George Duke
Mr. Duke,
At last!! Just read your article about the current state of jazz being
overly geared toward the European tradition.......... Hear, hear!! Amen!!
So many young jazzers complain about the younger jazz guys not having
"soul".............. I've personally compared it to the French
guy who eats bicycles.......... it's amazing, but is it art? Your take
on it is the best, thought-provoking piece I've read so far......... in
a sense, I blame Charlie Parker!! Why?? Because so many of his followers
heard the blazing technique, but not the blues at the core of his playing..........
in a sense, they got it half right......... and when you think about it
this way, Trane just fueled the fire of the "technicians"............
not his fault, of course.
FWIW, I'm a 60ish white attorney with a passion for jazz, trying hard
to spend my "later" years playing jazz (alto sax)............
I'm currently working on "Cry Me a River", and it strikes me
that this tune might well be a good example of what you're talking about.........
in form, it's not the blues at all, but what an opportunity to use a blues
"feel" of emotion, heartbreak, sadness, and anger!!
Thank you!!
Al
(Duke response)
Al,
I hear what you're saying, but you're going to make some people angry
over your association of Charlie Parker and John Coltrane contributing
to the Europeanization of Jazz.
While I understand what you're saying, I don't believe they contributed
to this movement, even accidentally - but maybe I'm wrong. I'll be really
interested to see if someone answers you on this one!
That's a HOT topic!!
G Duke
George,
I'm right now beginning to read your article posted in CounterPunch. I'm
a musician/guitarist continuing to create my own sound and have begun
to debate whether to study within the Jazz track or the traditional music
major track. My style tends to be classical- improvisational, i.e., classical
guitar technique with mostly improvised elements that I'm continuing to
develop as I study more types of music.
I sent your article to my professor who is teaching a class in World Music
at the University of Pittsburgh (we are currently discussing African American
musical traditions and styles). Really glad you posted your article on
CP. I'll have to bookmark your website.
Jim
Hi George,
Thanks very much for the update and taking a moment for a fan.
I was reading your musicians corner and enjoying an "insider's"
perspective on the evaporation of culture in music today. The issue is
too complex to summarize in a way that would be accepted for it's intent
without someone picking it apart for meaningless clarifications. The topic
is what matters and not individual words, that when focused on, tend to
deflect the issue in directions that are verbal calisthenics without any
spirit, just like the popularity of the canned music that inspired the
topic. On the other hand there are many meaningful ways to examine the
subject and many potent viewpoints that all carry significance beyond
mere statistics. The notion that there's any culture in "Pop Culture"
is confusing to most and for good reason. When big business becomes the
guiding light for creativity, the light will only direct things into someone's
pocketbook. There has always been a struggle between the artist and the
business person that brings the art to the public. That struggle seems
to be over - business has won it. In music business terms, the record
companies are the guiding light, and they threw Jazz in the dumpster out
back because it no longer conforms to the Pop Culture they've managed
to control into utter simplicity without the slightest concern for creativity.
In today's marketplace, the musicians that weren't around during any phase
of Jazz's popularity are not always aware of the "long view"
and play what seems appropriate based on the corporate business model
of "success". The irony is that the corporate model they grew
up with has tossed out creativity, and not having any themselves, don't
have a clue how to handle things. Another way to say that is "being
a great musician doesn't make you a great business person".
It's clear (at least to me) that the Internet is going to be the savior
of creative music. The only thing missing is a cyber version of Alfred
Lions, Ahmet Ertegun, Claude Nobs, George Wein, and most of all Bill
Graham who not only helped create the modern music world, but felt strongly
about "good music" whether the audience asked for it or not.
Imagine someone today putting together a concert with Toby Keith, Wynton
Marsalis, and Hilary Duff - not gonna happen! He put Cannonball Adderly
together with The Who, had Jimi Hendrix open for Gabor Szabo, mix
Buddy Rich with Ten Years After and of course the big one - Miles Davis
and The Grateful Dead. That kind of business person needs to step up to
the plate for any serious success outside of the R.I.A.A.
I'm on the Jazz Programmer's Mailing List (JPL) and read what all the
station managers and programmers talk about. It's beyond sad in many ways.
There seems to be a very disturbing irony in the mindset of the people
with the power to control what gets played, and more importantly what
doesn't. They routinely complain about shrinking markets, but because
of "individual words" without spirit, they have isolated themselves
into a very intellectual artifact that belongs in a museum because it's
no longer alive with the creativity that it was born with.
I believe in the groove regardless of the market and obviously, based
on the popularity of my site and other Jazz Rock Fusion sites, I'm not
alone, not by a long shot. Again, the only thing missing is the central
force to bring the widely scattered musicians and fans together. I'm working
hard toward this goal and with sheer force of will have been able to accomplish
things I could never have imagined while growing up and listening to the
creative burst in the early 70's. My feelings on the issue of "where
oh where has the groove gone" are pretty strong and unlike most in
apathy, have taken a proactive role in that discussion.
Thanks again for your time,
Rick
mr. duke:
i grew up in arcata, california and your trio performances in humboldt
county were some of my formative musical experiences - a belated thanks
for that!
i've been making a living as a musician in amsterdam, nl for thirty years
now, and of course we've all seen a lot of changes in that time.
holland is an interesting place because there is no strong local musical
tradition, but great things can happen when the musicians take a little
from Sonny Rollins and a little from Igor Stravinsky, learn their instruments
and develop their own music from these disparate points of departure -
it's a bit like what ran blake has been doing in boston with his third
stream department (now called 'contemporary improvisation).
in the last fifteen years, along with the beginning of commercial television,
there had been a large increase in the number of jazz students in the
conservatories. these students are much slower to develop a personal style
and lack the sort of basic curiosity about a broad spectrum of music.
a definition from Joe Henderson via Fred Hersch is that jazz is about
'makin' shit up'. another definition could be that it's about makin' shit
up related to the blues. i'm comfortable with both. but, it's this primal
'quality' that is difficult to teach. it's easy to teach the techniques...
all the best,
Michael
hi george,
been digging your amazing chops and groove since the 80's, and you are
a hero to me.
i am a self-taught rock guitarist/singer songwriter, and piano player/composer.
ultimately all boundaries between musics are illusionary, we see rivers
fusing, retributarising, rejoining...
i live in italy now, and my beef is with the inability to swing, be it
in rock, blues or jazz.
so many folks don't get how elastic time is, and what a pleasure it is
to play around the beat.
push it, pull it, tweak it like taffy!
most cats play like drum machines these days.
vernacular world music came late to 4/4, and is busy undermining our addiction
to it.
it's a lockstep boxing-in of rhythm that is emblematic of a 'square' worldview,
the same one that gives us militarism, psychosis and a rigid, unbending,
brittle misunderstanding of the fluidity of life.
no signature is evil, but meter is a light vestment, not a ball and chain!
playing in strict time is only beautiful when contrasted with a loose
approach, and over-insisted upon, has a sterilising effect on the passion
and sexiness of the groove.
if music be the food of biochemistry, play on, and thanks for being so
wise, as well as a master of music and on fire with the blues!
yr fan,
michael
Mr. Duke-
I read your Counterpunch article, and was really struck by one point you
made:
"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!"
As a classically-trained pianist, I could not agree more wholeheartedly.
The increased emphasis on technical virtuosity at the expense of real
feeling is a worrying trend in classical music as well as jazz. It is
frustrating to hear, say, Rachmaninov's 3rd concerto played by some 19
year old who can bring out every note with utter clarity, at tempo and
at a dynamic level that could wake the dead, but can't bring any real
warmth or excitement to the piece. Such performances are all too common
in today's youth- fetishizing classical music world.
As for jazz, like classical music, it is a victim of the conservatory
environment, with its emphasis on competition, "objective" standards
of competence, and assembly-line approach to musical training. Many music
schools have an institutional attitude better suited to training agricultural
scientists or hotel managers than practitioners of a totally unique art
form shared by all cultures. Music is not an industrial product or a graduate
thesis. As "jazz studies" becomes further entrenched in the
academy, jazz is being fundamentally changed, in some ways for the better,
but in other ways for the worse, as you detailed in your fine article.
So, to conclude, I feel that jazz is joining classical music in
being institutionalized by academia - to the detriment of the
music itself. Would that those great conservatory chops be used for something
truly expressive, but true genius is not made any less rare by the granting
of college degrees.
Andrew
(Duke response)
Andrew,
I really appreciate your comments, and I agree that the Conservatory approach
to teaching and the competitive atmosphere it creates has severely influenced
the heart of the young musician. While competition can be a good thing,
it must be taught that winning a competition is not what eventually will
dictate ones success over the long haul of a career.
In fact it is mostly the opposite! Time spent alone in a practice room
getting in touch with ones center and learning how to express that core
self is prime. It is the expression of the heart executed by an understated
but viable technique that endures.
My idea of a great performance is one in which I am touched in the heart,
but only barely aware of the technique used to execute a piece of music.
During a performance I would rather not spend my time marveling at ones
technique, I can always analyze that after the performance.
In many ways it's like watching a great film. For the most part the viewer
shouldn't be aware of the score, but should feel the
emotional impact that score brings to the picture, and by no means is
this meant to marginalize its' importance. In much the same way, a great
technique is in no way marginalized by not being constantly displayed
stage front!
I wish you all the best and thanks for adding some valuable
thoughts to this discourse.
George Duke
Hi George
As a long-time fan – saw you with Billy Cobham in Munich in ‘74
and most recently at the London Jazz Café 2004 – I caught
your piece on Counterpunch and found it a little surprising! Mainly for
the fact that what you’re talking about has surely been going on
for some time, musically and politically.
US jazz especially has become a campus phenomenon. Seasoned players have
achieved long-needed financial security with professorships and lecturing
posts, but the new kids coming through are schooled in a safe canon of
material of dead men’s work which typically concludes at Coltrane.
How this could possibly nurture the phenomenally free Roy Haynes (at 80)
and James Carter performances I witnessed at New Orleans Jazzfest 2005?
Yet today’s music of the whorehouse is brutalised, nihilistic, anti-social
garbage reflecting – not contradicting - the pervading values of
Bush-era barbarism.
So where can jazz flourish? Asking that question as you have was my attraction
to your article – cus I dunno!
Yet also, apart from Ellington’s motto about the necessity of swing,
surely his other famed rule of thumb – that there is only two kinds
of music; good and bad – is more relevant to this discussion. Whatever
the genre, quality counts.
There is great music all around the world, and blues music in China, Brazil,
India and Asia, if you define the blues as a sense of freedom, yearning,
hope, reaching out for a better world and love of humanity. I’m
unclear about whether you’re calling for a conservation of the strictly
north American jazz canon – or lamenting a conservatism characterised
by sheet-music rote players unable to improvise from the heart. (I must
admit that as a non-keyboardist I’ve always been puzzled by classical
players’ inability to improvise jazzically!)
But this is also not a discussion unique to music.
Take the arts generally. Most artists who are even remotely socially aware
– as painters, dancers, dramatists, novelists, film-makers, sculptors,
poets - struggle to articulate these tensions: the individual v
the collective, mere repetitive entertainment v artistic ground-breaking,
convention v experiment.
Also politically. A major factor in North America has been the collective
failure of political forces to mobilise beyond the Democratic/Republican
axis - two cheeks of the same arse. ( eg If La Clinton makes it to the
White House that will mean your populous and great nation being ruled
by just two families over 20 years! Might as well have an almighty, unelected
bunch of retards as a Royal Family like us!) The peace/environmental/labour/civil
liberties/public welfare/ethnic rights activists are ground into atomised
irrelevance by corporate rule. In particular, where are the Fred Hamptons
of today? Our enemies have done a great job of either killing off or buying
off such noble dissidents.
Most worryingly, you seem to be saying that you have to have experienced
slavery to play the blues. Two problems. One. Does that apply Jo Zawinul?
Bill Evans? Charlie Haden, your old boss Frank Zappa even? Is slavery
just a historical, north American issue? I would say no on both counts.
Photographer Sebastiao Selgado’s documentation of contemporary forced
migrations is a sample bit of evidence here.
Phew. So many angles. Maybe you could publish the filings you have collected
around your magnetic article?
Be strong,
Nick-London, UK
(Duke response)
First let me say thank you for contributing to the discussion.
You misunderstood my intention about the feeling of the blues. I'm referring
to a feeling that is much broader than a form of music or a USA dominated
groove. It is a spirit that emanated from Africa many years ago.
So for clarification, I did NOT say that one needed to experience slavery
to play the blues - in fact it is quite the opposite! My concern is the
desire in young jazz musicians to include that feeling in their playing.
My concern is musicians who see technique as the end all of a performance.
The survival of music I'm concerned about is music that comes straight
from the heart without loosing its' connection with ordinary people. Jazz
was not formed to be intellectualized, it was a people's music that
grew out of a cultural gumbo.
A balance of elements is what's important if jazz is to survive.
I don't want to see jazz lose its' grit and become the next generations
elevator music or a music mainly comprised of non improvised scales designed
to be heard in concert halls.
Jazz is meant to soothe and challenge.
Regarding politics, my hope is that Jazz will remain free of it!
Take care,
GD
george,
i just read your article..
at 7:00AM (new your time !!)
RIGHT ON...
big hug,
ron carter
ps....
please share this hug with stanley
(Duke response)
Thanks Ron, this means a lot coming from you!!
G Duke
Gerge,
With regards to your musicians corner on jazz and young jazz musicians,
I'd just like to ask you, how far do you go?
Do you know that in the 1950s they were saying EXACTLY what you're saying
about the "long haired" jazz pianists who "couldn't swing"?
Pianists who were panned by "purists" because they had a classical
background... and were white. Yeah, guys like Bill Evans.
Now, these days Bill Evans is looked at by many jazz critics and musicians
as the most important jazz pianist in the latter half of the 20th century.
I guess it's a throw-up between him and McCoy Tyner. I just wanted
to ask you to comment on it. Was Bill Evans one of those pianists
with "too much technique"?
No, he didn't play the blues as much as many jazz pianists - not to say
that he couldn't jam on the blues. And to those who said that he
couldn't swing, well, they just weren't listening. Listen to "Oleo"
on "Everybody Digs Bill Evans", and yes, read the album notes
about what Miles had to say about him.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on Bill Evans.
Paul
(Duke response)
Hi Paul,
I absolutely LOVE Bill Evans. Bill was an extremely lyrical and melodic
player who was definitely not all about technique. Bill could execute
a melody like non other, and not only that, he could play the blues.
Maybe I'm being misunderstood by using the word "blues" because
I'm not referring to a particular form or style of music. I am referring
to a feeling, that African shout if you will, that inner spirit that has
a connection to the past. Bill had that.
Now, everyone doesn't tap into that spirit in the same way, but you instinctively
know when one has it. In fact, maybe it would have been clearer to use
that word - "it". This musician or that musician has "it".
What that is is in many ways an enigma. The "it" is what generally
separates an incredible musician from a good musician. Acquiring the "it"
is the last step in reaching the pinnacle of musicianship.
The "it" has nothing to do with technique! In fact some musicians
have "it" without knowing anything about music. The ultimate
musician is one who makes use of the basic fundamentals they have learned
as a foundation, but uses "it" to express that knowledge as
a vehicle or conduit for their true heart, soul and spirit. Music at its'
best is spiritually derived and executed.
Bill Evans had all this and more!
GD
Hi George
Love your music and in particular your approach to music. Don't know what
is missing from todays jazz, whether it's swing or the free expression
of emotion, but something is missing. Maybe you also think that swing
is the sound of free expression of emotion, is that also what you found
in brazilian music?
I think for better of for worse, jazz has become accepted as an artform
and in that process also a more formalised kind of music. Today jazz is
taught in conservatories, as opposed to the old days, where I guess it
was more handed down from the older generations through on-the-spot-learning
during gigs and jams and from listening to records. Maybe it's the classical
spirit from the conservatories that take over. That's what conservatories
are usually about, learning people to play the correct notes and rhytms
and everything beyond that, is considered inappropriate noise
with no value. Players like Keith Jarrett and Bill Evans also seem to
be heroes of a lot pianists today and even though they are great
and can/could swing, they are more europeanised players and that
might be what people pick up on. Also as somebody earlier mentioned jazz
is considered a strict format on radio stations. There's probably quite
a few young players swinging in clubs somewhere (no sexual puns intended),
but they just don't get recorded beacuse they don''t fit the format. Not
to pester you and I know you have answered it before, but I can't
find any information on your site, as to whether or not your MPS recordings
are being rereleased in the near future, do you know anything about that?
That is the music of a great creative spirit.
Kind regards
Søren
(Duke response)
Hello Soren,
You know, maybe I shouldn't have used the word "swing". I am
not referring to "swing" in the classic sense. I am referring
to a sometimes underlying rhythm or pulse. Depending on the type of music
your playing, it can be accomplished by accents or speeding up or slowing
down certain sections of a piece.
In short, all music needs to "swing" - even a balled. If there
is no rhythm, then their is no pulse which means the music is dead - Hello!
(The MPS recordings will be made available at my website when I receive
them from Universal Germany)
Take care,
GD
George,
I just read your Counterpunch article - excellent and thought provoking.
Recently I heard Branford Marsalis making the same general points on TV
in an interview for New England Cable News with regard to the loss of
emotion and expression in favor of conservatory technique in contemporary
jazz which is linked to a drift away from the blues.
One question I have for you (and for Branford I guess): who are you referring
to? I know that it's not really appropriate to name names in a forum such
as Counterpunch or on TV. However, I listen to a wide range of jazz (including
so called "third stream" and other improvisational music that
borrows from other traditions than the blues) and I have not heard what
you are talking about there, at least at the high levels of improvisation
and composition exhibited by someone like Dave Douglas or Don Byron, for
example.
I suppose at a "lower level" of jazz playing that is primarily
the
product of schooling in jazz programs this might be happening, but at
the national/international performance level (e.g., at Newport '04 and
'05) I haven't heard it.
Dave
(Duke response)
Hi Dave,
I am happy that you have not heard this waning away from the
feeling of the "blues" if you will.
And yes, I'm referring to the young pianists I've heard at various colleges
and schools throughout the world. I am not a hater and do not want to
name any artists, for each artist has their own walk through this life
and enough obstacles to deal with without me adding more hand grenades
to their minefield.
G Duke
Hello George,
I saw your article on Counterpunch and then went to your site and saw
some of the responses. Great discussion.
In the article say you're not going to define jazz, but indeed you do--using
a definition that I've seen before and agree with.
Namely, jazz is swing, improvisation, and the blues!
If those elements are missing, you might have something that's "kind
of" like jazz. But as Johnny Adams put it in one of his tunes: it
ain't the same thing.
Regards from New Orleans, LA,
Jedd
Way to go George!!! All I would say is keep checking out some of the
new pianist... I would be honored if you started your search with me..I
may not be "new" but I'm not old (31 years old)......at the
risk of sounding arrogant, there are still a few of us out there under
35 still swinging.....Now maybe none of the major jazz periodicals or
labels will mention us (or me) after 11 records as a leader .....I hope
and pray that either way I'll always try to swing!! Thanks for the much
needed words!!!
All Luv!!!
Orrin Evans (East Coast Philly)
ps. The only thing I will say is that without the apprentice- musician
system of learning that used to exist how will things change. There are
no more Art Blakey's, Betty Carter's, Elvin Jones and many others when
a young musician moves to NY. Is Higher Education the answer? Leaving
the street and bandstand totally out of learning the music.......?
(Duke response)
Hi Orrin,
You make some good points below. I still believe it is a balance that
needs to be achieved.
I wish you all the best and keep swinging! (Actually I'm not referring
to "swing" in the traditional sense, but more from an unconscious
underlying spirit that has ties to the motherland and our musical forefathers.)
Phew - that was heavy! (smile)
GD
Hi George,
Hi George; Music is too good to categorize. None of your 'its' words take
an apostrophe. Good to see you on Counterpunch, anyway. all the best,
George-Vancouver BC
(Duke response)
Thanks for the "its" lesson! I'm not a literary scholar by any
means, but as long as I get my message across, I'm happy!
By the way, I totally agree with you that music is too good, or should
we say too valuable and important to categorize.
However, by the same token I understand the need for the people that sell
the music to put it in some sort of order. Organizing music by genre
is definitely helpful in finding and selling material. On the other hand
I don't feel that any musician should be bound by those arbitrary boundaries.
Long live artistic freedom!
GD
Hi George Duke:
Your commentary was on point. I'm a self taught bassist from Phila, and
did a year of composition studies at Manhattan School of Music. I saw
first hand how the music learning process has become formulated and instructed,
usually by guys (and gals) who really do not possess much playing creativity
and thus become teachers and theorists. Teaching is cool, but for jazz
it's become a massive industry of think tanks, leaning on a lot of Eastern
Euro classical devices. the result is folks sounding the same, drawing
from the same learning sources.
The problem as you are well aware is that the "negroid attributes"
are eliminated and discounted from the music, leaving the listener bewildered
and the music with no blues or hump. I suffer this now playing with many
cats over here in France. But I still hit with Geri Allen and other Afro
Americans in NYC and passing thru Europe.
I've dug a lot of your work over the years, from Cannonball to the Cobham/Duke
projects, to your own, and Diane Reeves and Rochelle Ferrel(whom I used
to work with around Phila when she was known as Rochelle BARNS!). I've
been revisiting your stuff with Byron Miller, Black Diamond, Reach for
it, lately! Killin! They don't make bass players like that no mo!
If you ever come thru Paris, check in. And if you ever need abassist,
I hit with electric and acoustic. You can ask Christian Mcbride about
me!
Peace....
Darryl Hall
P.S. I don't want to clog you up, but i got some happening original stuff
I'd love you to check out.
Hello George - Regarding your article, Frank Zappa said "jazz
isn't dead, it just smells funny." That was some years ago. Now, I
don't hear anybody playing anything interesting.
- Walter Donnaruma
George,
I just read your comments on your website about the state of Jazz.
It was beautiful. Keep on telling the truth.
Russell Malone
In the eighties I would go to Jazz clubs in DC that some musicians I
loved to listen to (Steve Williams, Charlie Young, Tom Williams, Geoff
Harper, Aaron Graves, Marshall Keys....) played (Twins, les Nices, Philly's
Finest, Moore's Love and Peace, One Step... MOSTLY I was the only caucasion
for a lot of these venues.... When things were segregated you could hear
the most amazing music I have ever felt run thru/enter my body vibrationally
from just listening. Intergretion is just blended in. I don't think integretion
expanded the music...
I don't want to come off too angry but just share some observations...
Crazy thing is a few things I noticed happened simultaneouly:
1. Universities becoming chop shops for young musicians to mimmick "so
lows" they hadn't lived enough to play. (the only thing just as annoying
as hearing old white women playing like they think they're Coltrane, note
for note, is young black guys doing the same thing - although one is easier
to bear/understand.)
2. Younger sharper dressed artists Wynton Marsalis etc. become what the
white music consumers think is JAZZ. NO they don't know anything else
but wynton, soon diana krall, they don't go down to hear live jazz til
it's their son or their son's friend playing at the newly renovated section
of DC that hires young white players (that play nothing over 2,5,1's)
cuz whites pay to come out to hear them over Black artists you have to
pay transportation for & more money for the gig. Plus the parents
eat huge meals & pride over how great the kids sound after two semester's
of study.
3. Having an elder appreciate you/your music/have you sit in etc.. becomes's
of lesser value than a record deal or your own drifting along creating
your own ego based thang.
4. Record companies are putting more $$ into far reaching records sales
occuring for artists younger, not as deep.
5. Killin' musicians play behind other musicians that are not Jazz or
on the level, just for the bread.
6. The splintering of community due to all the shit combine.
7. the dissasociation with the world around you as a means to practice
more / than the ability to express the world around you thru your playing.
i.e. higher cost of living, free time and break downs in family, church,
and community. etc...
just my 2 cents! I loved what you wrote, need to read again to soak more
up and thanks to Orrin for hippin' me!
love,
hide
Hey Willard,
thanks for sending this to me, it was a great read. First, I am left with
a great thankfulness that I got my core jazz training in the Monk Institute,
where we learned from the "predecessors." I think I'd be a very
different player today if I hadn't gone through that.
Then, I think the present situation reflects how jazz is primarily taught
and learned today - in the university/college/conservatory arena, more
and more by people who have had limited contact w/the masters. In fact,
someone recently mentioned that very soon, the next generation of jazz
graduates will have been taught solely by university-trained musicians
who haven't necessarily experienced the trials-by-fire on the bandstand.
Those who are lucky enough to study in NYC where they can get more exposure
to the masters - it makes a real difference. I know and I've heard what
Mr. Duke is talking about, but I guess people can only play what they've
been exposed to and know about. I think it's a two-sided issue - is there
a way the masters could be more available/accessible? and on the other
hand, universities and the like need to seek them out while they are still
here.
I'm just so grateful to have had my a** kicked all over the place by the
likes of Clark Terry, Jackie McLean, etc. Esp. Jon Faddis who schooled
me on the blues... Well, I've run on long enough...! What do you think?
Helen
I'm 44 and growing up good music and instruments were in our house from
the day I could walk. My parents weren't musicians but it was normal to
have an upright piano and maybe a guitar in the house. Now within that
I was raised with the believe that the African Spirituals sung by our
Great Greats were used as a tool to endure the madness and evil of slavery.
These Spirituals AKA The Blues (secular issues) Gospel (Praise) are roots
of all American music. Jazz is a child of Blues and Gospel and older brother
to Soul, R&B, Rock N Roll, Funk and Hip Hop. They are just musical
siblings divided by their names a lot like skin color.I was very fortunate
to have parents who indulged my music and spent the money on lessons and
I had some really great teachers The Grant Leblanc Music Academy on MLK
Blvd in Houston was were it all came together you couldn't learn anything
there without being taught where in history it was derived from.
They also taught music in schools back then and since i played Piano and
Bass I got in the stage band at both of the High Schools i attended. The
latter was James Madison High School I will never forget how we could
be rehearsing the most elaborate composition known to man but if the horns
didn't put enough Blues on a section for him, folding chairs and drums
sticks flew towards the horn section. I didn't understand then how that
would shape my attitude towards what I write play and record.
I am saying all that to say the element of Blues that is the key to American
Jazz these youngens don't got. While they have the technique they lack
the cultural knowledge to feel the Blues element i think that's were the
breakdown is. Music appreciation is not taught at home or school anymore
so the church is gone out of the music. We have to teach these kids the
root of music again to preserve our roots. I could go from here into how
politics has taken the funding for our youth programs and lined their
pockets with it but that's a story that we all know all too well. This
has been such a deep and emotional subject for me for so may years i hope
this makes since.
With that I look forward to your next Houston Gig I will bring my son
so he can enjoy as well I hope to meet you some day.
Oh yeah dust off one of those CP70Bs or 80 you got lying around and give
me another family funk record (smile)
Eugene
George,
An Observation was eloquently stated I think the answer is simple, No
Blues No Jazz
Thank You,
Bernard
Dear Mr. Duke,
I whole-heartedly agree with your ideas regarding jazz:
The spontaneity and improvisation that happens in a group where what you
play next is based on what was just played is at the heart of jazz. As
a musician I get the greatest satisfaction from playing with a group that
is improvising and we play something we've never played before! Playing
with different musicians creates different music. Sometimes a musician
can perform with another musician and they can communicate on so many
levels and they inspire one another to play new and greater things. Isn't
this part of what makes music delightful and inspiring and motivating?
This is not to say that non improvised music can not delight or inspire
or motivate; it can. However, the joy that comes from being involved in
the creation, not just the production, is much greater for me as a musician
and a listener!
If I may, let me offer my opinion regarding the music industry and the
effect it has on music and musicians. The industry has always been about
profits but there was a time when this was balanced somewhat by respect,
awe, appreciation and social value. The industry has become a large mega
dollar entity. The aspects that at one time served to maintain a balance
have been displaced by selfish exploitation and greed. The lives of people
today are SATURATED with media. We must each choose how much time we will
spend being "entertained" and by what we will be "entertained".
There is more to see and hear than anyone could ever do. So there is no
room left in the industry for OK sales. Think how country music "crossed
over" to the mega bucks.....if it didn't would anybody hear country
music at all? Unfortunately BLUES never "crossed over" into
mega buck sales and so there is little room left for this rich music as
far as the industry is concerned. The industry at one time was the largest
reason why we could be exposed to so many different musicians and music.
Now it is the reason for the lack of diversity in music. This is the sad
reality of corporate greed and selfishness.
Finally, may I say that if you are a musician and you can't play the BLUES
you're time would be well spent learning how. The form is simple but that
is part of the reason it is difficult to pull off. Playing the blues forces
you to develop all of the aspects of music that you mentioned in your
definition of JAZZ. If you can't play the BLUES you are lacking in at
least one of the afore mentioned aspects (rhythm, melody, phrasing, dynamics,
swing, groove, etc).
Many thanks,
Glenn
Dr George Duke.
I hope this gets to you.
I read your regurgitation about Jazz pianists and whether or not Jazz
has left its African American core
I think you’re a couple of million dollars richer and 30 years too
late in your observation
Of course Jazz has it’s left it’s African American base,
because people like you left Jazz in the seventies for R&B and Funk
(and a few extra dollars), and the hip-swinging, bumpin’ brothers
and sisters left with you, leaving those artists who dedicated themselves
to the preservation of Pure Jazz to fend for themselves, and what happened
can be seen today at any Jazz concert. (I guess I felt a ‘disconnect’
from you back then) At any Jazz concert, there are typically an almost
equal amount of Black and White attendees in their 50s and older, less
Black and more White attendees from 35 to 50 and virtually no young Black
and a noticeable amount of young White attendees.
Yeah, I understand the classic argument that ‘I had to make a living’,
and I respect that to a point, but, did you ever look back?...then! It
reminds me of the mobster who always calls for the Priest on his death
bed, or the brothers and sisters that get saved after a life of drugs
and such.
Young Blacks have abandoned Jazz because (in their mind) it’s ‘corny’
or old, or lame compared to the musically baseless Rap they have been
inundated with. Just ask one of them if they even know who you are, but,
I’ll bet a 25 year old musically aware White person will know.
So, perhaps you became aware of this too late, but, I’ll look forward
to hearing your efforts to revive Fats’ or Bobby Timmons, or making
tribute to Ahmad Jamal..I’ll be there to photograph your concert.
BTW – I have a theory that in 40 or 50 years, M&M and Vanilla
Ice will have been the pioneers or Rap and Hip-Hop. Can You feel me?
Ben
(Duke's response)
Hello Ben,
While I respect your opinion and realize that you represent a portion
of the traditional jazz audience, I have much to say to you in response.
I'll be as brief as I can.
First, I can tell that you're annoyed by the fact that you called my observation
a regurgitation. Be that as it may, the fact that I have made a decent
living playing the music I love for a long period of time only reinforces
the fact that being well versed in music and utilizing the historically
spiritual connection to Africa is important and should be acknowledged
and used.
Your comments sound to me like you are in love with a particular style
of jazz music that you call "pure" jazz and there is nothing
wrong with that. It also seems that you do not like funk or r&b and
for whatever reason feel that jazz musicians leaning into that area amount
to what could be termed "sacrilege" - and further more that
these "lost" jazz musicians have taken the black audience with
them. I believe that about sums it up, right?
Wow! Let me correct your assertion that jazz is in any way "pure".
Jazz has always been an integration of musical styles. The reason jazz
exists is because of the pulsating rhythms from Africa and the chordal
and melodic structures of our European brothers coming together into a
spicy musical gumbo in New Orleans and the like.
Just so you know, I have received "way to go" emails from bassist,
Ron Carter among others, and I think you would categorize him as a "pure
jazz player.
Now, to clarify my "regurgitation" - I have said over and over
again that style is irrelevant to what I am referring to. With all due
respect and while I love both Bobby Timmons and Fats Waller, what I am
talking about has little to do with whether a pianist follows their particular
styles, but rather if they follow the creative line that flows through
them and hopefully on through future musicians.
Further, when I refer to swing, I am NOT referring to a style of music
or manner of playing 8th and 16th notes, but an intangible rhythmic bounce
in a piece of music that just makes it dance - style not withstanding.
When I refer to blues, I am NOT referring to a form of music, but
rather a feeling that extends spiritually back to Africa. That is what
I have been missing in some young pianists playing.
Now, your statement, "Young Blacks have abandoned Jazz because (in
their mind) it’s ‘corny’ or old, or lame compared to
the musically baseless Rap they have been inundated with. Just ask one
of them if they even know who you are, but, I’ll bet a 25 year old
musically aware White person will know."
This is a racially charged inaccurate statement! Most young people think
their parents music is outdated. I'm not as much concerned about them
as I am the musicians! Historically younger musicians have rebelled against
their predecessors, that is a normal progression that is not specific
to black people.
As far as a young black knowing me as opposed to a young white, I would
bet you it's about even. Any musically aware young person no matter what
race will more than likely have an idea of who I am. By the way, do you
know who the biggest consumer of rap product is - young white people,
why do you think that is? Finally, why are you making this a racial thing,
my observation is not meant to be a racial judgement.
Now since you brought up the idea that I may be trying, all though possibly
too late, to bring back the "good old days" of jazz; are you
saying that the progression of music stopped with Bobby Timmons, Fats
Waller and the like? Let me say unequivocally that I am NOT trying
to bring back the swing days of Fats and Bobby, I was simply making an
observation and asking what others thought!
Are you saying that because Miles Davis was a stylistically inclusive
musician and constantly reached into the commercial mainstream to include
what he wanted in his own music, that he and his followers are the reason
that we have jazz festivals that are in reality r&b festivals,
or smooth jazz festivals with players that are a step above muzak
players, or the reasons radio stations play what they play? Are Weather
Report, Return To Forever, Miles, the Mahavishnu Orchestra, Herbie Hancock
and others really the reason music is in the state it's in?
I think not!
There has been a lot of creative music created since the 50's, and much
of it by combining diverse traditions of music - rock with jazz, r&b
with jazz, brazilian and latin with jazz, etc.
Though I'm speaking for myself, I'm sure I speak for many contemporary
jazz artists when I say that implying that we have abandoned pure jazz
for the spotlight of money and fame is not only insulting, but not factual.
Frank Zappa taught me early on that there is intrinsic value in all forms
and styles of music. The mere fact that a style of music is very simplistic
doesn't mean that it is necessarily bad or without worth. I feel that
all styles of music serve a particular service to someone, and that is
to be respected.
I love funk! Do you think honestly that I would "fake the funk"
to earn a living. If I did, then the music really is worthless because
it doesn't come from the heart or tap into what I call the Ancient Source
- and that source abandonment is what I am referring to in my observation
That doesn't mean that I am not aware or take these factors into consideration,
but the prime motivational source for my music is what I feel led to create.
I'll say it again, jazz has always been and I hope always will be an inclusive
music. Part of the meaning of jazz is musical exploration, without that,
jazz will not only smell funny but will in fact be dead (to paraphrase
a Frank Zappa quote)
Whether a jazz musician adds Funk, R&B, Latin, Brazilian, Japanese,
African, Indian - whatever style to his arsenal, has nothing to do with
the spiritual connection to the past. A true jazz musician must be free
to create the music that he is spiritually committed to. Styles
are merely a vehicle. As long as there is spontaneity and
true feeling in a performance, then I feel that performance has reached
it's goal.
Having said that, it is also true that you as the listener are entitled
to accept or reject a jazz musician's music based on the same criterion
mentioned above, that's the way it works and that's OK! Everyone
is not going to like what you do so it's up to the artist to put forth
a musical point of view and roll with it.
This observation is NOT an argument between traditional jazz versus a
more contemporary jazz approach - that is a different argument. Your observations
on my article while more than likely well intended, are misguided and
misplaced.
George Duke
(Ben replies)
George.
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to compose a reply, and regardless
of the differences in our opinion, I respect yours. I strongly believe
that I represent not a just a portion of the traditional Jazz audience,
but, a significant portion of that audience.
The use of the word Jazz to describe so many varieties of music that is
has become sacrilege.
Sure Miles wasn’t playing ‘So What’ at the end of his
career, but, it was ‘Jazz Fusion’, my problem arises when
someone invents an idiom called ‘Smooth Jazz’ and somehow,
Kenny G (I hate to even type the name) gets Jazz Artist of the Year and
subsequently Nora Jones in dubbed Jazz Vocalist of the year., but Eric
Alexander or Diana Krall not! Are we serious here?
I didn’t make this a racial issue, I simply read and replied to
your discussion of the loss of the African American Jazz Base. There are
too many non-Black Jazz artists that I love and respect and are personal
friends, to even think that my reply was racially based. Jazz has
and always will be made up of musicians from all races. My point was no
matter what, the base of this music is from Black America, and young Blacks
are not keeping up with our history on this and numerous other facets
because they are inundated with what dollar driven producers want them
to hear. Look at New Orleans and just see who’s supporting
the effort to keep the music alive there!
Your talent and abilities are without question, but, I’m sorry;
you play R&B and Funk, and it’s ok, but, you can’t call
it Jazz.
Country and Western is what it is even when Ray Charles sang it, Bolero
is Classical Music even when Rene Marie uses it as a background to Nina
Simone’s Suzanne, but, the 70s hit ‘A Touch of Beethoven’
certainly isn’t Classical Music, neither can you tag anything
about what Kenny G or Nora Jones perform Jazz.
So, here’s a ‘30’ to the discussion.
Continued success and I hope to meet you at some point.
(George responds)
Ben,
It sounds to me like in some ways we are saying the same thing, we just
have different ways of saying it, and my definition of Jazz is much broader
then yours.
You are correct, the term "smooth jazz" does not in most ways
represent the spirit of what "real" jazz is. However, I have
heard and participated in some incredible sessions that don't contain
a traditional jazz beat, but have all the spontaneity, drive, chordal
structures, feelings and incredible dexterity of a more traditional jazz
performance. If it meets that criteria, then I call it jazz, the beat
is irrelevant.
By the way, when Ray Charles sang country and western, it ceased to be
traditional country and western but something else, and that's because
he tapped into the Ancient Source - he Africanized it and changed the
feeling of the music. I'm sure that you will concur that categorization
is for marketing and filing purposes only, and these artificial walls
are porous to most musicians and mean virtually nothing!
I understand your point of view regarding young blacks. FYI, I have taught
master classes at many schools and I can tell you that there is no lack
of respect or interest in jazz from black musicians. They are here and
waiting to be recognized, they just have few opportunities.
I was recently at Berklee College of Music where I heard some amazing
talent - one can only hope that this talent will see the light of day.
Now that is our responsibility to make sure that these young players are
supported, encouraged and taught. That means when they do perform that
we go see them and play with them to try and create a forum for their
innovation, thereby creating a link to the past.
My main concern is not their ability, but their will to continue that
original spirit of creativity that started so long ago. If I had to bet,
I would say they will not only survive but thrive if they tap into the
Ancient Source!
Continued success to you also.
George Duke
Hello George,
You’ve been getting a lot of interesting comments to the questions
you posed concerning the lack of Afrocentric rawness in jazz these days.
It should not be a surprise to know that the marketing of Black music
to Black consumers escalated in 1920 with a Perry Bradford song, “Crazy
Blues”, sung by Mamie Smith. This begin the practice of certain
record company entrepreneurs searching throughout African American neighborhoods
looking for talented musicians and vocalist. Much of the music was uncompromising,
meaning it contain a lot of strength in satisfying the demands of excellence
from patrons or customers which consumed the music—live or recorded.
This “standard” was a unifying thread from Mamie Smith to
Charlie Parker to Joe Henderson and into the 1970’s. Are you familiar
with the phrase, “The Negroization of America” which was coined
during the 20’s? There was public outcry by many citizens in the
U.S.claiming the decimation of “innocent youth” being influenced
by Black music. Bandleader Paul Whiteman stated, “We must make a
lady out jazz”. An article from The Ladies Home Journal, December,
1921, titled “Jazz Must Go” actually refers to jazz
as music that “calls out the low and rowdy instinct”.
This music that was once saturated in many African American cities is
very difficult to find there these days due to legal disenfranchisement
practices in the U.S. As a result, the venues that used to house musicians
who maintained high standards in the music—especially the natural
uncompromising qualities (you can call it blues or whatever)—do
not exist anymore. Consequently, the popular consumption of products by
record companies such as ECM Records, beginning in the 1970’s, has
ushered in a significant influence within the jazz marketplace. ECM’s
products, among other companies, were not blues-based at all, and looking
to “The Hood” for continued inspiration and development isn’t
considered necessary anymore—even among many who are born and raised
these days in “The Hood”. The common thread that linked T-Bone
Walker to the Jazz Crusaders, for example, has been disconnected. In some
ways it appears that Paul Whiteman’s assessment may have come true.
Leonard
(Duke response)
Well all-rigtht-y then!
G Duke
Ciao George,
Thanks so much for your words on ..."Jazz" and its roots....
I agree 100%. I came to Europe to study Italian language and literature..
I have been a musician since 6 ..singin in my father's COGIC pastorate.
I started taking piano lessons at 11 years old, classically focused. I
started playing at church when I was 12 or 13...I too realized just how
"funky" the music in church was. I studied Classical composition,
popular and Jazz harmony at the University of Virginia...My grades were
A-..because they said that in principle it was classical but there was
something different about it. in a school without a large African- American
student body.. I founded the Black Voices..
I got a scholarship to Berkeley School of Music but did not care for the
racial climate in Boston. i opted to study with Professor Horace C. Boyer...So
glad that i read the handwriting on the wall. It was one of my wisest
decisions...to learn about this phenomena calld African- American Music...
...many moons later after working in the stock market..playing the game..i
returned to SFSU..to study Italian...came to Europe ..refused to do any
music...no distractions..so I thought...
Finally I went to a few Gospel concerts and a few Jazz concerts...Saying
to myself.."COME???".."SAy What???........My late father
always said ..one can criticize ..or get up and do something...
the truth is that if I planned a Classical music concert..of pieces by
Verdi...I would be run out of town on a rail..if I was performing Puccini.......
Same as doing a Gospel concert...playing Spirituals and ..only OH Happy
Day.....,,or doing a Jazz concert playing ..classical music....thinking
that people do not know the difference..
.I have since learned that the possibilities of being a classical performer
as a career..are limited so many students ..become Gospel and jazz artists...What
an insult!!!...so , i decided to own the music of the African - american
Experience...in short I returned to doing what I had done in the USA...
Teach!!!! that is what is lacking..today..qualified teachers who know
the material and have devoted themselves to study.......not just those
who do it because they cannot make it in another realm (classical)......so
...I correct and instruct in the roots ...technique and bring students
to where the music was born...JUST LIKE THE
FOREIGN STUDENTS..WHO WANT TO BECOME..GOOD OPERA SINGERS...THEY STUDY
TO SHOW THEM SELVES APPROVED..WITH A MAESTRO ..STEEPED IN THE FORM........THANKS
SO MUCH FOR BEING ..GEORGE DUKE..AND OWNING IT!!!!
Nehemiah
(Duke response)
Nehemiah,
Thank you for your email.
You are absolutely correct about teachers who teach as a first option,
or at least those who understand and are "steeped in the form"
as you say.
I hold as many master classes and forums that I can to try and give my
perspective on the state of music and its possibilities. In the end I
can only hope that some ideas take root and a new generation of musicians
will make use of what I call "The Ancient Source".
George Duke
Greetings GD,
In my work, word definitions and origins are very important. I am glad
to see you discuss the definition of the word "jazz". As you
stated, the music, in its origin, developed out from the brothel and african
american community of the south. Some people don't understand, however,
where the word "jazz" came from. The term "jazz" was
a slang word based on the slang word "jizz", which means sperm.
The "cool" talking people of the day went from saying "jizz"
to saying "jazz". Just think of the guys like Louis Armstrong
and the way they talked and you will understand what I mean. So why "sperm"
as a desciption in the first place? Figuratively speaking, it ment the
kind of music which brought "life" to the party! "Jizz"
music was the PARTY music of the day! Of couse, mississippi delta blues
is a different style of blues than that born in New Orleans. Because
of being frustated by the lack of an agreed definition of the word "jazz",
I personally just call the early 1900's music jazz and seek other words
for the various music styles which came later.
Savior
