As a long
time subscriber to the Atlantic monthly, I have often read articles or reviews
of books written by their literary and national editor Benjamin Schwarz His
observations have been generally well thought out and cogent. His book reviews
have offered evaluations on the worthlessness or value of a newly released book
that are often consistent with my taste. So when I read his most recent
diatribe provocatively titled
“The
End of Jazz,” a
subject of great interest to me, I was greatly surprised and disappointed
by Mr. Schwarz’s spurious conclusions
The article was supposed to be a book review of the recently
published book “The Jazz Standards: A Guide to the Repertoire” by the scholar
Ted Goia from Oxford Press. Mr. Goia was my editor in chief at the now defunct
web-based jazz magazine jazz.com. where I was a regular contributor. He has
written several authoritative works on jazz, including “The History of Jazz”
and his fine “West Coast Jazz.,” to name a few, and his opinions carry some
weight in the community. I have always found Mr. Goia’s work to be
well researched, informative and eminently readable.
Candidly I have not yet read Mr. Goia’s recent offering, but I
understand it to be a collection of some two hundred and fifty songs that he
has deemed to be essential to any working jazz musician’s book-a repertoire of
songs that are generally accepted as standards that any jazz musician should
know. In delineating his choices, Goia takes a valiant stab at codifying what
he considers essential to the jazz canon. He uses the frequency of play as his
chief criteria for inclusion with some other more minor criteria being factored
into this equation. His list, by its nature, becomes a declaration of taste,
popularity and substance that transcends time.
In reviewing this book, Schwarz seems to tacitly agree with Mr.
Goia’s unequivocal praise for Billy Strayhorn’s poignantly bitter masterpiece
“Lush Life,” which Goia lauds as his choice for the single most important song
from the twentieth century ( the cover picture of the story is of Strayhorn and
Ellington at the piano) . But as anyone who knows the music is bound to do,
Schwarz does take the opportunity to air his own taste. He mentions some songs
that he feel Goia has unfairly left off his list. These songs include Rodgers
and Hart’s “Where and When” three by song-smith Cole Porter “In the
Still of The Night” , “Begin the Beguine “and “I’ve Got You Under My
Skin.” All worthy entries and all clearly part of what is known as
“The Great American Songbook,” a group of songs that were written predominantly
between the 1920s and the 1950’s, and have become a wellspring of inspiration
for jazz musicians as a vehicle for improvisation. The choices also say a lot
about where Mr. Schwarz’s musical mind has been quagmired, offering a clue
to how he has drawn his own personal conclusions about the state of jazz.
The predominance of these songs, from this bygone era, create a
moment of careful reflection for Goia, who freely admits to the dearth of
contemporary compositions in his version of the repertoire. But where Goia sees
promise “…the jazz idiom [is] a vibrant present day endeavour ”,
Schwarz uses this fact as a raison d'entre for his controversial and misguided
assertions. He states “The Songbook, a product of a fleeting set of
cultural circumstances when popular, sophisticated music was aimed at musically
knowledgeable adults was the wellspring of jazz.” He continues " “…there
is no reason to believe that that jazz can be a living, evolving art form
decades after its major source-and the source of that linked it to the main
currents of popular culture and sentiments- has dried up. Jazz, like the
Songbook, is a relic- and as such, in 2012 it cannot have, as Goia wishes for
it, an “expansive and adaptive repertoire.” "
Here is where Mr. Schwarz has gone completely and perilously off
the tracks. Does he truly believe that there are no longer, any "
musically knowlegable adults" listening ? Or perhaps he
believes that the music no longer speaks to the audience because it no
longer "links [them] to the main current of popular culture and
sentiments..."? True enough that some modern jazz requires
"work" by the listener before it can be fully appreciated. Does that
automatically un-link it to the main stream of popular culture or does it
just expand the culture ever so slightly, breathing new life and vitality
by daring to be adventurous?
Admittedly the Songbook is an invaluable resource and the basis of
many of a jazz musician’s book, but it is not the only resource. Just as the
Magna Carta of 1215 AD was the cornerstone for the subsequent U.S.
Constitution, which was written over five hundred years later, the Great
American Songbook, is a particularly important part of the the jazz tradition
but not its only part. It is certainly premature to claim that reliance on this
admittedly dated mother lode of inspiration is the death knoll for future
creativity and advancement in the art of jazz.
It cannot be denied that the Songbook has become the cornerstone
of the jazz repertoire, but new music from cabaret, theater, films, world and
popular music arenas have always provided a rich vein of new compositions for
the jazz musician.
In Its function as a template, the Songbook has become a living,
breathing monument to tradition. It is not calcified and decayed, but is
constantly being infused with new vitality through repeated explorations. In an
interview with Goia on Mark Myers fine blog, www.jazzwax.com , Goia recalled talking to 82 year old
saxophonist Bud Shank in 2009 before he passed. Shank told him that even after
fifty years of playing the standard “All The Things You Are” he felt that he
still hadn't exhausted all the possibilities that a song like that
could provide to a sufficiently curious musician. Like the torch carrying the
never extinguished Olympic flame, the Songbook is continuously providing the
spark that illuminates the way for future generations of musicians while
serving as a link to the origins and development of the music. As such it can
never be considered a "relic" as Schwarz asserts.
Modern music is constantly evolving and its inclusion into the
jazz canon is a process that will occur naturally over time. It may be
frustrating for some that the listening public have become inordinately
attached to these classics of yesteryear, but it is unwise to characterize the
art form as being on terminal life support because its audience is slow to
accept change. Jazz does not have a monopoly on the public's resistance to
change. Monk was derided for much of his lifetime as a man whose music was
curiously out of tune, Even his fellow musicians and critics had trouble
with the demands of his compositions. Few musicians or critics today would deny
the brilliance of his musical legacy and many of his compositions have become an
integral part of the repertoire.
Time is a great healer. Jazz as a distinct art form is barely one
hundred years old. Why is it so hard and potentially damning to fathom that the Songbook is still such
an important element in its repertoire?
The listening public must be connected to the music if it is to
survive and thrive. It is the modern jazz musician, who as he becomes more
daring in his approach to bringing new material into the lexicon, will make the
repertoire grow organically. The music of Michael Jackson, Paul Simon,
Sting, Lennon & McCartney or Kurt Cobain, is certainly more relatable
to younger audiences and needs to be included in the conversation;
explored for its nuances and adaptability to the improviser’s art.
It has happened in the recent past with artist like Miles
Davis and George Benson introducing songs by Cyndi Lauper and Leon Russell and is happening now
with artists like Brad Mehldau , George Colligan and Ethan Iverson,
who have introduced the music of contemporary artists like Thom Yorke, Michael Jackson and The Beatles to the
repertoire. Other musicians like Robert Glasper, Dave Douglas, John
McLaughlin and Rudresh Mahanthappa have successfully attempted to bring soul, hip-hop,fusion,techno and world musicical influences into the pantheon of jazz. Who knows when these influences become a permanent part of the repertoire? Far from being mummified and interred as Mr. Schwarz suggests, jazz is morphing, replicating and mutating.
Perhaps Mr. Schwarz does not embrace this change, perhaps he is
stuck in the afterglow of songs by Porter, Gershwin or Kern, but to
the declare “The End of Jazz” and to relegate
it to the status of a “relic” is an
uninformed and just plain wrong and its assertion does little to
enlighten the conversation.
Amhad Jamal : Blue Moon
