Further to yesterday's discussion in the "America's Been Tough on Jazz"
thread, here is a rather long and interesting review of two new books,
Stuart Nicholson's "Is Jazz Dead?" and Michael Dregni's "Django: The
Life and Music of a Gypsy Legend."

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mh...051205&s=yaffe

"Is Jazz Dead?"

It's not dead, it just smells funny.

Actually, Jazz is Dead . . . was a fairly strange fusion group that
featuring Jimmy Herring that played Grateful Dead tunes in a jazz
format.

However, now Jazz is Dead is dead.

Been thinking about this a lot..

And I think that the music is turning back twoards the Blues but with
jazzy elements - like melodic feel and rhytmic timing but more Blues
based. Rock is also turning back to blues progressions and has been for
some time - except now it's becoming more obvious.

"Jazz" - whatever that is - died when the people who loved the music
could no longer economiclly support it - ie colored folk. So, the mega
corps took over and repackaged it for the "tastes" of thier caucasion
patrons who could. Like Wes Mongomery and his later recording -- uck!

Monk's Oatmeal wrote:
> Further to yesterday's discussion in the "America's Been Tough on Jazz"
> thread, here is a rather long and interesting review of two new books,
> Stuart Nicholson's "Is Jazz Dead?" and Michael Dregni's "Django: The
> Life and Music of a Gypsy Legend."
>
> http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mh...051205&s=yaffe
>

Jazz isn't dead. I've got a closet full of it.
As long as wonderful books like Dregni's are
being published, jazz is as "alive" as ever.

Thanks for the heads up on the NATION review. Some very good points
were raised.

Bill


Monk's Oatmeal wrote:
> Further to yesterday's discussion in the "America's Been Tough on Jazz"
> thread, here is a rather long and interesting review of two new books,
> Stuart Nicholson's "Is Jazz Dead?" and Michael Dregni's "Django: The
> Life and Music of a Gypsy Legend."
>
> http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mh...051205&s=yaffe

Interesting discussion

I'd like to add a view from Europe to this.

I don't think it is true that "European's appreciated jazz more" In
particular I don't think the dance side of jazz ever took hold here the way
it did in the US. There was a period when a lot of black americans found it
more comfortable to live an play in Europe - but I don't think that was
anything to do with the music.

I also think that European's have tended historically to take the
avant-garde more seriously than Americans (you will have your own views on
whether that is because of its links to the European classical tradition or
just pretension.)

But there has always been and continues to be a strand of European jazz that
diverges from American jazz and I think there are two big reasons for this.

First, the music and musicians have had different influences. There have
been massive injections of black south-african and Carribean musicians, and
there have been strong influences from the national popular and folk
traditions. And these have influenced European Jazz in ways that are
different to the external influences on American Jazz.

Secondly, because of the small size of the national markets, jazz has
remained predominantly an "indie label" music. Despite the occasional Jamie
Cullum, most UK jazz musicians number sales in hundreds not thousands and
most make a living teaching or playing other forms of music. I think this
has led to European musicians seeing creativity as being really important.
There is very little commercial pressure to play more populist music in
order to make money. (although many musicians wish there was!). The good
news, is that the audience for this music tends to be young and enthusiastic
(but small!)

So if you listen to Instabile from Italy, or F-IRE collective from London,
or Bugge Wesseltoft from Norway, you will hear music that - like it or
loathe it - is certainly jazz, definitely original and creative, but clearly
different from most American Jazz.

P

jazz is a process that musicians with the necessary skills will always
enjoy and use to make up for the lack of fulfillment that comes from
playing down to the people in order to make a living. weather or
notjazz is amusing enough to the masses means nothing. the cats still
got to play . the end

"'Jazz' - whatever that is - died when the people who loved the music
could no longer economiclly support it - ie colored folk. So, the mega
corps took over and repackaged it for the 'tastes' of thier caucasion
patrons who could.[...]"

According to you, about when did all this happen?

Joseph Scott

Regarding the question in the article about how did Django assume an
"exalted space" in the canon: Well, same as other people. It just so
happens that only one of the musicians who had a huge impact on jazz
before about 1950 wasn't from the U.S.

Joseph Scott