Hi George!

And first, let me say that I consider myself an "old-school" player---I have vivid memories of lugging my Rhodes Suitcase piano, Farfisa organ and my tiny Yamaha CS-5 to gigs and dreaming of eventually getting a Yamaha DX-7 or a MiniMoog [I eventually got both]!  So I understand your view completely and may I add that it seems like today's popular music tends to favor mediocrity and eschew virtuosity. 

    Many times, I listen to some artists play live and wonder how on earth they ever got a gig, let alone a record contract.  Lip-synching, sequences, and a live band and none of it groovin'.  That's why I treasure those shows where I get to see real musicians play their instruments and heaven forbid, groove with each other--- [attention: kiss-ass moment] like your show down here in San Diego's Humphrey's By The Bay Concerts.  My band was the one playing inside the lounge while you and Stanley were on the outdoor stage; we caught some snippets of you guys during our breaks and all of the guys in our band reverted to schoolkids watching our heroes on stage.

Technique is and always will be a means to an end and not an end in itself! Technique is important in allowing an artist to more easily express ideas, giving flexibility of thought and the freedom to execute more difficult and complex passages. BUT THE TECHNIQUE IS NOT THE MUSIC!

Amen. I figured that out long ago when I realized I'd never be Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock, Jeff Lorber, Stevie Wonder or even George Duke.  Only I can think like me.  We are what we listen to, and we are an amalgam of our influences.  I feel fortunate to be raised by musically inclined parents: dad was a jazz lover who also enjoyed latin music, mom is a musical omnivore that enjoys everything from opera to the Beatles.  And both parents were singers with perfect pitch---something I've inherited as well.  Drives me crazy when a singer is off-pitch.  I've been told that the reason I get called for gigs is because folks like my feel, that I have a knack for making stuff feel better.  Kinda like my favorite players; they make the music feel better.  Quite humbling and satisfying to know how one is regarded by their peers.  I had a conversation with bassist Cecil McBee Jr. [a great player like his dad], and we lamented how some players look for short cuts and don't necessarily put the time in on their axe.  We also lamented the lack of historical knowledge that some of today's musicians have.  My father used to tell me to learn about the roots of my instrument(s) and music in general, because to truly move forward, you need to know the past.  And my mother always tells me that if you're passionate and inquisitive, you never stop learning something new.

The blues at its’ best (like gospel) is raw and free, and mad technical expertise has little to do with it! On the other hand there is nothing I love more than a beautiful melody played very eloquently, but somewhere that rawness, or as Quincy Jones calls it – those grits (that hot sauce – that bacon grease) - have to make an appearance on the stove.

Funny.  Dad used to call it "garlic".  It ain't tasty without the garlic! I love these cooking metaphors; jazz and cooking seem to go hand-in-hand--- kinda like gumbo: a little bit of this, a little bit of that and all tasty. [I come from a family of great cooks]
 
There are too many non-musicians deciding what musicians should do. In a nutshell that’s what’s wrong with the business! And even worse, these musicians are listening to these folk.
 
Sad but true. I once submitted a demo to a label and was told it was "too fusion-y" and had "too many notes".  He wanted me to dumb it down, so it can be "saleable".  But proof is in the pudding, since I hear some great players put out some lame stuff that belies their talent. C'est la vie and que barbaridad!
 
As I said before, style of music is irrelevant! The important message is the freedom of creativity and thought. Building on what came before and taking that idea to new levels. That’s the only way the music will truly evolve and become an extension of what came before.
 
Dad used to tell me there are only two kinds of music: good and bad.  And if you're gonna make a living as a musician, learn to like it all; or at least respect the art that goes into other styles of music.  As Billy Cobham said, it boils down to "simplicity of expression and depth of thought". 

Somebody once told me there are three levels of musicianship:

1. guys who play what they know with a limited vocabulary and technique.

2. This is the level most of us are: those musicians who are evolving and expanding their vocabulary and their technique, and

3. This is the level we aspire to: those musicians who possess great technique and vocabulary who simply just play: like Oscar Peterson, Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock and you, George Duke, as well as many others.

On an off note, how are the memoirs coming along, George? I look forward to reading about some of your road warrior stories.  [I was the guy who asked you about your Zappa days and your gear from the 70's and 80's].  And I also look forward to seeing you at NAMM at the Rhodes booth. Peace.

Max

Hey George!

I'm 18 and I live in England.

Hearing that from such a respected musician, is a great warmth to me, as I have had the same thoughts myself.

I do know what you mean about the classical/jazz cloud that hangs over a lot of new jazz material.

A lot of young jazz musicians I know never listen or play music from the beginning/roots of jazz. The period of Jazz before it developed to the complexity it did in the 40s, seems to provide no interest to many young musicians. Everyone seems to dive into Bebop, stay there, or move on a decade or so, and that’s basically it.

I think jazz is more intellectual than its ever been, and some people seem to be playing more from their knowledge rather than their soul. Because of the sophisticated and classical influenced direction a lot of young jazzers are going, it can be said that in many cases jazz does not relate to, or represent the hardships, blues and feelings of the youth majority in the way it did in 50 years ago.

The classical and jazz theory can be learnt by reading a book, and practicing 3 hours a day. You can learn to play every scale, every sonata, but learning to play from yourself, and using your feelings, is becoming harder and more distorted for young “jazz” musicians by the day.

Life has changed since the the days of Autumn leaves and blue bossa. All the stress, blues and feelings that teenagers experience, are usually expressed by going to club and drinking, or going to see a rock band. When it comes to sitting down and practicing jazz piano altered scales, there seems to be clear separation between life and feelings, and the world of 2 5 1s!

Now, if you look at current youth music that is all about current issues, current feelings and current blues, that separation is non existent. IN my opinion, underground hip hop, and British garage, can have blues, and many of the same features that lie deep in the foundations of true “jazz” music, SOUL and truth.

Personally I think a lot of the traditional values of jazz, can be more prominent in other types of soul music. In a lot of British neo soul, electronic drums are programmed slightly of beat, and that's what gives the beat that certain something....

For me jazz is all about self expression and loosing your inhibitions.

Unfortunately, a lot of current jazz is more image based, and many seem to play what they think is right, rather than what feels right.

It is a very interesting and mysterious issue, and as a young musician, I can completely empathize with you.

Thank you for all your wonderful music and love!

Hope to see you one day.

Best wishes
Ben

(Duke response)

Hey Ben,

You might have just said it better than me and definitely made some great additional points.

Thank you!
G. Duke

Can I shake the cage a tiny bit?...  Why are some musicians leaning towards the Euro-flavor rather than a more improvised flavor?

Let's draw a parallel to today's expressionism - one that many may hate and not acknowledge as "talent" but in a social and economic context is one of the top producers of followers and dollars... that is -- Ghetto Rap...  Why am I taking the discussion there?... stay tuned and hear me out.

Way back, in the days of slavery, wasn't the "holler" used as an improvised form of expression that was found to be "not the (white people's) norm" of everyday chant and music?  I'm sure way back then, listening to some person "near the bottom of society's totem pole" chant in a foreign manner conveying a tone of struggle would have stirred some emotions long ago similar to the feelings that some today may have towards ghetto rap... and let's not address whether rap is "music" or "talent".. that's not the point.  The point is that ghetto rap is a form of improvised expressionism with similarities to that of the holler - it conveys an improvised message of struggle in a lyrical, musical, and metrically signatured format.  So what does this have anything to do with the reason why jazz seems to be taking a pronounced turn towards a Euro flare?  Let me build more of the case...

How many of you musicians who are reading this column have the ability to go out on stage WITHOUT pre-rehearsed musical scores in mind and jam the way Miles or Jarrett do?  The whole concert would be based on your current frame of mind and emotions.  The holler, rap, "call your momma", (and even the blues).... all have improvisation as the primary root as would going on stage cold with no rehearsed material.  I think it is fairly safe to say (flame suit on) that MANY musicians today CANNOT improvise to the extent that the greats could only because of...

1) a lack of talent or ability to improvise

2) a (self-imposed) perception or conditioning that jazz is something that is learned rigidly and played as close to some "standard" rather than "auto-swung" in an emotional and ad-hoc manner

3) the population distribution demands more euro-flavored jazz and musicians will follow the dollars and tune their talents that direction

Picking on #3, what percentage of restaurants, and therefore their customers, will play the likes of Kenny G, Kim Pensyl, David Benoit, versus Keith Jarrett, Tyner/Coltrane, and George!?  I'll let you decide, cuz I don't have the galaxy's answer but I have my suspicions.

Also, tell me if I'm wrong on #1 and #2.

So, there's my personal voice on why jazz will continue to go the route of euro rigidness.  That's not to say there won't be the African-influenced version - I'm quite sure it will be around.  It just won't be as prolific as some of us want it to be.  It's also not to say that any genre of music is any better than the other... they all have their place and time and audience.

George... here's my challenge to you (and you even have a recording studio to fine tune it, but I prefer raw, even with talking in the background)   Publish a RAW and unplugged album, unrehearsed, jam as long or short as you like per track... and even take it to areas that are as far away as you can.  60 minutes of jammin, laughing talking, jammin some more.  Beatles recorded something like it, Jarrett in Fantasm take #7.  And while I'm asking for the moon, I prefer piano, rhodes, and B3 while doing that type of music.  The newer analog synths can be saved for other awesome works ;-)  Keep the jazz movement going your direction... we will follow... not blindly, but due to our understanding and our willingness to learn.

(Duke response)

I can truly say that you break it down very well, and it's obvious that you say what's on your mind and don't apologize for it. I commend you on that! You know, maybe you should write a book - it is an interesting subject.

As far as my challenge, I hear you on that - stay tuned!

G Duke

Hey George its Miles:

Help me out here Bro.
 
Already I've received a copy of your editorial from an aspiring jazz pianist who chose to highlight in red and underlines all of your points challenging the value of technique vs. daring or spontaneity.
 
Now I know that chops alone does not the artist make. How many cats started Julliard only to leave in search of more than the curriculum could provide?
 
I am in full agreement with your assertion that chops alone can never replace attitude, humor, mood, or just sheer inventiveness in a live or recorded performance. These and other qualities make 'our' music what it is in the blues context or just the way we walk and talk.
 
(Maybe a definition of blues would be helpful too so folks won't just think of somber, brooding tunes about broken hearts and love gone bad. Some Blues tunes can be hilarious.)
 
What scares me is that their will be those looking for an excuse to skip practicing altogether because Duke said 'it wasn't important'. As a violin picker, I know that without sheddin', my fingers ain't gon' answer when I call. You can't fool yo' fingers!
 
Where I come from, some cats just can't play... weren't meant to play past a certain level and there's nothing wrong with that. Everybody can't make the NBA just because they play a great game of street ball. Some should just watch on tv.
 
Radio programming and Pro Tools has made it possible for darn near anyone with the right gear to participate and maybe that's o.k. but I still get an attitude when folks disrespect the art by not practicing their free throws and layups. Understanding a little harmony and scale application ain't gonna kill you.
 
Now, I love the technology, if only for the economics of allowing everyone a shot at expression without the gatekeepers on Sunset or 6th Ave. blocking all but a few, but fingering technique, (if its just some simple Hannon exercises) is not a bad thing.
 
I also know that quantizing is not going to help you when you're playing live with some cats that can play so the technology candumb us and numb us if we're not careful.
 
I hear finger nails on the blackboard when I hear a cat on Jazz Radio playing something at the high school proficiency level. Snatch a kid right out of the marching band horn section and he could play the same track note for note. Now that's pathetic.
 
Besides, it gives the H.S. kid nothing to reach for... nothing to strive for. No dreams or aspirations of great artistry, he's already there. He's just pondering his first deal and the cash... the lifestyle. ( and don't let em learn circular breathing - Oh Lord, hep me somebody!)
 
No soul... no technique... just a record deal. Oh well! Maybe I'm just gettin' older. :-)
 
I know everyone can't be Art Tatum but we can all strive to be better. When you're no longer a student of the game you lose something vital.
 
I believe in my heart that Ellington, Strayhorn, Quincy and you Bro. Duke would encourage anyone professing to love this thing called jazz or just music to dig deep into the tool box and get familiar with all of the tools of the trade - technique being one of my favorite. (Probably because it kicks my butt along with hearing and trying to understanding everything I hear.)
 
George, don't let these cats off the hook. Make 'em play Bro... make 'em play! They'll listen to you!!!
 
Peace and blessings!
Miles
 
P.S. European vs. gut bucket... love em both and everything in between but that's another e-mail. :-)

Love you Bro!

(Duke response)

Hey Miles,

How are you doing man, long time no see! Thanks for joining the discourse. 

However, you misunderstood my point! 

Obviously to take your craft to the next level, one has to dig deep and learn not only what makes music work in the first place, but how to technically execute those ideas in the mind and heart. Learning the basics of playing and the theory behind playing will place a firm foundation for an artist to build upon.

Now, in playing jazz, theoretical knowledge and the actual technique of performance can be extremely beneficial. Having a thorough knowledge of melodic and harmonic content and a great technique can make one a great player. 

However what separates the men from the boys and turns a great jazz player into a unique and special player is the ability to transcend mere technique and tap into that inner space that breeds innovation - that is music that springs from an entirely different source, and besides execution, has little to do with technique or musical knowledge. It is a spiritual thing, something I call "the Ancient Source" - and that comes directly from the tradition. It is a continuum from the past.

Now I know to some it will seem as though I must be smoking some good stuff, but I assure you I am cognizant.

 "For a player, technique and theoretical knowledge in and of itself is not the ideal - that is not the music, only a means to it!"

Now Art Tatum is a great example. He was not only extremely proficient as a pianist but also a very soulful player who not only sprang from the tradition, but also led it in new directions.

So, it's not technique vs. daring or spontaneity - it's technique, daring and spontaneity all inclusive supporting the art form. To be perfectly clear, I have always said and will continue to say that learning the basics of music, having a firm foundation and educating oneself is vital to longevity and depth. Learning the craft will give a musician more tools to use in their search for the ultimate melody and harmony. I am not letting the youth off the hook in terms of learning the craft of making music!

However, that in and of itself is Not The Music, it is a means to an end.

My main concern among young jazz pianists is the lack of interest and knowledge in playing music based on afro centric traditions. Those traditions were central to the development of jazz, its' overall popularity through the years, and the feeling of the music. That feeling is what seems to be disappearing and my question is why? Why are young jazz players leaning more towards European musical traditions than African American musical traditions. It's an interesting question that some, based on some of the responses I received, believe may affect or infect other areas of society.

Now I thought I had adequately explained what I meant by the blues - not a form of music but rather a feeling that comes from Black America via Africa, combined with European musical traditions and developed in the bowels of New Orleans, Chicago, St Louis etc. but not isolated there. It's the combination of those elements that give jazz its' unique twist.

Leaning more towards one element than the other has gone on for a long time and there's nothing wrong with that. it just seems that now, the youth movement in jazz have pretty much abandoned the Black American side, and when they try and play with that feeling, it doesn't work because it's not real - they never learned how to play it. In order to really play it, you have to love it. 

Do they really love it? As I said before, an interesting question!

I hope I clarified a few things with this response.

I wish you well my brutha!
G Duke

Hey George:
 
Gotta tell ya... I am enjoying this food for thought. Thank you!
 
I think I do get it and I agree with you. I understand that its not one or the other. Technique is not the music; it's the means by which we make the music. No problem.
 
I just wanted to catch those who would misinterpret your points about technique as an excuse not to practice or study. It reminds me of other discussions like 'why learn to read music when I have such a good ear?' or 'why learn the repertoire; that stuffs old and irrelevant?'
 
I mentioned earlier that I had received an e-mail from someone who had read your piece (before I read it) and highlighted points that seemed to suggest to her that technique and facility were not important. I know this particular musician to be one who would love an excuse not to practice or study. (Imagine that! ) I just wanted to catch musicians like her who might take your meaning out of context and remind them that technique does indeed have its place and value.  
 
I interviewed Kirk Whalum, Jonathan Butler, and Waymon Tisdale this afternoon and you would have thought they had read your commentary. It was great!
 
There's a new piece out called the Miles Davis Story that touches on the process of reaching that inner space or "the Ancient Source" that anyone truly hungry for it or that truly 'loves it' can have a feast.
 
I also watched a new PBS documentary last night called Billy Strayhorn - Lush Life. Wow! The points you make are all over that Strayhorn/Ellington era.

In fact, these guys were deep into the European vibe from an arranging/orchestration standpoint while their feet were all up in the blues - swingin'.
 
One of the cats I spoke with today suggested its the connection to the streets that Jazz once had that's missing from the music today.
 
We talked about Smooth Jazz; which he reminded me, provides a needed break from the stresses of the world but costs us real time reflection of what's happening in our society today. Maybe Jazz got too smooth.
 
That's it for now!
Thanks again G!
Peace and blessings!
MJ

(Duke response)
 
Hey Miles,

You know man, I think you are absolutely correct about some young jazz musicians having lost their connection to the streets. Someone else mentioned that idea in a reply and I think it is valid.

You make some good points below! Tell the lady the highlighted my points to you that she misinterpreted what I said in a big way!

Thanks for taking part, I really appreciate it!

I'll have my publicist call you about setting up an interview.

Take care & God bless,
G Duke

Thank you as always Mr. George Duke for your accessbility and engagement.  This conversation really resonates with me, because 30 something years ago, my Father and I butted heads over and again about my notions of jazz vs. his.  He being an Oscar Peterson etc. etc. fan, he wouldn't hear of jazz even being played on a fender rhodes. 

Today of course, I've evolved and am also a Peteron lover.

While I do think he held a bit too tight to the classic reigns, I also understand the dilemma in the sense that once the parameters of a music might be compromised that could signal the beginning of the end of the road.   We see that in complaints about hip hop and how it originated from socio political framework and messaging and now how it has been all but hijacked as purely a tool of generating money. 

The more authentic the music, the less controllable the artist - and with that I agree that the technique has to be solid, and that the soulfulness has to come from deep within - and probably from deep within a sistah or a brotha' who has had those cultural challenges we face that help us thrust forth a special product. 

One must hurt like an Aretha (so to speak) to generate what I think you're looking for from this future crop of jazz artists,  On the other hand, the Eurocentric model is that we should erase or otherwise ignore our pain - trade it in for a mask of simulated pleasure and express it through weak musicality that has no historical significance and as such ruins our history of creating stuff that is cross generationally relevant (and fun). 

I know you get my drift.  I'm saying what we see happening in our music is happening across our whole collective being.

Thanks for the convo. 
Terry

(Duke response)

Hi Terry,

Thank you for entering the discussion.

I hear you!

I still ask the question why has the interest in Afrocentric playing wained among young jazz players. One doesn't have to be black and/or live a miserable life to desire to play Afrocentrically - is that a word? (smile)

George,
 
My first George Duke album was “Don’t Let Go” in 1978.  I was familiar with you from your work with FZ, and at the tender age of 18, I decided to take a chance with some of my scarce and hard earned money.  I still remember the day I bought that album; it was the beginning of my life’s journey with music.  (I was absolutely amazed that the vocals in the title cut were sung faster than they could be read, and I took speed reading!)
 
My days of actually classifying myself as a pianist and musician, are only a part of one of my former lives.  My OBX and Kurzweil are long mothballed; I keep my piano in tune for my wife’s listening pleasure, and my own therapy when needed.
 
I found a very personal connection to F. Murray Abraham’s portrayal of Antonio Salieri in the motion picture “Amadeus”.  In his prayers, he struggled with why God gave him the gift to recognize the divine and innocent beauty in music, but not the ability to create it.  He referred to himself as the Patron Saint of Mediocrity.  I loved that line.
 
The opinions and sentiments expressed here are all valid.  Music is changing, as it always has.  The question is whether the changes are part of the normal evolution of music.  What is its place and role in our culture?  Is there a disconnect occurring with music that is having the net effect of dumbing down the critical ear of society at large? 
 
Technology has contributed both good and bad.  In pre-digital days of the Moog and Oberheim, musicians sought to corrupt the near perfect electronic waveforms, in order to make them sound more natural.  It was understood that technology produced something too perfect to be pleasing to the ear.  Detuning, chorus effects, harmonic distortion, and ADSR were the tools of the electronic musician.  Look at what lengths you took to make the Yamaha Electric Grand and the Fender Rhodes acceptable as musical instruments!
 
This tug-of-war with the technology helped keep things I check.  As technology advanced, and the digital era progressed, the human refusal to surrender to technology began to weaken, and perhaps commercial artistic standards as well.  The immediate gratification culture has resulted in off-the-shelf, turn-key, musical capabilities.  At least in terms of the new standards now widely accepted.
 
Contrast this to the hours of physical human labor and craftsmanship required of African and Italian instrument makers, and Steinway factories, to make instruments capable of producing pleasing sounds.  Not to mention, the immeasurable hours of practice required of someone bowing strings on the violin, or pushing air over a clarinet reed, to produce a sound that is actually pleasing to the ear.  Historically, creating both music and musical instruments have required a large amount of human capital.  Call it the "sweat equity" of the Sweet Baby.
 
Clearly, the cultural connection to physically making music has experienced a serious interruption.  So too, has the physical experience of listening to music; unfortunately, for many of the current generation, the “columns of moving air” are no bigger than the ear canal itself.  Can you say “Ipod”?  Long live the Greek Theater, Red Rock Amphitheater, and Carnegie and Heinz Halls!  And oh, is there anything sweeter, or more hypnotic and erotic, than a real live Leslie…(long sigh)?
 
With respect to Jazz, I think it too, is suffering from culture’s current obsession with instantaneous gratification and self.  Anglo-European music from Gregorian chant, through Baroque and Classical, were adventures in strict compositional discipline.  The musical styles reflected both the repressive, but orderly, nature of the societies and cultures of the time.  One only needs to read Jane Austin, to realize that the austere confines of societal expectations and self-judgment, served to enhance one’s pleasure and emotional pain.  Small things carried large experiences.  Sort of like the magic of making a single, long note come to life.  You, my dear Si r – are THE MAN!
 
In contrast, African music at its roots was a reflection of the importance that society placed on the role of the individual in the society.  (Not the individual’s focus on self.)  The polyrhythmic, hocket-style music had no unified downbeat.  Instead, each person’s “one” is placed relative to another in order to create the complete picture; without one of the parts, it was not complete.  African instruments themselves were assigned specific gender, and would have anatomical features carved into them, as it was important for even the inanimate to be given an identity.  The Dukey Stick is aware of each and every one of you all!
 
The genius of Jazz was the marriage of these two cultural approaches to music.  In simple terms, it combined the Anglo discipline of the downbeat, with the African celebration of the individual.  More important perhaps, is that both approaches sought to achieve and communicate an intimacy through music; thus Jazz music is the cultural behemoth of our time, in all its forms.
 
How does a self-centric and instantaneous society, maintain and preserve enough patience to foster the intimacy music intends?  Is the Eurocentric style you refer to, the result of an intellectual narcissism?  From a commercial perspective, the motion picture soundtrack may be one of the last genres for music to retain some intimacy.  One must actually sit still for at least 90 minutes, and home theaters are a trend.  (As to whether we will ever again uncouple what is heard, from what is seen, is a topic for another time.  Did video really kill the radio star?)  My wife and I have taken up ballroom, swing, and Latin dancing, and there is also some revival of disciplined and traditional, classic al dancing. We have found this to be an incredible joy.  West Coast Swing is the funk!
 
I’m just not sure the 18 year olds of today can possibly begin the journey through the purchase of a video game, or a download of the most recent hit by one of today’s sexualized teen divas or gangsta goons.  Historically, self-absorbed pursuits of fame and wealth, combined with the absence of critical, personal self-judgment, have not been the driving motivations shaping music of the day.  Unfortunately, the starving musician has been replaced by the American Idol.  As society struggles to maintain and define its values, it is confusing a sensory exercise for raw emotion, and a “product” for true art.
 
I hope I don't sound too negative, but stumbling accross your website, and this discussion, just started some gears turning.  My wife and I hope to get to your Cleveland gig at the end of April.
 
With love and respect, and God Bless, 
Joe

(Duke response)

Joe,

Man, you really laid it out there! 

I truly appreciate your valuable comments to add to this discussion. This thing just keeps growing and growing and I'm very happy that it has started a dialog among musicians. As you know, nothing will change unless a problem is recognized and dealt with. 

In the end, whatever the future holds for music and musicians, I realize I will have to accept. I just hope I did and am still doing something to shape that future in a positive and meaningful way. The rest is up to others, particularly the youth to carry the flag forward.

I just hope they don't forget the basics of what makes music work in the first place and what it takes to perfect that craft.

Fortunately there are some great young musicians out there who will be first class ambassadors for the music, they just need to be encouraged and supported in their quest to suppress mediocrity in music.

Time will tell where this ends up!

Thanks again for your heartfelt comments.
George Duke

george....nothing more to add.....u nailed it....with ur written words,
ur tunes and ur spirit!!!! period!!!

all the best,
jens

Hi George

Who owns the mps tapes?

I believe Universal owns them at this time

Do tou think we'll ever see Feel on cd?

Answered above

Aura, the blues and lib. fan. were released as a double cd a few years back. Unfortunatly I do not own a copy of that. How come it was those 3 albums that were released?

Had nothing to do with me, though I think they did a good re-mastering job

Being followed by girls in Tokyo huh?
Are you sure it was YOU they wanted?
Perhaps they thought you were Chubby Checker!!!! ?
Or Cilla Black? I mean, it was downtown Tokyo, right?

Ha, ha, yeah maybe you're right - except they were saying "Georgie, Georgie!"

(Here I paused to read the muscian's corner)
Some really good coments. I'm not so sure about this "swing" idea. I mean, does "A Remark You Made" swing?

I hear you! What I'm referring to is an attitude, not "swing" in the traditional jazz sense of "ooh bop she ba"

Isn't all of this .... this really ALL about actually Existing? And that many people in the video game console world are focusing on external events for gratification? Thus removing them further AND further away from the real source of all feelings and sence of orientation in this dang world.

That's a point!

anyway
You're a sweetie George!
Love your Love (most of the time)
Peter
Ps  If you dont get this mail EXACTLY like i mean it, I'll take it all back. ds

Thanks for the shout!
George Duke

dear george,

it's a pleasure to be writing to you. i've been reading what you had to say about the current state of jazz and the tendency of the younger generation of jazz pianists, although technically excellent, to lose touch with the roots of jazz and blues. i'm 24 yrs old and i was classically trained on the piano. reading your thoughts reminded me what's important about jazz, and that i should always keep the blues at heart. herbie's headhunters was what turned me onto funk and jazz - and since then i've discovered all your MPS records (and some zappa stuff too!) through my love of the rhodes piano.

Thomas

You might find this essay by Kenneth Rexroth of interest -- it
seems to make some similar points to what you do --

http://www.bopsecrets.org/rexroth/jazz.htm

(Links at the bottom of that webpage lead to some other Rexroth articles on jazz and jazz poetry.)

Cheers,
Ken

George:

It was a pleasure to read your reflections on the blues-based/Euro- centric dilemma that has so polarized the music community today. I think you have a sophisticated sense of what the issues are, an appreciation for the virtues of many different forms of music, and a refreshing, honest approach.

I was startled to learn recently that many of the great older musicians - Duke Ellington among them - disliked the word "jazz" because for them, that term had disreputable connotations of the whorehouses whence it sprang. It's curious how, for a later generation of musicians such as yourself, that association need no longer be a source of disgust or disdain. As you noted, jazz is in fact a melding of the African-American and European forms. It's also curious that for a musician such as Ellington, there was apparently no dilemma at all; he seemed to effortlessly unite elements of the two traditions and create something new and exciting in the process. It's also striking that you mentioned both Billy Childs and Keith Jarrett. Billy Childs has created some heavily "composed" pieces, fully of tricky and shifting time signatures, that nonetheless swing hard and pulsate with vitality. Keith Jarrett has been able to draw upon the subtle harmonies of romantic-era European music and spin some magnificent improvisations from it. In my opinion, Brad Mehldau has also successfully united aspects of the two traditions and created some amazing stuff in the process.

So I wonder whether "blues/classical", or "Afro-American/European" defines the matter exactly? Maybe it's "heart & soul/technology obsession", or "artistic expression/demands of commercialization" ? I'd love to hear you take this up.

Best regards,
Robert

p.s. One minor point: I get a little dismayed when I hear people say "I could care less", when it's clear that what they really mean is "I COULDN'T care less". In spite of this, I loved your piece -- and one of its virtues is that it called forth such an outpouring of informed and sensitive responses.

(Duke response)

Hello Robert,

Thank you for your comments, but before I tackle something else, I think I'll deal with the current subject at hand.

Peace,
G Duke

(Robert continues)

I don't think of it as something else -- I'm suggesting that the terms of the opposition might not be posed correctly, especially since various artists have successfully drawn upon both traditions. You yourself say it: "What makes and made jazz was the combination of African American and European elements." If this is so, then we have to ask: is there really an opposition between them? We have to figure out what is primary and what is secondary, what is essential and what is appearance.

(Duke response)

Hi Robert,

Of course it's all related. The interesting thing is that the responses to my initial observation have taken on a life of its' own, and further have broadened the issue much further than I imagined. For this I am very happy! There are a lot of really smart and dedicated musicians and listeners out there who have different strong points of view that need to be expressed and heard.

Just for clarification, I'm not suggesting that there is a mortal conflict between African American and European musical elements, in fact I believe that "Jazz Is" because of the combination of these elements. The fact that they are from different musical and cultural traditions, and in some cases observe different musical rules, makes the combination even more fulfilling to me!

At the same time, I also feel that in order for "Jazz" to remain, that balance - or detente if you will - needs to be more or less observed. Take the African American elements out of the music and Jazz in reality becomes classical music. Take Classical elements from Jazz, and the music becomes more chant like with less sophisticated chords, voice leading and the like. Further, my definition of Jazz is probably broader than most.

I believe from reading the responses of most of my fans, that they believe as I do that there is a move away from African American musical values among young jazz players, Black White Latino or Asian.

My question remains, why?

Some of the responses I've received have really attempted to answer this question with quite valid reasons.

Well, one thing we can say for sure, the future evolution of American music and its' influence on the rest of the world should be very interesting in deed!

I appreciate your contributions to this discussion!

G Duke