Get out the flamethrowers. And the fire extinguishers!
Gantt
Two extremes to be avoided
1: Too strict a definition
2: Too loose a definition
Jazz is, and always has been, a meaningless word, which is why Miles,
Duke, and Mingus, to name just 3, disliked aving their work so called.
>Apparently this is an "edgy" topic!
>When I was in jazz school,the definition was simple: improvisation. I
>don't buy it, though, for many styles of music have improvisation.
>Probably the best way to start is to see how the word came into
>currency.
Lots of styles have improvisation as far as single line soloing goes,
but do they improvise the whole form, key, rhythm, tempo, etc? Maybe
a good definition for jazz would be "the only music that allows bass
solos". Sorry Jaz :-)
Trying to decide: Hat or hairpiece; hat or hairpiece; hat or hairpiece ...
--
They lived like animals; they neither smoked nor drank
Here, this will either help or add to the confusion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_%28word%29
However arguable the definition may be, we all seem to have a common
understanding of which music is "jazz" and which is not.
The Dead, for one example, could improvise on some changes all night long,
but I've never heard them referred to as a "jazz band" or to their music as
"jazz".
My definition, for what it's worth:
1) Melodic improvisation
2) Harmonic malleability - i.e. the harmony isn't completely
determined ahead of time (but it isn't necessarily completely
improvised either)
3) Syncopated rhythm
I'd add a fourth requirement but I don't think everyone (or even most)
would agree: it's ensemble music. You can't play jazz by yourself. You
make use of techniques from jazz to make solo music but it isn't
really jazz. Jazz arises from the simultaneous and spontaneous
intersection and combination of different people's musical ideas.
Gantt
> Jazz is, and always has been, a meaningless word, which is why Miles,
> Duke, and Mingus, to name just 3, disliked aving their work so called.
^^^Common sense rears its head^^^. Seriously, is anything new really
going to come out of this debate, aside from perhaps another
squaredance with the Bopsy Twins from the tapping thread? Has anyone
ever actually come away from this kind of debate with a new
perspective and, more importantly, the ability to make better music? I
guess anything could happen...
> Apparently this is an "edgy" topic!
No, it's just an unanswerable question. I think it was St. Augustine of
Hippo who said something like "I know perfectly well what time is, but
when you ask me- I don't." Jazz is like that. I know what jazz is-
until you ask me. Then I don't.
I'm possibly in a minority by not viewing this as a particularly
controversial topic. Jazz is a musical style that goes back a hundred years
or so. It is not difficult for listeners to identify it when they hear it
being played.
The stylistic elements including swing, syncopation, characteristic
instrumentation settings, blues influences, ii-V7-I cadences and other
typical harmonic treatments are easily identifiable.
The improvisational character of the music is also a major overarching
element. The soloist's improvisations and the group interplay are indeed
definitive, yet it is important to note that jazz is not the only style of
music that has included improvisation.
Jazz is also defined by it's hundred years of tradition, folklore,
repertoire and the pre-jazz styles and culture from which it emerged.
People may quibble over specific instances relating to the nature of
particular elements but there has long been broad agreement on the key
points. ....joe
P.S. The word itself comes from the jasmine fragrance worn be certain
individuals who were present in various establishments where early jazz was
being performed.
--
Visit me on the web www.JoeFinn.net
> <ray...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1187980417.5...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> Apparently this is an "edgy" topic!
>> When I was in jazz school,the definition was simple: improvisation. I
>> don't buy it, though, for many styles of music have improvisation.
>> Probably the best way to start is to see how the word came into
>> currency.
>
> I'm possibly in a minority by not viewing this as a particularly
> controversial topic.
Not even possible. I think you are the sweeping majority.
> P.S. The word itself comes from the jasmine fragrance worn be certain
> individuals who were present in various establishments where early jazz was
> being performed.
I'm glad somebody put that to rest.
--
///---
"Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> wrote in message
news:fapno3$q7a$1...@news.datemas.de...
"Gerry" <some...@sunny.calif> wrote in message
news:2007082510350316807-somewhere@sunnycalif...
> On 2007-08-25 10:01:22 -0700, "Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> said:
>
>> <ray...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1187980417.5...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> Apparently this is an "edgy" topic!
>>> When I was in jazz school,the definition was simple: improvisation. I
>>> don't buy it, though, for many styles of music have improvisation.
>>> Probably the best way to start is to see how the word came into
>>> currency.
>>
>> I'm possibly in a minority by not viewing this as a particularly
>> controversial topic.
>
> Not even possible. I think you are the sweeping majority.
aaaarrgh! Now there's a scary thought. ....joe
>
>I read somewhere years ago something about the word "jazz" being a
>shortened form of an old Creole word "jasser", meaning "chatter". I
>haven't been able to track this word down, as there are, to my
>knowledge, no creole dictionaries on the web. Another source is that
>the word has a sexual connotation; an old Negro slang term for sexual
>intercourse. It was used to describe the music being played in whore
>houses in New Orleans.
The music played in the whore houses consisted of light popular airs,
by a pianist, sometimes with dirty lyrics, but no jazz band ever
played in the houses. Not according to Armstrong and Jelly Roll and a
host of others. A 60 year old man with a 17 year old girl needs to
concentrate, and Oliver standing up for the out chorus of Panama at an
inopportune time would ruin business. There were lots of whores
hanging out in The Big 25 and other clubs, but they weren't
whorehouses. The false connection between whorehouses and the early
music is a big reason why the early musicians rearely, if ever,
referred to it as jazz.
>>> I'm possibly in a minority by not viewing this as a particularly
>>> controversial topic.
>>
>> Not even possible. I think you are the sweeping majority.
>
> aaaarrgh! Now there's a scary thought. ....joe
The longer you stick around--this is what happens.
--
///---
A far more frequent supposition: that jazz and jizz as culled from
jizm, have the same roote, if you will.
--
///---
Good 'un!
Greg
>
> > Where's Pt?
>
> Trying to decide: Hat or hairpiece; hat or hairpiece; hat or hairpiece ...
>
lol You're killin' me here.
I don't know, it got a "worthwhile" vote by the amount of and the
quality of responder and response. Some good history, not just
lexicography
> Not controversial, and a waste of time. This isn't a lexicography
> newsgroup.
Kurt:
Good point. I agree that this isn't a lexicography newsgroup, but then
again, text is all we have to work with here. So defining things and writing
about other topics that lend themselves to text messaging is what we are
stuck with.
I agree that this is a colossal waste of time. ;-) ......joe
--
Visit me on the web www.JoeFinn.net
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Really- let's get out of here and quick :)
As you can plainly see, I've managed to completely avoid this pointless and
irrelevant thread.
<ray...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1188148937.3...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...