Jazz education: my favorite topic. I just read Mwanji’s newest post with quite some interesting points of view. Please read the original post before reading my comments, because my comments will perhaps seem out of place.
First off, much of the argument seems to center around identification. Firstly, the attempt to define “jazz,” or “free jazz,” or “experimental”. Obviously, this has become a futile argument, one that will never have merit. In fact, defining the music always will lead to confusion and debate. Fred Frith once told me that “Jazz is no longer a term to accurately define modern improvised music,” and Roswell Rudd told me in regards to the term jazz, “that as long as it means freedom, lets keep it around.”
Defining “free music,” becomes cloudy very quickly. A very general definition would be music that is improvised that has no preset harmony, melody, rhythm, etc. While this is a good starting point, it contains some fundamental flaws. When objectives are placed on music, this will begin to define the music in a similar manner that a predetermined structure would. For instance, when one is playing “free,” assuming that the musician is free to do what he or she pleases within the context of the music, then if they feel like playing a “traditional” swing rhythm on the ride cymbal, should they not be able to be free to do so? Or does playing free, dictate that swinging is totally off limits? In my opinion, playing free is a state of mind not a style of music.
On the matter of being taught to swing: I do think that the statement is partly true but young musicians aren’t being taught to do much of anything creative either. Unless you are fortunate to attend Charlie Haden’s Cal Arts program or attend the Banff institute, playing outside of the “traditional” guidelines for the music is rarely ever discussed. Music is rarely played for the musicians to learn from, and exposure to various forms of improvised are hardly ever discussed. I spent a great deal of time in some very highly regarded schools, to not only ever hear Ornette Coleman addressed, or even Louis Armstrong for that matter, but do you think the student are being exposed to Derek Bailey or Henry Threadgill, or Anthony Braxton or Dudu Pukwana? Of course not. (I urge you again…please read the George Lewis chapter in the Arcana book!)
The educational system as it exists in America is fundamentally flawed as it usually constructed by facilitators that have specific agendas that have very little to do with music or self expression. It’s fine that the younger musicians are diggin’ on Chris Potter, Mark Turner or the like. In fact, it makes perfect sense to me. The detriment is if that is the only scope of their vision, which it usually is. Their studies should include Sidney Bechet, Coleman Hawkins, Evan Parker, Han Bennink, Joe Harriott, Bud Powell, and Peter Brotzmann, to name a very few. Hopefully, when these students start listening to the young crop of players, they check to see who influenced them, and listen to those guys as well. Joshua Redman should hopefully lead them to his father Dewey, then to Ornette and so on.
It’s sad really. I think it’s heartbreaking that any composition major in most any school will never encounter the music of Bill Dixon or Anthony Braxton or Wadada Leo Smith. The reason why is subject for another article. But what generally happens is that the tradition of learning from your elders is virtually gone and has been replaced by those ridiculous play-a-long recordings or learning “licks” out of a book. At a certain point for the young musician, I firmly believe that some sort of apprenticeship is necessary. Too often, musicians are coming out of the gates as leader without any experience and are able self release their music and create careers based on formulas. A true apprenticeship can unlock so much about the history of the music, the life of the musician and the constant pursuit for creativity. As much time as I spent with one of my mentors, John Hicks, a great deal of it was him hipping me to countless musicians like Baikida Carroll, or Mary Lou Williams, or Lester Bowie. It is this type of education that creates uniqueness within a musician, definitely not those play-a-longs or scale books. As creators, the improviser will take in their influences and synthesize them. But if your only influences or your only listening consists of major label “jazz” records from 1980-2000, you will end up sounding that way. I guess that’s cool if that’s your goal.
In regards to George Duke’s comments, well I don’t even want to start. I don’t think it applies. Musicians ultimately will play the music that’s closer to their heart…African American music or not. The blues are important to understand, I agree completely, and will stop there.
In regards to the Vision fest, I wish I could have been there. I need to refrain from commenting because I was not there.
Listening: The Blue Notes (the group not the label), Alan Silva, Joe McPhee, & Andrew Hill.
Labels: Artist Thoughts
