Blog 5: Altered Assumptions in Jazz

Pick one thing/issue in the Miles Davis Autobiography and use it to answer a broader question: What were your assumptions about jazz and its history coming into the
course?

How have those assumptions been changed, revised or reinforced by what you have learned in this course? 

Coming into this course, I knew very little about jazz and even less about its history. Although I was familiar with certain artists by their names (Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Frank Sinatra, etc.) I did not know anything about their music or where it came from. I did have the feeling that jazz was more of a community event than a performance, but did not know of any solid evidence to back this up. I knew that it originated as a “Negro music,” much like blues did, and figured that it kept the community close during hard times. I did not, however, have any idea of the magnitude and influence that it would have on America. I figured that its growth was based on teamwork and encouragement—in this regard I was partially wrong. While bands did work together, encouraging each other well, a common strategy of music teachers was to be extremely hard on their pupils.

Jazz music originated as the blending of musical cultures around the turn of the twentieth century in New Orleans. Over the next fifty years, jazz grew into a culture itself. I was fully unaware of the magnitude of this culture and its influence on America. I had only previously assumed that it was simply a musical genre, used solely for entertainment purposes. This course has demonstrated thoroughly that jazz helped spark a cultural revolution in America that eventually became The Civil Rights Movement. Jazz became a way for African Americans to show racist whites that they could be geniuses too, and that they had value to give society. It became an easy way for them to become integrated into white society. At the same time, it gave them an excellent community event that could separate people from violence and destruction, such as in San Juan Hill and Leimert Park. In all of these regards, I was mostly ignorant but had the right idea, and this class gave me more insight to reinforce my blind assumptions.

One assumption that this course has completely transformed was the mode of teaching that most jazz teachers employed. In everything that I have been taught—piano, guitar, gymnastics, water polo, even school—I have always been encouraged and told, “you can do it! You have the potential!” Even if I was performing horribly, someone would tell me, “it just takes practice, you’ll get it eventually.” These experiences have made me assume that this is the way that teaching is everywhere, and with everything. When considering jazz, however, this is simply not the case. Miles Davis exemplifies this repeatedly in his autobiography. Beginning in his early years his teachers would tell him he was the worst musician that they had ever heard. “Maybe Gus [trumpet teacher] thought that by telling me I was his worst student that I would play harder.” (Davis, 35) This was not how it always worked—in high school, Davis received encouragement from his fellow band mates. (Davis, 32) However, the sort of ‘negative encouragement’ he received from Gus transformed into blunt truth when Davis began to play in the real world. In the underground jazz clubs of New York, if a performing musician was good, he was encouraged. If he didn’t impress, then he would be heavily discouraged. “If you got up on the bandstand at Minton’s and couldn’t play, you were not only going to get embarrassed by people ignoring you or booing you, you might get your ass kicked.” This tactic is so alien to me that I couldn’t have conceived it before taking this class.

After studying jazz for two and a half months, I have realized that while some of my prior assumptions were based in truth, others were entirely wrong. Jazz is a community event, a blending of cultures, and has had an enormous impact on American society. Among themselves, jazz artists use tactics of both positive and negative encouragement, and aren’t afraid to tell each other if they are playing horribly. I have learned a lot, and my perception of jazz has been transformed into a more accurate idea, with interesting history to back it up.

Blog 4: The Common Cause of Jazz

Arguably, both Robin Kelley's biography of Thelonious Monk and the film, Leimert Park, are about the relationship of art and community. What is the relationship of  Monk's genius to the San Juan Hill community where he grew up, according to Kelley?  How did it shape Monk's music? Is this what some mean by "Jazz is New York, man!?" Or something else?  Is the relationship of jazz to the community in Leimert Park the same or different from the relationship Kelley outlines? What do you think is the relationship between art and the communities in which jazz musicians grow up and/or perform?

San Juan Hill is a small community in New York. Historically known for its racial violence, it was a dangerous place (especially for blacks) when the Monks moved there in 1922. To survive, the children of each neighborhood formed a small community, and protected each other. This brought them together in a unique way, and later in life allowed Thelonius Monk to mature into the musical genius that he was always meant to be.

“I did all that fighting with ofays [whites] when I was a kid. We had to fight to make it so we could walk the streets,” Monk once said. (Kelley, 18) San Juan Hill was neither nice nor forgiving. It bred delinquency, and so as a solution, a community center was established in 1928, just down the street from the Monks. The Columbus Hill Community Center became one of young Thelonius Monk’s greatest influences. (Kelley, 28) It gave them a community, and a safe place to be at after school. It helped to shape Monk’s jazz by giving him a place to practice, an automatic audience to play for, as well as fellow musicians to play with. He formed his first band from friends at the community center. (Kelley, 35) His audience there was made up of friends who could always give him helpful encouragement, as well as unrivaled enthusiasm. He strived to impress his community. In addition, the band he formed there went on to be rather successful for what it was. By the time he was sixteen, Monk was paying for his own clothes and food, as well as giving his mother some of the money that he made from paying various shows, or winning contests. (Kelley, 35-36) With this money, he was able to travel to Harlem and watch professional jazz artists, most notably Herman Chittison. He gained much of his style and inspiration from watching these shows.

This is part of what is meant by “jazz is New York, man!” Jazz brought the community together; it was far-reaching, popular and respected, and provided an enjoyable, productive activity that anyone could participate in. The other part of this statement, however, comes from the diversity of cultures present at the time. Jamaicans, African Americans, Spanish, French, Germans, Jews, Italians, West Indians and whites all lived in the small community of San Juan Hill. (Kelley, 18) This type of ‘melting pot’ preexisted in almost every place that jazz has erupted during its short history. This is what is truly meant by “jazz is New York, man!”

The relationship of jazz to the Leimert Park community is very similar to this. Leimert Park is a small neighborhood in Las Angeles, California. In the early 1990’s, riots and violence were rampant near Leimert Park in LA. In 1992, Richard Fulton opened a coffeehouse that became a sort of community art center. People would go there to listen to music (mostly jazz) or show their art at all hours of the night, in lieu of the violence occurring nearby. In this way, both the Leimert Park and the San Juan Hill communities used art to separate themselves from destruction. It brought the communities together, united them against violence, and promoted art all at the same time.

The community of San Juan Hill was one of the most important influences on young Thelonius Monk’s jazz genius. Art has brought many communities together in the face of violence by providing a sanctuary of peace and love. People cease to judge others based on unimportant factors such as race or where they live, instead collaborating and uniting in the name of art. San Juan Hill and Leimert Park are two perfect example of this phenomenon.

Comment on Matt Hirning.

Race in the Swing Era

Prompt

Given that race has always been a discourse in the history of jazz, why did race become explicitly written and talked about in the 1930’s in the “Swing Era?”

The melting pot of races, cultures and traditions that was New Orleans in the early 20^th century gave rise to the amazing musical genre of jazz. It was inevitable that the culture resulting from this genre would eventually become very entangled with racial issues. Specifically, jazz of the 1930’s, also known as the swing era, brought light to much of the racial discourse present in America at that time.

Jazz had classically been a colored peoples’ music; whites would listen, but rarely played. This changed in the early 1930’s, partially due to the invention and popularization of radio and records, and partially due to the Great Depression. Radio made it hard to distinguish what race the artist was, and so whites could play without being immediately judged negatively by the color of their skin (blacks were often seen as superior in their jazz abilities (Swing Changes, p 61)). The Great Depression also caused such a shortage of jobs that becoming a jazz artist seemed like a much more realistic opportunity for many whites. Unfortunately for the existing jazz artists, however, this provided them with a lot of competition. Not only were there more aspiring artists with their same profession, but their music was broadcasted for free, and distributed in a large scale on records. (Stewart, 12 February, 2015) In addition, the end of Prohibition in 1933 meant that, “Both [alcohol and jazz]  could now be easily consumed at home.” (Gioio, chp 5) This decrease in demand and increase in supply of jazz artists meant that a few of the top artists could provide all of America with a satisfying amount of jazz, leaving much less of a market for jazz played regularly at night clubs and theatres. Due to the racism present at the time, whites began to have a much easier time getting radio segments and releasing records. This was catastrophic for many of the beloved jazz artists of the 1920s, including Bechet, Morton, King Oliver, Smith, and Beiderbeck. (Gioia, chp 5)

Thus far, most of the discussion of jazz has centered around Negroes. Whites had participated, but mostly in the role of mistreatment of the jazz artists, owning the clubs and paying unfair wages, with unfair hours. Now that whites began to enter the industry as artists, several became prominent figures. John Hammond, for example, played an interesting role, as he was not a musician himself, rather a reviewer that was so deep in the culture, and so in love with the music that he made his name almost as famous (if not more famous) than many of the artists he reviewed. (Swing Changes, p 55) Being part of the community, so closely involved with (and thus such good friends with) so many Negro jazz artists naturally made Hammond into a civil rights activist. He saw the cruelty and unfairness that blacks had been enduring for all of their lives, and wished to put it to an end.

What is possibly the most astounding, however, is that the so-called ‘king of swing’ was actually white. Benny Goodman, raised in Chicago with influences such as Bix Beiderbecke and The Austin High Gang, had a father who pushed him into his musical career. (Gioia, chp 5) This in itself is telling of the time—had he been born twenty years earlier, this would have been impossible, especially in a white family. With the dedication to jazz of a true Chicagoan, alongside natural talent and support from his family, it is no surprise that he became the father of the “Swing Era” of jazz in the 1930s. Changes like these caused race to be a prominent subject of the 1930s.

Many factors contributed the issue of race in the jazz culture of the 1930s. The most important players here were the Great Depression, the technological advancements of the time, as well as the more intimate relationships developing between people of separate races, specifically people such as John Hammond, who fought for race equality. In addition, the migration of jazz from being an all-black genre to being a mix-race phenomenon gave rise to much discussion of race in the Swing Era.

Comment – Jenny Eberle

Chicago’s Contribution to Jazz

Prompt:

Which city was more important to jazz in the 1920s--Chicago or New York? What role did the particular social, economic, and racial conditions of that city play in creating the cultural conditions for jazz to triumph in that city?  Was there a Chicago or New York style of jazz (depending on which of the two cities you choose)? If so, what was it, who played it, and what distinguished it from other styles?  Whose (band or individual) art best represents the culture and community of the city you choose?  Why?  Please provide references. 

            Jazz progressed from its blues and ragtime roots beginning in New Orleans at the turn of the 20^th century. The style originated from a mixing of cultures in this city, which became known as the ‘melting pot’ of America. Once the jazz fever had begun to spread, it was no longer the melding of cultures, but the style itself that propagated its own evolution. By the 1920’s, Chicago had developed a strong passion for this smooth, syncopated and rhythmic new style of music, and became a centerpiece city for the genre’s development.

            The primary reason that jazz was able to emerge in Chicago when it did was the great migration. Tales of opportunity and decreased racism with a better chance at prosperity for Negroes caused many to migrate to Northern cities in the 1910s. Whether or not these anecdotes were accurate, they caused 60,000 Negroes to migrate to Chicago alone during this decade (Jones, p. 95). According to Wikipedia, “at least 40 prominent New Orleans jazzmen” were part of this migration, many of whom, including Armstrong, Hines, Morton, Oliver, Noone, and Dodds (Gioia, chapter 3), eventually settled in Chicago. This is no surprise, as according to Gioia, “Sidemen in Chicago bands could earn $40 per week…a far cry from the $1.50 to $2.50 per engagement a New Orleans player might have commanded during that era.” (chapter 3) Thus, economic opportunity was a primary factor. However, there was much opportunity elsewhere—the factor which separated Chicago from other cities, such as New York, was its thirst for the music itself, which in turn led to the creation of its own unique style.

            Of the 1920’s jazz artists, one group that stands out boldly is McKenzie and Condon’s Chicagoans. The band originated as a group of high school students who had an avid fervor for jazz. Calling themselves the Austin High School Gang, they spent all of their free time listening to any live jazz band or orchestra they could find, or repeating records of the greats over and over, stopping and learning to play the songs along the way (The Best Of Jazz, p.153-154). This devotion to jazz was not unique to the Chicagoans, instead it was the factor that made Chicago the centerpiece of jazz in the 1920’s. Bix Beiderbecke, another jazz artist located in Chicago, shared their obsession with jazz. He in fact proved to be a role model for these young musicians, among others, being similar to them in age and social standing (The Best Of Jazz, p.154). Beiderbecke came from a family who wanted him to go to college and lead a normal life with a reliable job, but his love for music was so great that it eventually became his life’s work (Gioia, chapter 3). The passion that these artists shared for jazz was common among musicians in the area, causing Chicago to become the heart of jazz in the 1920’s.

            What happens when music comes from the soul of the artist as opposed to the blending of preexisting styles? In one simple word, ‘improvisation.’ Although this does not encompass the entirety of the style, it does provide a hint for its direction. Another quality was epitomized by Frank Teschmacher. He played slightly, “‘out of tune’, used a ‘squawky’ tone and often let fly carelessly-articulated phrases” (The Best Of Jazz, p. 159). In Chicago, jazz was played from the heart and soul, resulting from a deep passion that nearly every musician and fan possessed. This was the culture, and it ultimately led to the city’s ubiquitous influence on the genre as a whole in the 1920’s.

Jazz in New Orleans

Jazz emerged strongly in New Orleans for a variety of reasons. One key fact is that jazz is the product of many different cultures (and thus musical genres) coming together with the common goal of entertainment in a specific era. In the early 20^th century, culture and heritage determined a huge amount about the life someone would have. Slavery had only recently been abolished and stereotypes and racism were plentiful. As an African American, one did not have many options. Many African Americans who were part-white were freed long before the civil war and emancipation. By the time the 20^th century rolled around, these people were black of color, but distanced themselves from the Negro culture. These ‘creoles’ continued to do so post-abolition as to prevent themselves from being labeled as ‘black.,’ and to maintain certain rights. However, Louisiana legislation passed in 1894 to designate anyone of African heritage as a ‘Negro,’ thus forcing them back into the ‘black’ culture. The creoles, often well-trained musicians, were now competing with the Negros, who often lacked formal techniques but made up for it with their contemporary style. The emphasis of these two styles differ greatly. Creoles emphasized the specific notes they were playing, making the notes distinct but the tone similar. In contrast, the Negroes emphasized the way they played each separate note. For example, jazz musician Sidney Bechet once told a student to play one note, and see how many ways he could play it; to express his feelings in it. None of this, however is particular to New Orleans. The major difference and the most important factor was that in New Orleans, brass bands and string ensembles were already extremely popular. These styles were played everywhere, but in New Orleans they were played for almost every kind of social gathering. Another factor that distinguishes New Orleans as a major birthplace of jazz is the contribution of Mexican immigrants to the music. Following the performance of a Mexican military band at a cotton exposition in New Orleans in 1884, Mexican bands commonly returned there to play, some band members even staying permanently to play music for a living. These Mexican bands gave New Orleans an inspiration that not many other cities had at this time. In addition, several Mexican immigrants became prominent music teachers. One famous example is Lorenzo Tío, who had at least fifteen students go on to eventually become professional jazz artists. This is yet another source from which jazz evolved. The most important thing to take from it is that jazz is the culmination of many different styles of music. When Creoles and Negroes and Whites, inspired and taught by Mexicans, got together with brass ensembles and string bands, in a time of ragtime and blues, jazz emerged.

Commented on Ethan Reul's post at <http://ethanblogblst14.blogspot.com/>