Post-modernism and jazz (one and the same?)
ed
I read a quote "More and more young people undertake the professional study
of literature; fewer like to read." from the book "A Company of Readers" by
Arthur Krystal, Jacques Barzun
Students are learning what seems to be the peripheral stuff of literature -
how it is perceived and its relativeness - more than the value in the
literature itself: the emotions and what is actually being said.
I fear the same has happened with music, and not just jazz which has largely
been institutionalized. My guess is at the moment, more people have the
opportunity to study jazz than ever before, and yet the music itself seems
to have less value than ever before.
People are more likely to say something like "oh that's just a mixolydian
mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
And everything seems to work more in isolation than ever before. Not just
the musicians working more independently, but so much of this "art" (as its
now called) has less connection with all the other artefacts being produced.
It's all over the place.
When I think about what post-modernism means, I see terms like
self-consciousness, randomness, and fragmentation - and those terms could be
used to describe the evolution of jazz. But these terms can be applied to
other arts: fashion, literature, architecture and more.
And the blurring of distinction betweens styles of jazz - don't we all know
that one? What we really need is a renaissance in music. Jazz has become
too textbook - an assortment of work today would have less cohesiveness and
soul than a collection of recordings from decades past.
It's an affair without romance, and can only end in despair
Eddie Luck.
Marc Sabatella
> People are more likely to say something like "oh that's just a
mixolydian
> mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
> beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
I've yet to meet any such person. Sure, we do sometimes discuss the
mechanics of the music - it's impossible to make it successfully without
doing some of that - but only a miniscule fraction of the time we spend
talking about music.
> It's an affair without romance
Speak for yourself. Again, I don't see this at all.
--------------
Marc Sabatella
ma...@outsideshore.com
The Outside Shore
Music, art, & educational materials:
http://www.outsideshore.com/
still...@webtv.net
the post-modernism and jazz topic. Was watching a Woody Allen movie and
he said someone he knew said that nothing is real, that its all a big
dream inside the mind of some dog....interesting thought.
Jazzcorner
The average listener (jazz) collects mostly for his own pleasure that means
for listening pleasure.
For me is important to know beforehand what I get when I buy something.
In this case the name artists mean you know what you get for 90 %. Example:
Stan Getz. I have to find the first bad recording from that artists.
But who knows all the well college educated new talents? Buying records is
really a risk. You never know what you get. No promoting on the radio = no
sales. To play roulette means buy 20 CDs and hope you will like 10 is not my
thing.
W.B.
"ed" <e...@ed.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:40ac...@news.comindico.com.au...
> Are we gradually drifting away from reality?
>
> I fear the same has happened with music, and not just jazz which has
largely
> been institutionalized. My guess is at the moment, more people have the
> opportunity to study jazz than ever before, and yet the music itself seems
> to have less value than ever before.
>
> People are more likely to say something like "oh that's just a mixolydian
> mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
> beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
snipped partly >
Smack
> People are more likely to say something like "oh that's just a mixolydian
> mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
> beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
There's nothing postmodern about that. A *modernist* might only
appreciate the technical aspects of a piece. A postmodernist might say,
"That piece belittles me as a woman," or "That piece glorifies the
racist times it was written in."
That being said, understanding the technical aspects of a piece, or the
social ramifications of it has never diminished my appreciation for it,
just like knowing how mountains are formed doesn't make me appreciate
the view any less. And in most cases, understanding actually heightens
that appreciation, seeing the complexity behind something so elegantly
simple. Comprehension is not something to be avoided; it's natural part
of maturation.
> And the blurring of distinction betweens styles of jazz - don't we all know
> that one? What we really need is a renaissance in music. Jazz has become
> too textbook - an assortment of work today would have less cohesiveness and
> soul than a collection of recordings from decades past.
>
> It's an affair without romance, and can only end in despair
Again, these are modernist issues, not postmodernist. Postmodernists
are known for - if anything - being *too* touchy-feely, rather than not
touchy-feely enough. And since postmodernism is the natural step beyond
modernism, the problem you perceive - if it actually has any validity in
the first place - is already being solved.
--
Stephen Mack
Arka Music - Engraving, Copying, Transposing
www.arkamusic.com
"Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber
Guest Pest
On Thu 20 May 2004 12:36:46pm EDT, one who goes by the
pseudonym "stilltime1" said in rec.music.bluenote:
Well, not really. That's just another solipsism joke.
--
_T o m_
_____________________________________________________________
"If a man's alone in the woods, and he says
something, and there's no woman around to criticize
him, is he still wrong?" -- Earl Pickles, 1997
_____________________________________________________________
A.J. Robb
> Are we gradually drifting away from reality?
>
> I read a quote "More and more young people undertake the professional study
> of literature; fewer like to read." from the book "A Company of Readers" by
> Arthur Krystal, Jacques Barzun
>
> Students are learning what seems to be the peripheral stuff of literature -
> how it is perceived and its relativeness - more than the value in the
> literature itself: the emotions and what is actually being said.
>
> I fear the same has happened with music, and not just jazz which has largely
> been institutionalized. My guess is at the moment, more people have the
> opportunity to study jazz than ever before, and yet the music itself seems
> to have less value than ever before.
>
> People are more likely to say something like "oh that's just a mixolydian
> mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
> beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
As has been said, that rarely happens among Jazz circles - mostly just
around self-conscious players who have an inferiority complex. But
such a categorical aptitude and knowledge is essential for the art to
move on, for in its absence we would be saying the same thing over and
over ad infinitum. The more clear the ear, the more clearly we can
express what it is we need to.
But the jaded, cocky attitude that you referenced is not a hallmark of
many good players, or I would submit, of a musical person(ality).
> And everything seems to work more in isolation than ever before. Not just
> the musicians working more independently, but so much of this "art" (as its
> now called) has less connection with all the other artefacts being produced.
> It's all over the place.
>
> When I think about what post-modernism means, I see terms like
> self-consciousness, randomness, and fragmentation - and those terms could be
> used to describe the evolution of jazz. But these terms can be applied to
> other arts: fashion, literature, architecture and more.
>
> And the blurring of distinction betweens styles of jazz - don't we all know
> that one? What we really need is a renaissance in music. Jazz has become
> too textbook - an assortment of work today would have less cohesiveness and
> soul than a collection of recordings from decades past.
So are you saying variety is not desirable?
> It's an affair without romance, and can only end in despair
>
> Eddie Luck.
It's a rational fear. But keep the faith: institutionalism of one form
of expression tends to spurn another, sometimes as a result of, but
more often as a reaction to that institutionalism. We're all looking
for the same thing out of Jazz and to do with Jazz, but it's vitally
important to understand what has been done so far in order to
effectively move forward.
I personally am grateful that we didn't stop at playing mixolydian
scales over dominant chords.
Glenn Wilson
>
> mode over a dominant seventh chord" instead of "oh man, that's so
> beautiful - did you ever hear anything so good?"
>
themselves in this way in a very small minority. I also agree that someone
who hears jazz in this way is a victim of jazz education.
You're point is well-taken and there is a problem with jazz teaching that, I
believe comes from the inexpereience of the teachers. As jazz education has
become 'legitimized', a lot of musiicians are going from college jazz band
to Masters of Jazz to Doctorate of Jazz and their playing experience has
consisted mainly of gigs around whatever college town they lived in. As the
big bands died and clubs were closing, many musicians lost the opportunity
to be sidemen. To learn the business and hone their skills until they were
ready, if ever, to be leaders. Lately, the only thing for jazz musicians to
do it become a leader, many before they are ready. We are then asked to
follow these players as they try to develop their own style. Many don't
retain recording contracts long enough to do that.
So, point being, a lot of jazz teachers don't have the real passion and love
of the music that comes from playing with those who helped shape the music.
Each generation gets further removed from the source and there are fewer who
can pass on this passion to their students. Believe me, when I teach, I'm
looking to point out the beauty of the music and try to get students excited
about the process of creating that beauty. Scales are highly overrated :)
(But again, musicians have got to sell books. It's hard to put beauty in a
book, but pretty easy to put scales in there).
Glenn
www.jazzmaniac.com
Mark Eisenman
moc....@nosliw.nnelg wrote on 5/27/04 3:39 PM:
You nailed it.
Mark
puck
>Are we gradually drifting away from reality?
the most appropriate definition of post modernism seem to come in the
shape of the song, ' stairway to heaven', in the line, 'sometimes
words can have two meanings'.
whether you like it, agree with it, appreciate it, deny it are
different things altogether.
even in my late twenties, i am perhaps one of the youngest readers of
this group. don't read music, don't know tonality from pitch, all i
know is that a lot of jazz and the chemistry between musicians move
me. that's why i listen to jazz.
sum1
>
> even in my late twenties, i am perhaps one of the youngest readers of
> this group. don't read music, don't know tonality from pitch, all i
> know is that a lot of jazz and the chemistry between musicians move
> me. that's why i listen to jazz.
Right on, puck.
That's why most of us listen to jazz.