Can jazz be saved?

[isaacs]

See article from Wall Street Journal

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574320303103850572.html

Thoughts?

[don jordan]

Couldn't agree more, except that 'jazz' covers a multitude of musics - just like 'classical'. I don't know what age groups are attracted to, say, Andre Rieux, who is undoubtedly a great populariser of 'light classical' music and whose presentation and publicity are amazing, and it would be interesting to know how attractive he is to younger people.

Age groups are not the only statistics of interest, either, as I imagine his music is going to appeal most to people of European origin for whom it is a familiar 'background' to their lives. There has to be a cultural and historical attachment to, and therefore an understanding of, the musical/emotional language of a music for it to be 'popular'.

So how does this affect Australian jazz musicians? There is still an (ageing) audience for traditional jazz, and apparently there are some younger people who want to learn its language and enjoy its particular appeal. I guess you could say the same about 'swing'. Once we get to bebop and beyond, things start to fragment, as this seems to be the point where some jazz musicians started to make a claim on 'high culture' for their music. The 'pop music' basis for jazz, where people knew the tunes from musical shows and the radio and could fairly easily relate to their jazz interpretations, no longer applies. The music becomes more 'pure music' for its own sake, which means that people have to learn its language(s), rather than having learnt it by osmosis from the pop scene, and lots of people find that difficult, or just don't want to do it.

I think that the heart of the matter is that we've lost the deep connection between music and culture that all musics arose in. In traditional (pre-industrial) societies, music underpinned most of that society's activities, from the ritual and ceremonial, the association with the drama, the accompaniment to work, to the celebration of community events. When you think about it, there is no separation of music from the life of the society - it's an integral part of just about every aspect of life. It becomes pointless to try and separate it out. The musician is understood to be of vital importance and just as worthy of support as any other other person - farmer, artisan, merchant, priest, teacher, administrator, and so on. In such a communal society, each person is entitled to a fair share of the food, clothing, housing etc., just by playing their part

Can our society - fragmented, restless, ever-changing, continually mixing people of vastly different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, uncertain of its future, having hugely differing individual beliefs about the meaning of life and of our purpose as living beings - possibly achieve a situation where any one type of music can have universal appeal? I can't see how it can.

I think we have to accept a heavy responsibility if we wish to make music that plays a significant part in people's lives - in enriching their spirits, in communicating aspects of the beauty of living that cannot be transmitted in any other way, in supporting communal expressions of unity and grief, of underpinning reverence for life and the astounding universe in which we live, and so on. How do we do this? There's the rub! Before I can continue this thread, I need to think a bit more about the issues I've raised. I'd love to hear what others think, too, before committing more words.

[isaacs]

Keep going, fantastic post

[don jordan]

Thanks, Mark. Pity no-one else read it!! I only just got back to it, and to your encouragement, and I will continue soon if I can think of any more useful things to say.

[alimcg]

I read it Don!

[trumpetguy]

me too!