by the post-secondary jazz establishment. I also don't really think that these things are the case.

I know my experiences with these schools have been overwhelmingly positive and even useful. But when I went to school, it was specifically to learn to play straight-ahead, so the schools I attended were well-suited for me.

Maybe this should be another thread, but how would you structure a college music program?

Here. I'll go start it as a new thread. Last one there's a rotten egg...

[LAZZ]

As for Django Bates, I don't know enough about him to comment meaningfully. About 10 years ago I heard a recording of his arrangement of 'New York, New York'.
Interesting. I understand completely. This was supposed to be a clever-clever post-modernist deconstruction. Allegedly. I hated it too. This is I think his fatal weakness - the notion that it's possible to build a music career out of taking the piss. Oh well, at least he puts his money where his mouth is I guess. Still and all, he does have the potential to approach genius. I just wish he wouldn't bugger about quite so much and simply just get it on.
(And oh, I do have some private recordings that might make you sit up and take notice, Mike)

[reddiva]

Couldn't someone with a strong mind read a critic, and still retain the ability to think it through for himself?


Some old greek guy once said "The mark of an educated mind is the ability to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Stupid old greek guys, I tell ya. ;)

[Clamato]

It's great to see so many responses to this discussion. I just played a gig with Buster Williams,Lenny White, and Stefon Harris. Before the gig, I mentioned this article to them and how I had written a rebuttal on this board and the All About jazz Board and how people were responding. Of course ,as African Americans,and at least in Buster and Lenny's case musicians who were involved in stylistic revolution,they had an interesting take on it. I'm not going to go too much into it because some of that has probably been discussed at length somewhere else. I'm thinking about doing some research and maybe writing a book about this subject. I would interview musicians from both sides of the pond. Maybe even get the Canadian perspective.
Do you think there is more funding for jazz in Canada than the U.S. ? I just played at the Cellar with Terry Deane and I must say we did not have a stellar turnout. I was a little surprised. I would love to live in Vancouver but I'm sort of used to playing jazz gigs and it seems like that would be very limited in Vancouver. I talked to Tilden about it and he said he does a wide variety of styles to make a living. Food for thought?

I'm sure Nicholson is a nice guy( well who knows, maybe he is a dick. I have no idea.That's not really the issue.I heard he kicked a duck billed platypus), but I don't think he has really thought this through. There are just too many great, forward thinking musicians from the U.S. for his argument to work.He should have researched it a bit more. I won't make that mistake. And people, don't steal my book idea either. :(
I think Django Bates should have been mentioned in the article. I'd take him over E.S.T. any day. At least what I've heard.

Stefon Harris said he thought creativity was overrated.I know that seems weird, but I think that is interesting. He explained himself futher, but I want to save it for the book.
My feeling is that creativity is very important, but it is just one element of art. I think everyone should get in touch with their creativity. It doesn't mean everyone will be a great artist. Leave that to the skilled professionals. What did Einstein say? 10 percent inspiration and 90 percent perspiration. (I hope he had deodorant. P U.) Did he also say' It don't mean a thing if it aint got that certain je ne sais quoi......'hmmm

This gets into a whole other discussion, which I think is relevant to the Europe issue, is the idea of " I'm going to do my own thing" as opposed to
" I;'m going to learn about music , then I'm going to do my own thing , and that makes it more valid." I think a lot of musicians are trying to side step the hard work it takes to , i don't know, play over changes, play in time, and learn tunes. I think many Europeans suffer from this thinking, but many U.S. musicians do as well. Especially students. It's great to see people into the new shit. But you can;t run if you can;t walk. I think some of the Europeans dis the tradition because they are too lazy to deal with it.
And I think this is why they are missing something. Sure, many many musicians in NY get that " unhealthy obsession with the tradition." But I'm starting to realize that if you know what's been done, you can make something new. People see Lenny White as a fusion drummer, but he knows plenty about Max Roach, Jo JOnes, Elvin, Tony, and Roy Haynes. Not to mention a lot about Classical music , and hip hop., and R and B, and movie scores.

Like I had this idea --A NECKTIE WITH PIANO KEYS ON IT . I spent months designing it. And then come to find out Mugatu from the movie ZOOLANDER had already invented it. DRAT DARN FUCK. This is why you need to know the history.

;)

[Clamato]

I like the Soul Live Quote, A musician is the sum of their record collection. So I guess these records would be a part of my musical development:
The Hobbit
Star Wars
The Muppet Movie( 8 track cassette)
Jesus Christ Superstar (8track cassette)
My Fair Lady
Free To Be You And Me
Bill Cosby-I Started Out as A CHild
Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner-2000 year old Man
Monty Python's Matching Tie and Handkercheif
Flinstones
Madonna Like a Virgin
Michael Jackson Thiller
Weird Al Yancovick,I forget the Album Title
Damn Yankees
Muppet Christmas
Sing Along With Mitch-Mitch Miller( we had a shitload of those)
Bill Cosby 200 MPH
FLip Wilson, I forget the title
1776(it was a musical about the Sigining of the Declaration of Independance)

Oh, And I guess some jazz shit
:) ;) :D ;)

[John Doheny]

Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks:2000 Year Old Man (great minds think alike, Clam)
Workin With The Miles Davis Quintet
Dylan Thomas: A Childs Christmas in Wales
Frank Sinatra: Come Fly With Me
Mahalia Jackson: The Apollo Years
Bozo The Clown:Bozo Under The Sea
Lenny Bruce: The Carnegie Hall Concert
Lenny Bruce: Interviews Of Our Time
Clancy Brothers: Live At Carnegie Hall
Gustav Mahler:4th and 5th Symphonies
Strauss: Also Spracht Zarathustra, Fritz Reiner Conducting the Chicago Philharmonic (I remember this one as being a very thick, heavy piece of vinyl)


These are recordings I remember my parents playing when I was a child.




I get the impression you're kind of hinting around about people who hold views like "learning all that technique just kills your creative spirit." I forget who said it but, "any gift that can't stand a little training is a pretty frail reed." I've never quite got why ignorance and lack of knowledge is supposed to be a good thing.


BTW Clam, I was at the Terry Dean gig. I was the guy in the leather jacket at the bar, pestering Terry about mouthpiece facings. His understanding of this esoterica always amazes me. I don't care about tip openings and facing integrity, I just want the damn thing to play, but I'm starting to dig that knowlege is power in that area too.

[mike rud]

Do you think there is more funding for jazz in Canada than the U.S. ? I just played at the Cellar with Terry Deane and I must say we did not have a stellar turnout. I was a little surprised. I would love to live in Vancouver but I'm sort of used to playing jazz gigs and it seems like that would be very limited in Vancouver. I talked to Tilden about it and he said he does a wide variety of styles to make a living. Food for thought?

Well that depends on what you mean by 'funding'. I don't exactly know the figures, but my impression has always been that per capita, the various levels of government in Canada fund their arts in a way that outstrips the US, but is less than what you might find in some European countries.

But funding can also be framed in terms of demand and market. The US, no doubt because of its population density, strikes me as having dozens of thriving local scenes that are on par with any of the larger cities in Canada, of which Canada only has a handfull. And of course nothing compares to New York, Barry Harris' comments a decade ago about how bad the scene was notwithstanding. I'm going to pretend I'm from the Fraser Institute for a second and say that maybe there's more money floating around these US markets, because their govenrment takes less of it away from them. Make me a liar John D, I know you can ;)

I had an incredibly good time in Vancouver, Clamato. The die-hard music fans there were very warm and supportive, and the musicians treated me like family from the day I arrived to the day I left. I got to play a lot of wonderful shows at the Cellar, and some really good stuff at O'Douls as well.
Also, I played in plenty of situations where I was learning from other musicians and being inspired by them. I don't think I'd have done any better by living in Seattle, or Portland.

What I remember from my brief stay in NYC was that if you could carve out a livable situation for yourself, you could session regularly with a constantly changing roster of (often incredible) musicians. That's a growth inducer, for sure. On a musical level, I can see why so many hardcore musicians want to go and live there for as long as possible.

But I can also see why the great players in Vancouver want to stay there. There's a lot of opportunities to play great music, and you don't have to live like a rat!

Sure, Tilden Webb plays quite a few different styles to pay the mortgage. But man, he's got a mortgage. To own one's own home, and still get to play no small amount of great stuff, live in a large but comfortable city --I can totally see why Tilden does that. I think just about every jazz musician I've ever known has either a teaching gig, a regular day gig, or plays other styles.

Hell I moved to Ottawa ! This is a small city (about a million). The music was better in Vancouver, it will surpirse no one to find out. But there are other benefits to having come here.

[John Doheny]

Make me a liar John D, I know you can

I'll xerox my pay stub from Tulane and mail it to you. Not only does the tax bite look about the same as Canada (give or take a dollar or two) but there's a monthly deduction of $328 for 'health insurance' (which still has a $25 co-pay for doctor visits, and I'm on the hook for the first five grand of hospital stays in any given year). I kind of get the impression that this situation would be better is I made $200,000 plus a year though. Especially if most of it was from investments and capital gains.

[BDavies]

Hoi.

Thanks for pointing out the good side of the dark Mike. Your very right. You can get a just feel for a night, or week of music by reading the paper and taking out of it want you want. I've gone to shows and loved it, then read a colum on the same show by someone that hated it, but in that colum there will be one little thing about the goodness of it all that shines through to my soul.

If I can remember properly, the first two albums I ever bought for myself were, Miles Davis, Kind of Blue and Black Sabbath Paraniod. I was 12. The next two were a Dizzy album and the empire brass greatest hit's(this guy dosen't like trumpets or anything trumpet related....:) But what about those Rafi albums from childhood?

as for the styles thing, yah. I don't make any money playing jazz even though I love to play. All the money I've made as a player usaully comes from funk bands, latin bands, playing with DJ's, ect. Not from the $50 jazz standard gig. I was in a modern jazz orchestra (11pc) in Amsterdam and we played all over the place and had real wicked rep. But still, sometimes we'd walk away from a gig with 10 euro's each and a couple beers in our bellies.

oh well, back to the wood shed.

Bryan

[Clamato]

I just got Nicholson's book entitled "Is Jazz Dead? Or has it moved to a new address)". I'm on chapter 3. I must say, he has done a lot of research, more more so than in the 2001 times article. He makes a lot of relevant ad important points. He writes in depth about the Marsalis phenomenon, and also talks about the current touring scene in the U.S. Chapter 3 is about the NUcrooners like Norah Jones and Jamie Cullum. in a way I feel like I owe himan apology. I'll wait on that until I finish the book.
I still think that overemphasizing the music that is promoted by the big labels is not fair to the U.S. musicians who are trying to do forward thinking stuff but just not getting heard. Also, he makes an interesting case against jazz education and how it's focus on mainstream techniques can stifle true creativity. However, I think that this is the typical view of non musicians regarding jazz anyway. In terms of learning the tradition, I don't think journalists and non musicians realize how much skill goes into learning how to play on a basic level. And I don't think everyone is going to innovate. Classical conservatories have been viewed as trade schools for many years. I think jazz schools should be the same, because I don't think that creativity can be taught as well as basic skills. Some people are going to play like Trane or like Sonny, and that's as far as they want to go and that's cool. I think you have to have the basic skills so that if you are inclined towards creativity, then you have more depth and validity to your artistic creation.
I think the most relevant artists today have both the basics and the creativity. Like Kurt Rosenwinkle, or Mark Turner, or Ralph Alessi, or Steve Coleman. Some people will never innovate, and that's fine! Some people have a really intuitive sense for creating music. They may be limited in terms of the situations they will be appropriate for, but they will hopefully find their niche.
I'll be trying to finish this book in the next day or so. I think's it's worth reading whether you agree or not.

[diachun]

I just played a gig with Buster Williams,Lenny White, and Stefon Harris. Before the gig, I mentioned this article to them and how I had written a rebuttal on this board and the All About jazz Board and how people were responding. Of course ,as African Americans,and at least in Buster and Lenny's case musicians who were involved in stylistic revolution,they had an interesting take on it.
Lenny White is the God of Groove.

I'd be very interested to hear what these guys had to say. How about an excerpt and I'll buy the book, too.

(BTW I posted that article over four years ago. By August, '01 I gave up and assumed everyone agreed with Nicholson. ;))

[Guy]

David Yaffe, in The Nation, reviews Nicholson's "Is Jazz Dead?", as well as several other books on jazz, here: http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20051205&s=yaffe

Here's a taste of his take on Nicholson: "He has a nose for news, but where is that device Hemingway recommended to younger writers: the bullshit detector? Nicholson swoons over Norwegian pianist Tord Gustavsen, describing him as "an exceptionally lucid soloist" with "a sure sense of melodic structure and lyrical imagination." That may be, but Gustavsen's performance at New York's Merkin Concert Hall last spring was an exceptional snooze, an elegant but desiccated retread of territory covered better by Bill Evans and Keith Jarrett. Nicholson has nevertheless found his Great Nordic Hope."