[Dixielandjazz] What Jazz Is - and Isn't by Wynton Marsalis (1988)

[Larry Walton Entertainment - St. Louis]

Thanks Steve, I will be looking forward to the TV shows.

Just an aside.  I have said that musicians need to have multi skills to 
succeed in music.  Wynton not only plays well but he writes very well.  Note 
the crafting of this article.  The very first sentence grabs you and makes 
you want to read it.

It's no longer about "just" playing a horn.  I look back at all the skills I 
have learned just to stay in the business.  it's writing, art, presentation 
and dozens more, some of which haven't even been invented yet and many have 
nothing to do with music at all.

I know people who are knowledgeable, who are true monsters on their 
instruments but what makes this man rise above the others?  It's not just 
his talent as a player or his knowledge of music but much, much more.  He's 
showing some of that in the crafting of this article.

I think we can all rise above the others if we develop the skills we need. 
In my lifetime we went from 78's and reel to reel tape to the internet and 
digital music.  What incredible technicological leaps and there will be 
more.  It's how we adapt and the attitude we have toward learning and 
adaptation to new things.

We all know and could name off a dozen musicians that we know personally who 
are highly talented but just are going nowhere and never will.  It's not 
just about how well we play our horns.
Larry
StL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen G Barbone" <barbonestreet at earthlink.net>
To: "Larry Walton" <larrys.bands at charter.net>
Cc: "Dixieland Jazz Mailing List" <dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 7:31 PM
Subject: [Dixielandjazz] What Jazz Is - and Isn't by Wynton Marsalis (1988)


> Fun to look back 20 years and see what Marsalis was saying about Jazz.
> Cheers,
> Steve Barbone
>
> NY Times - July 31, 1988 - By Wynton Marsalis
> MUSIC; What Jazz Is - and Isn't
>
> My generation finds itself wedged between two opposing traditions. One  is 
> the tradition we know in such wonderful detail from the enormous  recorded 
> legacy that tells anyone who will listen that jazz broke the  rules of 
> European conventions and created rules of its own that were  so specific, 
> so thorough and so demanding that a great art resulted.  This art has had 
> such universal appeal and application to the  expression of modern life 
> that it has changed the conventions of  American music as well as those of 
> the world at large.
>
> The other tradition, which was born early and stubbornly refuses to  die, 
> despite all the evidence to the contrary, regards jazz merely as  a 
> product of noble savages - music produced by untutored, unbuttoned 
> semiliterates for whom jazz history does not exist. This myth was 
> invented by early jazz writers who, in attempting to escape their 
> American prejudices, turned out a whole world of new cliches based on  the 
> myth of the innate ability of early jazz musicians. Because of  these 
> writers' lack of understanding of the mechanics of music, they  thought 
> there weren't any mechanics. It was the ''they all can sing,  they all 
> have rhythm'' syndrome. If that was the case, why was there  only one 
> Louis Armstrong?
>
> That myth is being perpetuated to this day by those who profess an 
> openness to everything - an openness that in effect just shows  contempt 
> for the basic values of the music and of our society. If  everything is 
> good, why should anyone subject himself to the pain of  study? Their 
> disdain for the specific knowledge that goes into jazz  creation is their 
> justification for saying that everything has its  place. But their job 
> should be to define that place - is it the toilet  or the table?
>
> To many people, any kind of popular music now can be lumped with jazz.  As 
> a result, audiences too often come to jazz with generalized 
> misconceptions about what it is and what it is supposed to be. Too  often, 
> what is represented as jazz isn't jazz at all. Despite attempts  by 
> writers and record companies and promoters and educators and even 
> musicians to blur the lines for commercial purposes, rock isn't jazz  and 
> new age isn't jazz, and neither are pop or third stream. There may  be 
> much that is good in all of them, but they aren't jazz.
>
> I recently completed a tour of jazz festivals in Europe in which only  two 
> out of 10 bands were jazz bands. The promoters of these festivals  readily 
> admit most of the music isn't jazz, but refuse to rename these  events 
> ''music festivals,'' seeking the esthectic elevation that jazz  offers. 
> This is esthetic name-dropping, attempting to piggyback on the 
> achievements of others, and duping the public. It's like a great  French 
> chef lending his name, not his skills, to a a fast-food  restaurant 
> because he knows it's a popular place to eat. His concern  is for 
> quantity, not quality. Those who are duped say ''This greasy  hamburger 
> sure is good; I know it's good, because Pierre says it's  good, and people 
> named Pierre know what the deal is.'' Pierre then  becomes known as a man 
> of the people, when he actually is exploiting  the people.
>
> All the forces at work to blur the lines deplore the purist ethic in 
> jazz, but try to capitalize commercially on the esthetic reputation of 
> jazz. In other fields, purism is considered a form of heroism - the  good 
> guy who won't sell out - but in jazz that purism is incorrectly  perceived 
> as stagnation and the inability to change. Therefore, those  who are most 
> lauded by the record companies and writers and promoters  are those who 
> most exploit the public. The major obstacle facing this  generation of 
> musicians is finding out what makes something jazz.
>
> Andre Malraux, in ''The Voices of Silence,'' observes that art itself 
> puts the biggest challenge before an artist, not the superficial 
> statistics of sociology: ''Artists do not stem from their childhoods,  but 
> from their conflict with the achievements of their predecessors;  not from 
> their own formless world, but from the struggle with the form  which 
> others have imposed on life.''
>
> Feeling as I do that the greatness of jazz lies not only in its  emotion 
> but also in its deliberate artifice, I have tried, in helping  to shape 
> Lincoln Center's Classical Jazz series, to convey some of the  conscious 
> struggle that has gone into the great jazz of the past and  to show how it 
> impinges on the present.
>
> The irony of my generation is that now not just commentators but even 
> many musicians still believe in misconceptions that long ago were 
> rejected by men like Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, who knew that 
> their work was much more than the result of talent forged by adverse 
> social conditions. For too long, people have attributed Armstrong's 
> spiritual depth and technical fluidity to the supposed fact that he 
> didn't know anything about music, couldn't read music and played in  the 
> hallowed halls of prostitution, knife fights and murder. But  Armstrong 
> grew up in a New Orleans that demanded many levels of  musical 
> sophistication. In a highly competitive musical milieu, one  had to know 
> melodies, how to phrase them beautifully, the harmonies of  those 
> melodies, many kinds of rhythms, and so on. Access to such  knowledge 
> allowed younger generations of musicians to develop what had  only been 
> implied in earlier music.
>
> Armstrong did that with ragtime, with the popular songs of his day,  and 
> with the styles of trumpet players like King Oliver. He knew he  was 
> refining what he heard around him, and he didn't like to be  thought of as 
> a ''rough'' player, which is why he spoke highly of  those who had 
> ''sweet'' tones.
>
> But the noble-savage cliche has prevailed over the objective fact of  the 
> art - and this is manifest in my generation's inability to produce  more 
> than a few musicians dedicated to learning and mastering the  elements 
> like blues and swing that gave Louis Armstrong, Duke  Ellington, 
> Thelonious Monk and Charlie Parker such unarguable artistic  power. Young 
> musicians who want to follow that path these days cannot  find anywhere to 
> practice their art. In schools that I teach in around  the country, I find 
> the teaching of the arts and of American culture  almost nonexistent; 
> perhaps that's because jazz is central to American  culture. While faced 
> with this problem, musicians are also faced with  the constant clamor for 
> something ''new.'' How can something new and  substantial, not eccentric 
> and fraudulent, be developed when the  meaning of what's old is not known? 
> Could we have gotten to the moon  without even understanding Newtonian 
> physics?
>
> I am not saying that there should not be artistic variety. How could I 
> say that, when so much of jazz results from the work of great 
> individuals? But those great individuals all had in common the pursuit  of 
> quality and the painful experience of discipline. To accomplish  what they 
> did, each of the great individuals in jazz took the time and  effort to 
> master particular things. They were not satisfied to stand  above the 
> engagement that is necessary to perfect craft.
>
> With these thoughts in mind, we designed a Classical Jazz series this 
> year that deals with the music of Duke Ellington, Tadd Dameron and Max 
> Roach, as well as with evenings given over to singers and 
> instrumentalists interpreting standard songs. The series focuses on  two 
> things as ''classical'' in jazz: the compositions of major writers  and 
> the quality of improvisation.
>
> In the first case, musicians have struggled with the problem of  creating 
> the sound of jazz in preconceived notes, rather than in on- the-spot 
> improvisation, in tones that have been pondered and edited  until the 
> writer is satisfied. This doesn't mean that the individual  piece won't be 
> reworked every now and then while still remaining in  progress. (Ellington 
> and Charles Mingus were noted for this.) In the  second case, when jazz 
> singers or instrumentalists take over a song,  they use all of the 
> sophistication Louis Armstrong first brought to a  very high level of 
> craft, virtuosity and feeling. This is the  classical form of jazz 
> performance: when improvisation works so well  that it can stand on its 
> own as composition. This kind of  improvisation is what jazz musicians 
> raised to an art through deep  study and contemplation.
>
> While enjoyment and entertainment are paramount matters in the  Classical 
> Jazz series,it should be clear that we also feel a need to  help promote 
> understanding of what happens in jazz. An important part  of the series, 
> therefore, are the program notes by Stanley Crouch,  which seek to explain 
> the intent of the musicians as well as the  meaning of the art. Although 
> jazz can be enjoyed on many levels, from  the superficial to the profound, 
> we feel that the proper presentation  of notes, song titles and even small 
> discographies will help audiences  better understand the essential 
> elements of the music and thereby  enjoy the music even more.
>
> Duke Ellington exemplifies a mastery of the relationship of knowledge  to 
> development. He was present almost at the beginning of jazz; his  career 
> spanned five decades of continuous and unprecendented musical 
> development: he continuously proved that no one was more capable of 
> translating the varied and complex arenas of American experience into 
> tone. His recorded legacy gives us the most accurate tonal history of  the 
> 20th century. Duke Ellington developed the implications he heard  in the 
> lines and phrasing of Armstrong's improvisations, and he  expanded upon 
> the compositions and arrangements of everyone around  him, including Jelly 
> Roll Morton, King Oliver and Fletcher Henderson.
>
> Max Roach is part of this serious hierarchy of musical giants. All  great 
> instrumentalists have a superior quality of sound, and his is  one of the 
> marvels of contemporary music. The drum set is actually  many intruments 
> in one - the bass drum, the snare drum, tom-tom, sock  cymbal, crash 
> cymbal, and ride cymbal - and they all have unique  characteristics. To 
> play them all at once requires an individual touch  and attack for each 
> one. The roundness and nobility of sound on the  drums and the clarity and 
> precision of the cymbals distinguishes Max  Roach as a peerless master of 
> this uniquely American instrument.
>
> His stature as a musician, composer and bandleader is the result of  his 
> having created a larger and more varied body of work than any  other 
> drummer-leader. He has done solo pieces, pieces for drums and  voice, for 
> jazz ensembles, percussion ensembles, for choirs, and has  performed with 
> video. While working with Charlie Parker, Dizzy  Gillespie, Thelonious 
> Monk, Bud Powell and Clifford Brown, he  developed a unique vocabulary 
> that gave the drums another level of  identity. He played the drums in a 
> way that not only kept time and  accentuated the beat, but he also 
> developed the call-and-response idea  central to the foundations of 
> American music. He has refined his style  over the course of the years, 
> and his playing now has the grandeur  found only in those who had 
> exceptional talent to begin with, and  matched that talent with an ongoing 
> dedication to sustained development.
>
> Classical Jazz at Lincoln Center - whether celebrating the work of an 
> individual artist or using the improvisational talents of masters like 
> J.J. Johnson, Jon Hendricks, Tommy Flanagan, Hank Jones, Sweets Edison 
> and the other artists on the programs - is intent on helping to give  to 
> jazz, its artists and its products their deserved place in American 
> culture. I also feel that the Classical Jazz series gives Lincoln  Center 
> additional reason to regard itself as a center of world culture.
>
> Jazz commentary is too often shaped by a rebellion against what is 
> considered the limitations of the middle class. The commentators 
> mistakenly believe that by willfully sliding down the intellectual, 
> spiritual, economic or social ladder, they will find freedom down  where 
> the jazz musicians (i.e. ''real'' people) lie. Jazz musicians,  however, 
> are searching for the freedom of ascendance. This is why they  practice. 
> Musicians like Art Blakey, Sarah Vaughan, Elvin Jones, Max  Roach, Sweets 
> Edison and Betty Carter are rebelling against the idea  that they should 
> be excluded from choosing what they want to do or  think, against being 
> forced into someone else's mold, whether it be  the social agendas of the 
> conservative establishment or the new fake  liberal establishment of which 
> many well-meaning jazz observers are  part. They feel knowledge gives them 
> choice; that ignorance is bondage.
>
> The late Ellington pieces that will be featured - ''Such Sweet  Thunder'' 
> (1957), ''Suite Thursday'' (1960) and ''Anatomy of a  Murder'' (1959) - 
> show how well Ellington mastered the integration of  rhythm section and 
> band; these extended pieces prove that he is one of  the great musical 
> thinkers as well as one of the great masters of  musical form. Integrating 
> the rhythm section and the rest of the band  is not a simple job, and I 
> believe the jazz pieces of concert  composers are almost always failures 
> because they have not mastered  that idea. Concert composers must accept 
> the fact that a rhythm  section is part of the sound in a very different 
> way than anything in  European music; but they settle for corny 
> syncopations, which only  partly suggest the range of force and impetus 
> provided by the rhythm  section.
>
> Genius always manifests itself through attention to fine detail. Works  of 
> great genius sound so natural they appear simple, but this is the 
> simplicity of elimination, not the simplicity of ignorance. This kind  of 
> intricacy is abundantly evident in these late works. Not only are 
> difficult form schemes arrived at and executed harmonically,  melodically, 
> rhythmically and texturally, but Ellington also  successfully manipulates 
> interrelated dance moods and tempos that  imply a totally innovative 
> vision of form as it applies to movement.  Even more amazing than the 
> complexity of these pieces is the fact that  we can still hear quite 
> clearly the sound of the early New Orleans  polyphonic style that 
> attracted Ellington to jazz as a young man.
>
> Though Tadd Dameron is not as well known as many other giants, he was  one 
> of the finest composers jazz has produced. He created a body of  material 
> of great originality and personality that still addresses the 
> fundamentals of jazz - blues and swing. What distinguishes Dameron is  how 
> successfully he transformed the sound and the substance of the  jazz 
> ensemble through skillful adaptation of the innovations of  Charlie Parker 
> and Dizzy Gillespie. His work is difficult and  beautiful, which is what I 
> consider the greatest challenge in modern  music. As Duke Ellington once 
> said, some people think that something  has to be ugly in order to be 
> modern. Like Ellington, Dameron didn't  believe that.
>
> His music has a melodic and harmonic complexity that is angular, but  it 
> always has a singing quality, which he probably got from Ellington,  who 
> was one of his artistic mentors. An avowed fan of Louis Armstrong  from 
> his youth, Dameron understood the majestic powers of the trumpet  when it 
> sings melodies that rise above the ensemble with relaxed,  lyrical 
> boldness.
>
> A recent experience showed me just how much Dameron's compositions 
> contributed to the language of the music. I was listening to a  recording 
> of John Kirby's Sextet from the late thirties, a well- rehearsed and 
> exceptional band with intricate arrangements. Yet, when  I put on some of 
> Dameron's music, recorded with the trumpeter Fats  Navarro 10 years later, 
> it sounded almost like an entirely different  idiom. Dameron learned to 
> apply keen melodic and harmonic sense to the  rhythmic innovations 
> instigated by Charlie Parker. In other words, his  music swang and sang 
> and had intellectual stang.
>
> JAZZ AT TULLY HALL
>
> While jazz festivals over the years have largely been eclectic  affairs, 
> more recent developments have seen some jazz festivals  becoming more 
> focused. The Classical Jazz series at Lincoln Center's  Alice Tully Hall 
> has been following the newer pattern, with this  year's festival focusing 
> on composition and on jazz as an art form.
>
> The festival, presented in conjunction with radio station WBGO/FM and 
> with major funding from Yves St. Laurent, opens Friday with the music  of 
> Tadd Dameron and featuring Tommy Flanagan, George Mraz and Kenny 
> Washington and the ensemble Dameronia, which includes Clifford Jordan, 
> Walter Davis Jr. and Benny Powell.
>
> On Saturday, the program is titled ''Saturday Night Songbook'' and 
> features artists like Anita O'Day, Jon Hendricks, Earl Coleman, Joe  Lee 
> Wilson and Frank Morgan. There is no Sunday program. On Monday,  Aug. 8, 
> the program is called ''Standards on Horn,'' with the  participants 
> including Wynton Marsalis, Harry (Sweets) Edison, Doc  Cheatham and J.J. 
> Johnson among others.
>
> The offering on Tuesday, Aug. 9, is titled ''Many Eras of One Man's 
> Music'' and focuses on Max Roach. Mr. Roach will, course, be on the 
> program as performer as well as composer, along with the Max Roach 
> Quartet, the Max Roach Chorus and Abbey Lincoln Moseka.
>
> The final program, on Wednesday, Aug. 10, is ''A Duke Ellington 
> Tribute,'' in which the performers will include, in addition to Mr. 
> Marsalis, Jimmy Hamilton, Milt Hinton, Norris Turney, Jaki Byard and 
> Jimmy Knepper.
> _______________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or change your e-mail preferences for the Dixieland Jazz 
> Mailing list, or to find the online archives, please visit:
>
> http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz
>
>
>
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
>