[Dixielandjazz] Art vs. Entertainment - was- Audience

[Stephen G Barbone]

Kash wrote (polite snip)

"However, another aspect of my post concerned the (for some reason)  
nasty word 'entertainment', and the word was connected with the  
(worshipped) word 'art'."

"In one post I received privately those two words were put together,  
as we've seen before on this list, with  'vs' between them. I cant for  
the life of me understand why it needs to be one or the other. The two  
can live happily together." Jim then went on to cite Tony Bennett as  
an example of an artist who entertains.


Oh my how I agree with Jim's idea on  the subject of art vs  
entertainment. Perhaps even more forcefully. The two SHOULD live  
together IMO.

Examples in  the OKOM world are easy to spot. First off, Louis  
Armstrong, a consummate artist and a consummate entertainer. More  
recently, how about Kenny Davern? If you've seen him play, you realize  
he was a musical artist. And you also know that he was, like Armstrong  
an entertainer.

And if you never saw him, but read his biography you read: (page 185  
'The Life and Music of Kenny Davern' by Edward N. Meyer)

"Audiences liked Kenny Davern. He engaged them. He talked about the  
music, kibbitzed with other musicians, and joked with the customers -  
all the time with a wicked twinkle in his eye, as if he and they were  
a party to some naughty secret. It was not accidental."

"One of the secrets to Davern's popularity was that he understood that  
there was more to performing than just playing music. He told an  
interviewer: 'You must relate to your audience, you must communicate  
with them, you must know what their pulse is, what they feel. They are  
there to see you and hear you, and it's the least you can do, to  
involve them. It's very important to create a relaxation, a tension,  
and a rapport." At another time he said; "The music we play has been  
relegated to a sanctified role, where everybody is supposed to sit  
there and not talk. You are supposed to deliver some kind of emotional  
message to them. Its GARBAGE. (emphasis mine) You're are supposed to  
dance, have a good time, talk. Get up, flirt, whatever."

That, my friends, is what this music is all about. Who the hell are  
those LESSER "artists" that lecture about art music vs entertainment  
music? Or those audiences that would kill the music by relegating it  
to "art music"?

IMO, "art" and "entertainment" are certainly not be mutually  
exclusive. If bands (or festivals) are not entertaining, no wonder  
they have no gigs. At one time there may have been an "art" audience  
for OKOM. They went to festivals to pat each other on the back because  
they were the few, among the unwashed many, that truly understood  
musical art. They looked down on "entertainers". (One wonders what  
they thought of Armstrong & Davern) They thought they were elite. But  
about 95% of those folks have gone on to that great art world in the  
sky, because "in the long run", as  Keynes said, "we are dead."

Cheers,
Steve Barbone
www.myspace.com/barbonestreetjazzband