[Dixielandjazz] MOLDY FIGS PLUS (or vs.) DIXIELAND

[Charles Suhor]

Part of the sadness of jazz fandom and criticism is that some folks have
dug into a particular kind of music and branded others as bad. I've been
following the comments about the figs,  Preservation Hall Jazz Bands,
Leonard Feather, etc.

Surely there are good, mediocre, and bad performances in all styles, but
there are radical figs, jazz purists who denounce everything except the
earliest New Orleans jazz styles that were usually played in ensembles
without solos. Tom Bethell, e.g., once wrote that with Louis Armstrong,
"the rot set in," leading to inherently egotistical virtuoso soloists.

Dixieland is a corruption, according to misrepresentations by Ralph
Collins. In Dixieland ensemble courses, it's "every man for himself" and
then there's "an assembly of individual soloists held together by loud
mechanical-sounding drums....Creativity is not required...indeed it might
prove deleterious...each man plays fortissimo, as loud as possible.
Artistry is out of place here and originality a definite handicap." Of
course we've all heard bands that sound like that, but over the years and
through today, innumerable Dixieland bands have performed brilliantly.

Another kind of put-down is the disparagement of many of the older
Preservation Hall players for their nanny-goat vibratos, dated phrasing,
etc. I heard most of the first-generation jazz players at the Hall,
covering it from N.O. for DOWN BEAT throughout the 60s. Many showed a
mixture of jazz and pre-jazz influences, the latter being aspects of style
that were generally let go when players like Louis (above all), Brunis,
Bigard, Noone, Hines, etc. helped to distinguish jazz as we know it more
clearly from the ricky-tick, zippy music of the late 19th century and
beyond.

The figs in New Orleans and elsewhere often sentimentalized the old
players, just BECAUSE they were old, African American, and sometimes low on
chops. I couldn't play this patronizing, tin-eared game, but I found
pleasure and value nevertheless in much of the Pres. Hall music.

Someone asked, were many of the early Pres. Hall players (DeDe Pierce,
Sweet Emma, etc.) not merely aging artists but players who had always been
second-stringers at best in the New Orleans pantheon? To an extent, yes,
but that doesn't mean that their music isn't very moving and
expressive--nanny-goat vibrato, corny phrasing and all.

It's interesting to listen to the early and mid-20s tracks on CDs like NEW
ORLEANS IN NEW ORLEANS and JAZZ THE WORLD FORGOT. We hear Pres.Hall and
players-to-be and others (Peter Bocage, Larry Shields, Wingy Manone, Joe
Robichaux, Sharkey Bonano, Papa Celestin, Jim Robinson) when they were
young and hearty. Bless me, most of them were playing with decidedly
pre-jazz tone, ragtimey phrasing, etc., and many of the songs were stiff,
march-like pieces or slight dance vehicles. Even so, they're interesting to
listen to.

A fig might say this was the REAL jazz and the later stuff was crap. I
think that a sober view is that the 20s recordings show the players at an
earlier stage in their development and the evolution of jazz. (Of course,
they might well have been recording their more conservative pieces but they
surely didn't transform their entire conception when entering the recording
studio.)

The later Preservation Hall bands, certainly those of today, are musicians
who were born into a world where swing and even modern jazz had become part
of the musical environment (e.g., John Brunious was an ace be-bopper in the
sixties). They're skilled players, so to a lesser or grater extent they can
role-play the music of their forefathers. As many of you have noted, some
do it well, others don't.

I rarely go to Preservation Hall when visiting New Orleans (I now live in
Montgomery, Ala.) but I don't think I'd find it to be totally devoid of
jazz interest. I just don't want to hear them call it "authentic" old-style
jazz--an odd phrase in 2001. It's probably inauthentic to apply it at all.
What I look for, always, is whether or not swinging and inventive jazz is
being  played by someone in a group, whatever the style of jazz or the way
it's described on the marquee.

I've noticed a few plugs among the messages, so let me brag that I discuss
many of these issues and players in my book JAZZ IN NEW ORLEANS: THE
POSTWAR YEARS THROUGH 1970 (Scarecrow Press, 2001). You can get it through
your library or from a bookstore for $45 a pop. See some reviews on
amazon.com. But if you want a copy don't go to strangers. I'm allowed to
sell it for $35, postpaid. I break even, and the book gets to people who
care.

Charles Suhor