Wattree's picture

    An Online Jazz Seminar

    BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

    An Online Jazz Seminar
    .
    .
    Ramona,
    .
    You're listening to America's classical music. It's America's contribution to humanity, and one of the greatest art forms ever created by man. It's the ultimate in spontaneous creativity, as precise and intricate as mathematics, yet, provides a master musician with the freedom to explore the very depths of his or her emotional being - the depths of your emotional being. For that reason, since its creation and development, it's technical conventions have influenced the creation of music all over the world. Thus, even people who claim not to like jazz, owes jazz a debt of gratitude, because the chance are great than not, the very musical conventions that touch their hearts most about the music of their choice, was developed and perfected by the geniuses of jazz within the smoke-filled caverns long obscured nightclubs.
    .
    Ramona, You write with such eloquence, imagination, and insight, I'm surprised that you didn't know that, since Jazz is much like writing. In fact, I became a writer through the influence of jazz.  The only difference between a great writer and a great jazz musician is jazz musicians write their essays in emotion rather than words. Look at how much better I can paint a portrait of my mother's ravishingly beautiful friend, Teresa, in music than I could ever have done in words:

    .
    TIME PASSES BUT BEAUTY NEVER FADES
    .
    I’d Like to Dedicate This to Teresa.
    She was a Friend of My Mother’s,
    And a Ravishing Latin Beauty -
    The Most Beautiful Woman I’d Ever Seem.
    She’d Be In her 80's Now,
    And Young People Probably Pass her on The Street And
    Think, "Little Old Lady," Without Ever Knowing . . .
    But I Remember,
    And "Cha Cha" Is Still A Ravishing Beauty 
    In My Mind’s Eye,
    And She'll Continue to Dance
    As Long As I'm Alive.
    So Dance On, Sweet Princess.
    Dance On . . .
    .
              .
    
     Now here's the very same tune, but expressing a different emotion. This time it's expressing a sort of "in your face, I got this" kind of  competent defiance. Jazz musicians love this mode, because it thumbs it's nose at society. It's sort of our way of telling society to "Take your Black inferiority theories and shove 'em" - and without saying a word.   
    .
    .
    A big difference between jazz musicians and the vast majority of pop "artists" is that jazz musicians are renowned for being some of the greatest musicians in the world.  They take great pride in that fact, so musical virtuosity plays a huge role in jazz. The musicians of the Bebop and Hard Bop eras understood from the outset that they weren’t going to get rich playing the music that they loved, so they sought to validate themselves through excellence.
    .
    On the other hand, many of today’s young pop oriented musicians are in a hurry to learn their chromatic scale so they can run out and achieve wealth and fame - they figure they can learn to play in Gb Maj while they're on the road. Then they get out and play distorted chord progressions, add a thunderous beat and loud electronic distortion to camouflage their limitations, and label it as "The New Thang." Thereafter, they slap one another on the back as brilliant, and dismiss those of us who recognize it as noise it is, as being "out of touch."
    .
    So the bottom line is, many of the so-called musical "revolutionaries" of pop never took the time to learn what either music, and particularly jazz, is really about. Jazz is more than just another form of music, and it's not just fun-n-games. Jazz is also a way of life. There’s a political component to it - a way of thinking that reflects a unique way of viewing reality. So jazz purists are not simply upset over a modified beat and the introduction of electronics, they're also upset over the caving in to mediocrity and the abandonment of the political principles and qualities that jazz represents.
    .
    After all, one of the greatest contributions that jazz has made to the black community is informing the world that we're not the frivolous and thoughtless people in which we'd previously been portrayed. The harmonic complexity of bebop served to bring the dazzling intellectual capacity of black people to the world stage. So naturally, jazz purist are both reluctant and hostile to going back to the people-pleasin' days of what is essentially a musical form of Steppin'-Fetchism.
    .
    Jazz has traditionally been the cultural anthem of social revolutionaries - both Black and White - who are willing to fight the good fight. Thus, jazz purists resent the mongrelization and surrender of those principles in lieu of "Can we all just get along?" To them, that represents the selling of our principles. That's why the word "commercialism" is looked upon with such disdain by those of us who have come to be known as jazz purists. We're not merely fighting to defend our right to be snobs. We're fighting to defend excellence from sliding down the slippery slope of corporate profit and mediocrity; we're fighting for a way of life, and we're fighting a political battle against the dumbing down of America as a whole. Our fight is an essential part of our jazz tradition. It's expected of us, because that's what jazz is all about - pushing the envelop, and never caving in to convention.
    .
    So you can’t just put a funky beat behind noise and call it jazz, because once you go frivolous, the spirit of jazz has been abandoned. While jazz does kick up it's heels on occasion, it's a very serious form of music that’s designed to appeal to the mind, not just the ass. For that reason, a logical and organized structure is essential to its character. Without that, and it’s arrogantly distinctive swagger, it's not jazz - Period.
    .
    True jazz is a dead-serious form of music, performed by a dead-serious group of musicians.  Any one of them, on any instrument, is capable of giving a master's seminar at any university or music conservatory in the world. So it's not at all surprising that many of us who are products of the jazz culture, and who understand the true meaning of jazz, become outraged at the spectacle of frivolous, rump-shaking imposters impersonating these great artists and our tradition.
    .
    MILES
    .

    We knew him as Miles, the Black Prince of style,
    his nature fit jazz to a tee. Laid back and cool,
    a low threshold for fools, he set the tone
    of what a jazzman should be.
    *
    Short on words, and unperturbed, about
    what the people thought;
    frozen in time, drenched in the sublime,
    of the passion his sweet horn had wrought.
    *
    Solemn to the bone, distant and torn,
    even Trane could scarcely get in;
    I can still hear the tone of that genius who mourned,
    that precious note that he couldn't
    quite bend.
    .
    Miles Davis and John Coltrane
    .
    Sometimes people ask me what do I consider myself first, a writer, or a musician. I tell them that it's all an extension of the same thing - my need to express what's going on inside of me. When I have an issue that I can express intellectually and support with facts, I write an essay. When I can't support the issue with factual evidence, I use poetry to express my feelings. But when I want to express an emotion that I can't put into words, like the pain of betrayal, or how my mother's friend, Teresa, made me feel as a child when I looked upon her beauty and absolute perfection, I rely on music to express that emotion, and the only music that gives me all of the tools and necessary emotional hues to express the range of my emotions is jazz, because it mimics emotion.
    .
    Jazz is especially designed to do that. It allows Black people to express their pain, anger, love, or sorrow to one another in a language that is nonverbal. It's the closest thing to communicating with one another through extrasensory perception as you can get - and even in the case jazz singers, they use tone, emotion, and lyrical nuance to communicate a nonverbal message.  If they can't do that, it doesn't matter how beautiful their voice, they will not be successful in jazz, because jazz is about feeling.          
    .
    Jazz is America's greatest contribution to the arts, but unfortunately, everyone seems to recognize that fact but America.
    .
    .

    .
    Do Yourself, and America, a Favor . . .
     Embrace The Beauty That You Created.
    JAZZ
    *
    Related Content
    .
    The Building of a Jazz Man
    http://wattree.blogspot.com/2009/04/play-me-essay-son.html
    .
    ONE FOR JIMMY
    http://wattree.blogspot.com/2014/01/one-for-jimmy.html 
    .
    The Hustlers
    http://wattree.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-hustlers.html
    *
     
    Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
     

    Comments

    You're wrong. They are not the same song. You're so ignorant of any jazz past Be Bop that you don't even have a clue you're making an ass out of your self. What I find most hilarious is that in your unbelievably stupid dissing of jazz fusion you're offering a jazz fusion standard written by one of the best known jazz fusion musicians as an example of "good" jazz.

    Al Jarreau wrote lyrics for Spain. so we can use them to deferential the two sections. The intro is based on a theme from Concierto de Aranjuez.

    Yesterday, just a photograph of yesterday
    And all it's edges folded and the corners, sepia brown
    And yet it's all I have of our past love
    A postscript to it's ending

    Brighter days, I can see such brighter days
    When every song we sang is sung again
    And now we know it's for good
    This time for good
    And we'll love us once again
    And you're near me


    The moment it kicks into the fast samba beat all the rest of the song is written by Corea. The vast majority of Spain was not written by Rodrigo. Chick Corea composition begins when Jarreau sings


    I can remember the rain in December
    The leaves are brown on the ground

     

     


    Kat,

    With regard to your assessment of the relationship between the tune that you call "Spain" and Chick Corea, if you know anything AT ALL, about music, I’m sure you should recognize that both the theme, and the chord progressions - the chords that musicians improvise to - of the entire tune, is "Concierto de Aranjuez," written by Joaquín Rodrigo in 1939. Your argument would justify my writing a hook for Beethoven’s Fifth and renaming it "Wattree’s Groove." Just listen, to the tune, man! I play it on my horn ALL THE TIME - and will probably play it today.  Just adding lyrics to a tune doesn't change who wrote it!  Damn! We LITERALLY need to go to war to save our educational system.


                                        MILES DAVIS 1959


    Hilarious. And you actually claim to be a musician. I have my doubts. There are hundreds of songs with the same chord changes. If you actually played music you'd know that. Sometimes musicians deliberately use chord changes from a song to write a different melody over them. Most often chord changes are the same because certain chords lead to other chords, for example I7 leads to IV. Therefore certain chord changes have  become somewhat standardized and are used over and over again.

    I don't expect that you've noticed this but often in an improvisation the soloist will toss in several bars of the melody from a different song. The reason that melody line "fits" is because the two songs have the same chord changes.

    I actually have no doubt that if I did an analysis of the chord changes of Beethoven's fifth that I could find numerous songs that use those same chord changes. Beethoven was not Stravinski and chord changes in that era weren't that complex.  Just as the chord changes in the Dixieland era were generally not very complex. Since western harmonies were classical music's contribution to jazz, mostly from christian hymns, its likely to find some Dixieland songs with the same chord changes as Beethoven's fifth. Of course the melodies would be very different. So contrary to your view they would be different songs.

    You've posted some incredible nonsense in the past. But I'm surprised that even you would post something as silly as claiming that songs that have the same chord changed are the same song even though the melodies are different.


    Makes me think of Les McCann on "Trying to make it real compared to what", where he dips into a jazzy Aquarius for a minute before launching into his own piece. Of course as you note, very standard practice


    Ocean-Kat, you're talking about the ii,V,I progression. But we're not discussing that here. Again, go back to the article and listen to the two tunes. THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME TUNE!!! The only difference is, in the tune that we call "SPAIN," Chick added a HOOK!


    Chick Corea on the "writing" of "Spain":  "At the time I was in love with Miles's "Sketches of Spain," with Gil Evans. I still am. On that record Gil has this fantastic arrangement-it's the second movement of Joaquin Rodrigo's "Concierto de Aranjuez." I fooled around with that theme, extended it and composed some melodies, which turned out to be the main themes of "Spain." I always play Rodrigo's second movement as a keyboard intro."  That's a musician's version of politispeak to say, "I added a hook."  And beyond that, doesn't it tell you ANYTHING that "Spain" is the tune that he's most famous for?  The tune has endured, because it was enduring before he was born. If he'd tried that with a Beatles tune all hell would have broke loose.


    You have it exactly opposite. Yes Chick added a hook. The hook was playing an arrangement of Rodrigo's theme as an short introduction to the song he wrote. You're pointing at the hook and claiming its the song. There are two very different and distinct melodies as I think I made clear in my post. The theme by Rodrigo used as a brief intro and, as Chick said, "I composed some melodies which turned out to be the main themes of Spain."

    I listened to Gil Evans arrangement of Rodrigo's adagio at least thirty years ago. I have the album in my collection along with 6 or so other Miles albums. Its not new to me. In the last few days I listened all 3 movements of the Concierto de Aranjuez. At no point in either is there even a fraction of the melody written by Chick. Just the theme he uses as a brief introduction. As a way of paying homage to Rodrigo, as a hook.

    Everyone who listens to jazz knows this. You're the only person I've heard that makes this nonsensical claim. If you try to buy sheet music for Spain 80% of the time Chick is listed as the sole composer. 20% of the time they'll note the use of Rodrigo's theme in the intro but Chick is always given top billing. By Chick Corea and Joaquin Rodrigo. Because after all, Rodrigo only wrote the theme used as a brief intro. The vast majority of the song," the main themes of the song Spain," wre written by Chick. This is not just my opinion but that of all the major publishers of sheet music.

    If you can show me anywhere in Rodrigo's Concierto or Evan's arrangement of it that include even 1 measure the themes Chick claims to have composed that he claims to be the main themes of his song Spain you might have a point. But they're simply not there. Because they didn't exist until Chick wrote them. Stop pointing at the intro and listen to the main body and the main themes of the song. They were composed by Chick and that's why he is acknowledged as the composer of Spain by everyone but you.


    Ocean-Kat,

    I'm going to say this, and then I'm going to drop this, because I would have to teach you music to make my point. What you're calling Chick's "melody" is nothing but a syncopated statement of the Concierto's theme. It's an "EMBELLISHMENT," using the very say notes, in nearly the very same order. He's simply changing the way the notes are being accented. You shouldn't even have to be able to read, or play, music to HEAR that. And beyond that, the mere fact that he has written ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE in his ENTIRE musical career that even approaches the prominence of "Spain," is clear evidence that he's not even CAPABLE of writing on that level.

    But I don’t know why I’m even debating you. You’ve already betrayed your level of insight when you suggested that I suffer from a perceptual disability due the trauma of the Black experience. LMBAO!!!

    Man, I’m done with you.


    This is the first page of the song composed by Corea. It is not the same tune as the melody written by Rodrigo and used in the introduction. It is not the same tune in Concierto de Aranjuez. It is not the same tune used in Evan's Sketches of Spain. At no point in the Concierto de Aranjuez or in Evans arrangement will you find even one measure of this melody written by Corea. Its not the same notes in the same order with different rhythm. Its a fucking totally different melody.  Can you possibly be so clueless you can't see the notes right before your eyes? This is Spain composed by Corea. The short introduction is not the song Spain. Its just an introduction to it.

     

     

     

     

     

    chickcorea1a.jpg


    Kat, You've just proven that even his hook is a ripoff.  Look at the notation above the staff and start with the 6th bar: 

    Corea opens the Light as a Feather version of Spain with the adagio from Joaquin Rodrigo's Concierto de Aranjuez. After the intro, the song switches to a fast, steady samba-like rhythm, in which the main theme and an improvisation part are repeated.

    The chord progression used during the improvisation part is based on harmonic progressions in Rodrigo's concerto. It runs as follows:

     Gmaj7 F#7 Em7 A7 Dmaj7 (Gmaj7) C#7 F#7 Bm B7
    

    Here's a link to the score of the Adagio. It should be no problem for you to point out exactly where the first two measures of Chick's notation about is the same, but with slightly different accents on the Adagio score.

    https://www.jellynote.com/en/sheet-music-tabs/joaquin-rodrigo/concierto-...


    Here are a couple items on how Corea wrote Spain and what effect Miles had on him:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/11/how-chick-corea-wrote-spain/248948/

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304655104579163722788382890

    Presumably Dylan wrote "All Along the Watchtower" and Hendrix just did a cover of it. If you listen to the 2 pieces, it's rather tangentially unimportant what Dylan did - Hendrix's "version" is a completely different mindset and musical universe. Granted, the chords are the same. ;-)

     


    I don't know anything about Chick Corea and "Spain", but the discussion thread here is reminding me of this, which I hope all involved can enjoy:


    So true. You wonder why they aren't all getting sued for plagiarism.


    Thanks verified, that was great!!! Lol!

    That's why when I write music I'll generally take the feeling of one note that resonates with me in a tune that I like and write an entire piece based on the role that note played in the tune that I like, or I might take one lick that I hear in a solo and write a tune based on it. But I would never take Michael Jackson’s "Billie Jean" and add a hook to it and try to claim it as "The Kid is Not My Son."


    Funny!  As I said below, Pachelbel's Canon in D is my ring tone.  Of course, he was singing about "Pockabell" so it's entirely different.  laugh


    "the only music that gives me all of the tools and necessary emotional hues to express the range of my emotions is jazz, because it mimics emotion."

    Because you know, man, like nobody ever noticed the connections between music, poetry and the range of human emotions before jazz.

    Alexander's Feast, or, the Power of Musick (Dryden, 1697) [about the poem]

    Händel - Alexander's Feast (ondertiteld) - YouTube [the opera based on the poem]

    And I doubt Dryden was the first to notice either.

    Wattree, some of your audience [me] might be a little more receptive to your 'lessons' if they were presented with a skotch more humility, as in 'this is what I think' instead of 'this is how it is'.

     


    Emma, My interest is in providing knowledge, not babysitting. If you want to ignore what I have to say because you don't like the way I say it, so be it. I'm not interested in catering to your sensibilities. My interest is in contributing to the pool of human knowledge. Those who find value in what I have to say will absorb it. Those who don't, won't. It doesn't matter to me either way.


    As you may be aware, I rarely read you but since you offered a 'seminar' and I like to learn, I made an exception this time. My mistake and now I will be even more disinclined to read anything you post in the future.

     


    I don't have a problem with that, Emma. I don't get paid by the eyeball, and I'm not trying to win fans.  I hope you find what you're looking for.


    Thank you for these beautiful musical selections.


    You're very welcome, Lurker.


    Since this was originally addressed to me, let me just jump in here and try to calm the seas a bit.  Eric, I appreciate your attempt once again to train me in jazz appreciation, but once again it's an epic fail.  I've been forced to listen to jazz publicly and otherwise for more than a half century and if I still don't like the sounds of it chances are almost 100% that I never will.  Jazz history, jazz theory, jazz snobbery ain't gonna do it.

    I gave each of your selections a chance, very good headphones and all, and I'm sorry to have to report that I couldn't sit through even one of them.  I tried.  I saw it as a chance to really, really study what it was that bugs me about jazz but I couldn't listen to any of them long enough to even analyze it.  Turns out I really didn't want to.

    I do have to wonder about it, myself.  Why do I hate it so when there are so many others who can't get enough of it?  (Yes, I know.  "Hate" is a strong word for music, but you'll understand since you yourself admit there is music you hate.)  I haven't a clue why Jazz sets my teeth on edge and sends me running from the room, but after all these years I don't dwell on why.  I just know it does.  It's a visceral thing, only leaning in the opposite direction from what you're feeling.

    I love music, but I love the music I love.  I can't imagine trying to train someone else to love my type of music--trying to explain to them how deficient they are if they can't appreciate the beauty of it.  To keep harping on what they're missing if they don't turn their lives over to it.

    You would hate my music but I don't take it personally.  I grew up listening to semi-classical, show tunes, movie scores, light opera.  During my teen years I leaned toward Al Martino, Patti Page, Rosemary Clooney, Teresa Brewer and Mario Lanza.  I sang soprano and thought for a long time that that would be my career.  I loved to sing and I'm crushed that I can no longer do it.  Now I write, but it's not the same.

    My growing-up music was pure and sweet, and that probably explains why discordant sounds even now tend to hurt my ears.  My tastes have broadened over the years, as they should, and I lean more toward New Age and world music, but there is very little jazz in my playbook.  (George Winston is the closest I come.)

    Pachelbel's Canon in D is my ringtone.  I watched Susan Boyle sing "I had a dream" again last night and blubbered, as anticipated.  I have everything John Denver and Enya have ever produced.  I love Pavarotti's "Nessun Dorma" but I cry every time I hear Aretha's version of it.  Yes, I think Celine Dion has a voice straight from the heavens, but so has Betty Buckley. And Elaine Page.  And Sarah Brightman. And k.d. lang. (If there's anything more amazing, in my estimation, than this, I don't know what it would be.)

    I can get highly emotional over Simon and Garfunkle's "Sounds of Silence" and I once had a total meltdown in a square in Albuquerque listening to Peruvian street musicians play guitar, keyboard and pan pipes.

    You're going to have to give me up as a lost cause, Eric.  It's not going to happen.


    It's not going to happen in this way...but it can happen.

    I know I've gone from really hating a piece of music to suddenly finding something truly beautiful in it.

    My prime example of this is: Tom Jones's What's New Pussycat. Hated, hated, hated that bit of treacle...

    Until one day, I heard the phrase...

    "Pussy cat, pussy cat, I love you. Yes, I do."

    Not the words, but the musical phrase under them, and not the phrases that preceded and followed it. Just that one. Wow. That was a beautiful phrase.

    Same thing happened to me with Dylan. Through most of my younger years, I couldn't stand him, despite everyone telling me to "just listen to the words."

    Then, one day...and I don't know why or how...I started loving his music and listened to it every day.


    Peter, I've done the same thing over the years.  It happened with Dolly Parton and with Elvis, for example, and it happened with the Beatles.  I think it was their evolution as much as my own, but it did happen.  I still don't get Johnny Cash but I like Willie. 

    I've never understood the attraction of Dylan,  (I suspect even he knows he can't sing.) but he pushes buttons hidden to me but observable by millions of others.

    I have never felt anything for jazz.  At all.  Most of it sounds more like practice riffs than actual music, but again, that's my own take.  The music of the world strikes different chords in all of us.  That tantalizing part of music is still a mystery to me and is worth studying, but in the meantime I'll just listen to what I want to listen to.  Unless I'm in a public place where I'm forced to listen to awful, uninvited sounds someone else calls good music. 


    Well, if a still small voice ever urges you to give it another try...

    Try Chet Baker. Singing and trumpet.

    Or Miles Davis's Kind Of Blue.


    Okay I went looking.

    I chose "Long Ago and Far Away" for Chet Baker because my mom and I used to sing it together.  Big mistake.

    I made it to 2:27 on Miles Davis.  (I'm pretty proud of myself.  Just remember I did this for you.)

    Sorry, nothing.

     


    Not a missing gene. It must be that you have SO many other GREAT qualities that you need a few lacunae to balance things out, Ramona.


    Right. That must be it.  devil


    Somehow I think these guys are much more fun - 


    Lots of fun. I LIKE it.


    practice riffs

    In a way, they ARE practice riffs.

    There's a story Herbie Hancock tells about a time when he was playing in one of Miles Davis's quartets.

    They were playing a song they'd played zillions of times, and suddenly Hancock played a wrong note or two. Davis made the wrong note right by playing something else on top of it.

    Later, when he apologized for messing up the song, Davis waved it away and said, "I pay you to practice on stage."

    But it isn't exactly "practicing" in the way we think of it. They aren't trying to perfect a piece of pre-existing music. They're trying to bring something into being based on something that already exists, i.e., the underlying song or chord changes.

    So you're not listening to a performance of a finished song or "piece of music." At it's best, you're listening to the act of creation in real time.

    I'm told that classical musicians used to do this--Beethoven could do it, for example --but that that skill set has been allowed to atrophy in the classical world.

    Don't know...

    Here's another interesting story. Apparently, the great classical pianist Vladimir Horowitz was a huge admirer of the legendary jazz pianist Art Tatum and once opined that if Tatum had gone into classical music, he would've dominated the scene.

    Anyway...

    Tatum and Horowitz met and, somehow, Tatum ended up playing a series of variations on a classical theme (it might have been a popular song, can't remember). Horowitz was so impressed, he asked Tatum how long it had taken him to compose those variations.

    Tatum, somewhat taken aback by the question, said, "I don't know. How long was that? Five minutes?"


    Love those stories.  Especially Tatum/Horowitz.  Thanks.  I feel as if I have a gene missing or something.  I don't know. . .

    My Italian grandfather used to listen to Caruso singing Puccini and cry.  My Finnish grandmother used to listen to "Finlandia" and cry.  I can do both.  I just can't get a feeling for jazz--except extreme annoyance.  A flaw, but not fatal.  I'll get over it.


    I fully understand, Ramona,

    There are a lot of people who can’t get into jazz. I’m the same way about rock and most classical musical, country and Western, and even some music that they try to claim is jazz. Music that people like have a lot to do with your frame o reference, what speaks to your vision of the world. Mozart, for example, is lost on me, because his music speaks of a reality that is totally foreign to me.

    I knew the same was true for you with respect to jazz. If you had any leanings toward jazz, you would have long since been into. So I was really trying to convert you. I simply used our discussion as a spring board to put together something that I should have done long ago for Black youth. I did exactly the same thing with a piece that I subsequently posted to Ocean-Kat. First, I wrote a response to one of his comments, and then came to the conclusion that his comment and my response resonate with young Black people. Most of my writing is dedicated to educating various groups in the Black community, and I’m always looking for a strategy to do so, and you provided one, just as Ocean-Kat did.


    Eric, I probably wouldn't have responded if you hadn't addressed your post to me.  I think it's fine that you want to school black youths in the theory and appreciation of jazz.  Just do me one favor and try not to look down on those who don't or can't feel it the way you do.  There is nothing written in stone that says all black kids have to love jazz.


    Ramona,

    I don't look down on anyone. It may just look that way because of my writing style. I started out by writing legal briefs as a paralegal, and then later became a political columnist, so I'm very forceful in pushing my point of view. I’m not an exploratory writer, so I always develop a point of view before I sit down to write. So as I've said here many times, I see no value in tiptoeing around issues. If your going to advocate a point of view, advocate it forcefully, and bring all of your guns to bear on substantiating your position. That's the point of writing is it? English Comp. 101.


    Both legal briefs and English Comp. 101 require persuading your audience to adopt your view, not pissing them off so as to dismiss you nor making forceful claims they don't think are substantiated.


    I lost one case in 12 years, and attorneys are still coming after me to do legal research and brief-writing - for one-third of their gross fees on the case.  I was an independent contractor. I have the unique distinction of winning a discrimination appeal signoff on by Clarence Thomas. On attorney told me that if he had won that EEOC appeal he'd have if framed in his office right next to his Harvard degree. Another suggested that I might be able to get rich by putting it up for bid online.


    No, Eric, that's not the point of writing.  It's not even the point of writing opinion pieces.  We write opinion pieces for an audience, not for ourselves.  As PP says, our role is as a persuader.  We understand that our audience is going to need persuading and we do it by presenting our thesis in such a way that they'll read it all the way through, even if they disagree. 

    I don't believe in tiptoeing around issues either, and I can get heavy-handed when I'm most passionate about an issue, but I still try very hard to consider my audience.  They're not always going to agree with me and I know that going in, but if I go in wielding a sledgehammer, I can't expect much more than a sledgehammer in return. 

    That's not why I write.  I don't write to instigate, I write to entertain and inform. (Well, sometimes I write to instigate.  Be honest, Mona.) If I'm going to write opinion pieces I have to understand that while I may be including facts, the bulk of my piece is opinion.  I'm slanting it my way.  It's how I feel. I can't and don't expect to sway everyone but I'm also not looking for a fight.

    I think if you study opinion pieces that resonate with you, you'll find that even with the passion, they're pretty fair-minded.  They're not lectures, they're conversations.  They draw the reader in and make them want to stay. 

    If we're going to be writers, we need readers.  The downside is they don't all think like we do.  The upside is if they did all think the same there would be no need for opinion writers.  So you see, they're actually doing us a favor.  smiley


    Ramona,

    I disagree. The kind of writing that I do is designed to provide information as I see it, not to schmooze. I don’t write commercials, and neither am I a publicist or public relations person. The people that I direct my writings toward are serious-minded adults who are interested in facts - period - not being coddled. And since they are serious-minded people who are primarily interested in facts, I fully expect them to go to another source and read someone with an opposing point of view when they’re done reading what I have to say. So when I write, I have one - and ONLY one - objective in mind - to get the facts out as I see them, and as forcefully I can. I leave the socializing and back-slapping to comedy writers.


    Alrighty then.  And how's that working out for you?


    It works fine for me, Ramona.  I've never had any problems with it. I never have any shortage of work, and I routinely have to turn down invitations to appear in the electronic media. 


    But are you having any fun?


    Ramona,

    Writing forces me to think, and I get more pleasure out of thinking that I do anything else in life, with the possible exception of having breathlessly passionate sex. I prefer it over attending any kind of sporting or social event. So I guess you could say I’m having fun - though "fun" is not a term that I generally associate with what brings me pleasure - I can’t think of anything I’d rather do, other than that mentioned above, over writing words, music, or both, and playing my horn - and even playing my horn is an intellectual pursuit - that’s why I don’t like music that’s repetitive or too easy to play.

    Imagine having to listen to "Mary Had a Little Lamb" all day long on every radio station. Are people snobs for saying that’s too simplistic for their taste? I don’t think so. That’s one of the reasons that what are called "jazz purest" rebel, because having to endure the equivalent of "Mary" all day every day drives us up the wall. Maybe we’re wired differently, but we crave more complex harmonies, and generally view a melody as nothing more than a pretty statement of the chord structure that a master musician is going to build upon. So for a jazz person, what pop oriented people consider a "song" is nothing more than a prelude to introduce the actual musicianship that’s to follow. So when a pop musician keeps repeating the prelude, and then ends the song, we’re left thirsty. They leave us asking, "Okay, when does the actual playing start? When do we get to hear whether or not this guy can actually play?"

    So that’s essentially the difference between the two groups.


    It sounds as if you're saying that anyone who isn't jazz-oriented is pop-oriented, and that's a bad thing.  I don't view all non-jazz music as simplistic.  Much of it is stirring, sublime, beautiful, singable, danceable, and yes, fun.  Not all of it is "Pop", whatever that means, but even if it were it would still be all those things.

    We'll have to settle on "to each his own".

    By the way, I made it to 1:07 before I had to mute that last one.  Not bad, huh?


    That's not bad, Ramona - and when I say "pop" it's just short for "popular." I don't try to define it.





    Gorgeous cuts, Eric.


    You put out some of the most ridiculous opinions as facts for serious people. Then serious minded people discount you. You're not even aware its happening. I don't usually read your blogs, its really a waste of time, but I find it  amusing to read the comments they generate. You know, seeing how serious people react to your nonsense.


    He puts up some great cuts, however.


    Kat, you've become irrelevant.


    Gee. An entire thread without guns or Woody Allen-:)

    And still, no one hardly anyone agrees.

    How is America going to agree on the great issues of the day if we can't agree on jazz, the quintessential American art form?

    Maybe we really are doomed...

     

     


    But we'll always have this.

    And this.


    I almost put your first link up myself this morning. Just love it, your second one  as well.

    I tend to agree with you about the jazz that Wattree and others are posting. I can not get through to the end of them -- either too irritating or too draining, very urban and existential. Too instrumental and too centered on technique. But then, as your links show, thee are other kinds of jazz that I do enjoy like blues and swing,

     


    The Nina Simone is great.  I love this, too, though I'm sure a jazz purist would hate the instrumentals.


    Oh c'mon. No jazz lover hates Nina Simone and Ella Fitzgerald.


    Whoever said they did?

     


    though I'm sure a jazz purist would hate the instrumentals.

    This is how I took it. You said "instrumentals," but it's all part of the song, no?

    I'm not a purist...though.

     


    There is an orchestra backing them up.  They're not jazz musicians.  The sound is languid and not at all like that day's jazz.  I like it but I wondered how jazz purists felt about that kind of backing.  That's all.


    Oh, but it IS "like" it.

    That's sort of OK's point about jazz.


    I know!

    We can secretly re-categorize all the music you love as jazz!

    And then list all the reasons why this and that song really is, at bottom, jazz.

    LOL.

    I love solutions like this. They're so...elegant.


    So after all this it turns out I've been wrong about jazz my whole life?  I like it!  I like it!  Except every one of those videos Wattree put up there to convince me.  I don't know what the hell they are but Wattree insists they're prime jazz.  I'll let you all figure it out. I'm off now to listen to some Zamfir and maybe some Tesh or Yanni.  I KNOW that's not jazz.


    That's about it, Ramona.

    You've been loving it all your life.

    (The only time I was in a paddy wagon, they had that bumper sticker on the wall.)

    Oh, and Zamfir, Tesh, and even Yanni--that is some serious jazz, girl.

    I knew you'd clue in after a while.

    You see, jazz is jazz.

    It's like kalki. When I asked the Jewish butcher what that meat was in his window, he said, "That's kalki." When I asked him what kalki was, he said..."

    "Kalki? Kalki's kalki!" And then he walked away as if I was out of my mind for asking such a silly question.


    I'm in a real fix here, PS.  I want a term for Wattree's jazz.  I want to be able to put a name on what I don't like because I really, really, really, don't like that.

    (I broke up with a perfectly nice boy (and a great kisser) in HS because he took me to a jazz session where he played some kind of horn.  It was horrible.  The look in his eyes as they played was pure ecstasy.  Wasn't his fault.  He was in heaven, I was in hell.  It happens.)


    I think its cool if you don't like jazz. I don't know why some people get so defensive about their particular form of jazz that they have to spend so much of their time hating other forms of jazz or other types of music. I don't find that when I hang out with classical musicians.

    What I find surprising is you "love" this Ella Louie version of Summertime. I imagine you could find some jazz purist to hate on it but I think the vast majority of jazz lovers would love this as well and call it jazz. While I think its ok for you to hate jazz I have to inform you that love at least one jazz song. Clearly there's some jazz you don't like but who knows, you might be listening to lots of music like this but just not calling it jazz.

     


    I listened to quite a bit of jazz at one point, but these days it's kinda "okay, but where's the screaming crunching guitar or techno beat or frantic singing or tribal chants..." But then, most Kinks makes me cringe, little of the 80's new wave is listenable anymore, much of industrial feels like they're trying too hard...

    The wild horns on Violent Femmes "Black Girls" or horn section behind Madness or whatever are all jazz influenced, but music's a bit somewhere else these days, except for those who enjoy these styles. I meet a lot of people going to hear Mozart or various opera, and in a way, the jazz clubs these days are somewhat this kind of retro - it's fine, it's beautiful, but it's also niche.

    Still, people like what they like. It took me a year before I could stand Elvis Costello, same with The Cure, and then I was listening to them every day. Other people have different patterns. I couldn't stand AC/DC when they first came out (even though I listened to much harder music), but these days I appreciate their style/attitude and guitar playing and performance and how they influenced the music scene.

    There is no "right music" - some people will appreciate Beethoven or Coltrane or Santa Lucia - or they don't, or it has a minor affect... doesn't make them cultured or uncultured or missing something - it's like enjoying different kinds of food.


    I have a similar pattern, but different points along the way.

    I will say, though, that sounding "jazzy" is different from playing jazz, IMO.


    Listen to the last 2/3 - is it jazz or is it Memorex?


    No idea. You'll have to ask Ramonawink


    You can't make me listen to it.  I won't, I won't, I WON'T!


    Ramona, you're not getting away. You're getting weak. I can feel it.   


    Is he trying to sound like Satchmo?  I can handle his voice but that horn!  (Sorry, I know you play. . .)  It's painful.

    But do you realize that you're now adapting to me?  You've gone through your repertoire and now you're working on pieces you think I might like. 

    You're. . .

    Ready for it?

    Compromising.

    And it's sweet.   smiley


    People have been discussing what is jazz for years. There's been 100 years of jazz now and the differences between different forms is substantial. Dixieland and be bop and swing and fusion, they sound like totally different forms of music yet they're all called jazz.

    For the first 40ish years most jazz was songs from musicals and films. For example Autumn Leaves. Originally from a movie. Eventually everyone played it from Lawrence Welk to Davis and Parker. Which versions are jazz and which are not?

    Or Porgy and Bess. Jazz or classical? Well the jazz players quickly grabbed several tunes from it to add to their repertoire. And it wasn't consider legitimate opera until the 70's

    Some say jazz is improvisation. But lots of well loved jazz singers don't or rarely "scat" improvise.

    I don't have an answer to the question. I just like to hang out with friends and share and listen to music. I usually share jazz. I'm happy to learn and listen to whatever new, for me, music that they're into. It was my first wife that turned me on to jazz fusion and rock and roll. My second wife was an exceptional classical flautist who taught me about classical music.

     


    I've learned to like so many styles of music I don't say there's anything I don't like. Just music I haven't listened enough to appreciate. I'm not drawn to heavy metal, but then I haven't really listened to it much. Could be if I took the time to really explore the genre I'd begin to get into it.

    I remember the first time I went to see the wall. I hadn't listened to much rock at all. My dad was a sax player and we listen to jazz in my house. I didn't get into it at all. I was bored. Some years later I went to a midnight movie and decided I'd seen Rocky Horror way too many times so I went to see The Wall again. Totally blew me away. I was weeping in the movie theater.

    It was the same Wall by Pink Floyd that I'd seen earlier. It hadn't changed but I had in some way. I had grown both emotionally so I could relate to the story, and musically, I had learned an appreciation of Rock and Roll.


    Yeah, time & experience & life change us, and while there are still some foods I hate that I was forced to eat as a kid, my food tastes along with musical tastes traveling the world are quite eclectic - if I don't like it now, I might in 5 years, or the other way around.

    The big thing is I don't judge anyone for liking or disliking something - might be permanent or temporary, something I haven't come around to, or maybe my taste is awful (at the moment).

    Still, I have to say...


    Yes, I realize that.  It's why I included that particular video.  I don't know what to call that pure, discordant jazz that jars my nerves, but I recognize that there are pieces I like that are called "Jazz".  Ella's voice is amazing but when she starts to do scat, I'm outta there.


    I'm going to let you in on something, Ramona, but don't tell anyone. This is my woman, and she sings old hard-ass here to sleep with this. She once told me, "If people could see this they would never believe it."


    I don't know what all that means.  She's "your woman"?  Well, she's lovely, of course, and has a beautiful voice.  You'll be happy to know I lasted until 3:00--until she stopped singing and the "noise" began.  Lol.

    Edited to add:  There wouldn't have been a 57 year marriage if my husband called me "his woman".  Uh uh.


    Whoa! Is that "your horn"?


    No, PS.

    That's the guy I hate to love, Ricky Woodard. He drives me crazy - and I think he's using that horn to flirt with my woman. Lol! But she loves my jealousy, and twists the knife regularly - "Ricky blew the lights out last night" - because she's using it to drag me back into the business.

    After playing sax every since I was tall enough where it didn’t touch the floor, I started writing and went out and got a 9 to 5 in the eighties so I could provide a regular family life for my wife, son, and daughter. But my wife (who I’d been with since she was 14 and I was 16, and married when she was 19 and I was 21) passed suddenly in 2005, and my kids had started their own families. So the only thing I had left was my pen and my horn. Then one day about 3 years ago I heard Rita’s first CD and wrote a review of it for the Jazz Times. She called to thank me, and we’ve been connected at the hip every since.

    Now, she slowly pulling me back into the music world. I’ve written a couple of tunes for the CD she’s currently working on and I’m teaching her music theory to take her scatting to the next level. And thanks to my intense jealousy of the pretty-blowing Ricky Woodard, I’m playing my sax 3 to 5 hours a day, everyday. Check Rick out in "Gentle Rain" in the post above. I’ve got my work cut out for me, but in the past couple of months I’ve started smiling.

    Me and Rita have been talking about forming a hybrid group, a quintet with me playing sax and using her as the trumpet voice (she has a 3 1/2 octave range). But Rita’s undoubtedly one of the greatest jazz singers in the world today, so she deserves the best. So I’m only going to follow up on that if I can make myself one of the best. Otherwise I'll let her work with Ricky Woodard or Dale Field, who ARE among the best in the world. She doesn’t need a charter member of the dime-a-dozen club hindering her career. I love her too much for that.

    Check her out live at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Harold Land Jr. Is on keyboard. She does a lick after his solo (you’ll know it when you hear it; the crowd responds) that I based a tune on. It’s called "Rita’s Song." Look for us at the Grammy’s. mark my word on it.

     

     


    Also, check out Shirley Horn and Johnnie Hartman, especially his record of ballads with John Coltrane. It's called something like Johnnie Hartman and John Coltrane. Every cut is a gem, IMHO.


    The only thing I'll say about the latter is that Hartmann was a baritone, and not everyone likes the deep, rich baritone. My wife, for one.


    Latest Comments