[Dixielandjazz] 2-beat vs. 4

[D and R Hardie]

Dear Sue,
  Well put. In Bolden's time the dancers wanted two steps, and also  the 
earlier conventional dances  - quadrilles, polkas, waltzes, mazurkas, 
schottisches and the bands had to be able to perform  not only in two 
beat duple time but in 3/4 or 6/8, something that changed after 1917, 
though the jazz waltz was often demanded. Our experience has been that 
modern dancers have some trouble trying to dance to the two beat rhythm 
of ragtime era tunes played by Bolden. If you prepare a paper I'd like 
a copy as its a long way to the FQF from here.
regards
Dan Hardie
On Tuesday, December 26, 2006, at 11:22  AM, Loerchen2 at aol.com wrote:

>
> Charlie and listmates,
>
> The point that Jack Stewart was trying to make in his article is that 
> the
> rhythm was driven more by the dancers than by the musicians.  I tend 
> to  agree
> with this (at least in theory), having studied 1910s dance for the 
> past 20
> years, but here's the basic argument:
>
> The predominant dance step from c.1890 until c.1910 was the two-step
> (basically, a polka without the hop), which works great with both 
> ragtime and  march
> music.  From c.1910-c.1917, the predominant step was the  one-step, 
> which is
> just walking, also done to march or ragtime music.   Popular 
> variations on the
> one step were the so-called "animal dances" which  included the turkey 
> trot,
> snake dip, and ..... fox trot.  The original fox  trot consisted of 
> two walking
> steps on beats 1-2 and 3-4, and four quick steps  on four beats of the
> following measure (still in 2/4 time).
>
> Jack Stewart quotes from Nick LaRocca and says that the ODJB saw the  
> dancers
> trying to do the one-step (often using the fox-trot step) to the 2/4  
> music
> and it didn't look right, so the band changed to a driving 4/4 beat, 
> which
> worked better with the dance.  The first recordings of the ODJB sounds 
>  frenetic
> because they were geared to the normal tempo of the one-step, which 
> was  quite
> fast.  Within a year or two, the fox trot step had smoothed out and  
> became
> more of a jog or loping step -- two slow steps on 1 and 2, and four 
> quick  or
> shuffle steps on 3 and 4 -- and the music followed suit.
>
> Naturally, this is a simplification and it did not hold true in every 
> case,
> but if you see the proper period dances performed to both 2/4 and 4/4 
> music,
> it  makes a lot of sense.  And if any of you are planning to come to 
> New
> Orleans for French Quarter Fest (April 13-15), I will be presenting a
> demonstration of popular dances from 1910-1920 at the New Orleans 
> International  Music
> Colloquium on Saturday morning. (shameless plug)
>
> Merry Christmas, if that's not being politicially incorrect these  
> days....
> Sue
>
>
> On Monday, December 25, 2006, at 09:40  AM, Charles Suhor  wrote:
>
>> Pages 259-263 of listmate Dan Hardie's excellent book  EXPLORING EARLY
>> JAZZ give as well documented and thorough discussion of  the 2 beat 
>> vs.
>> fl;at four question as I've seen, and he comes down  lightly on the 
>> side
>> of earliest jazz being the former. A new article by  Jack Stewart in 
>> the
>> current issue of The Jazz Archivist is interesting  but to me, unclear
>> on the matter.
>>
>>  Charlie
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
> http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz
>