Michelle Mercer
  • Bio
  • Books
  • POSTS
  • Work

International Jazz Day: What Did We Really Contribute? 

12/17/2013

12 Comments

 
PictureThe central concert of International Jazz Day 2013 took place at Hagia Eirene Museum in Istanbul, Turkey. (Monique Jaques/Getty Images)








It was the most ambitious global jazz event of 2013. It likely will be the most ambitious global jazz event of 2014. Yet if you aren’t part of the jazz world, you may not have even heard of International Jazz Day. And if you did hear about it, you may still be unsure what exactly it aims to do. 

In 2011, UNESCO designated April 30 International Jazz Day as a way to "highlight jazz and its diplomatic role of uniting people in all corners of the globe." UNESCO partners with the Thelonious Monk Institute of Jazz to produce the day’s festivities, which include events in hundreds of countries. A larger main celebration in a floating location—this year, Istanbul—involves performances, panels and workshops, culminating with a gala concert.  

Sounds great, right? But just a couple months after performing in Turkey, Esperanza Spalding expressed some ambivalence about Jazz Day in an interview for a Brazilian newspaper. 

"After I left Istanbul," she said, "I thought: 'Wow, that was wonderful, everything that everybody said and played was so beautiful. But what did we really give to the needy in Istanbul?' . . . So much money was spent on this event — so many lovely, powerful and creative people were there together — but what did we really contribute? Wherever the next International Jazz Day happens, I hope we will leave with better answers to those questions."

Jazz Day’s agenda was compelling enough for me to buy a plane ticket to Istanbul and check it out myself. Like Esperanza, I found beauty in the experience. At the gala concert in the 4th Century Hagia Eirene church, the dust of centuries sifted down from high ceilings, lending substance to the music. Brazilian singer Milton Nascimento and the legendary Wayne Shorter gave a rare performance together there. Guitarist John McLaughlin electrified the house with tabla player Zakir Hussain. Jazz Day's constellation of more than 30 musical luminaries, some of them my friends, made for great conviviality. I lost track of how many people I hugged there. And everywhere we went, the Turkish people gave us a warm and gracious reception.

Yet, like Esperanza, I left with questions about Jazz Day's value and impact. Eight months later, I'm still wondering if the event could have done more, especially considering what happened there after we left. Of course, back on April 30, none of us knew that only weeks later all hell would break loose over freedom of expression in Turkey; that peaceful protesters would be gassed and beaten and killed.

But if we couldn’t anticipate that Istanbul would become a site a bloody conflict, we did know that freedom of expression had long been under attack in the country. We knew Turkey had the highest number of jailed journalists in the world. We knew that, just before Jazz Day, world-renowned Turkish classical pianist Fazil Say had been handed a prison sentence for insulting Islam in Twitter posts. Jazz Day organizers didn’t address any of that. In advance of the event, when they were asked, “Why Istanbul?,” organizers emphasized the symbolic importance of the setting, particularly the geographical significance of Turkey bridging two continents. Wherever it lay on a map, I wondered how the country’s human-rights abuses could be reconciled with Jazz Day’s goals.


The Democratic Ideal

Jazz Day organizers say the music can achieve the loftiest of aims: make peace and save the world. No one expressed International Jazz Day’s goals to me quite as vividly as Russian saxophonist Igor Butman. “I play for a lot of different presidents,” Butman said. “For Vladimir Putin, for Yeltsin, for Bill Clinton, lots of other guys. I played for Chinese president Jiang Zemin. So when I play for them, if I play good, they can discuss and say, ‘I like this guy Igor, maybe we should drop some of the weapons—we like the same music, the same art, we have something in common.’”

Okay, so I’d caught Butman at a party after a few drinks. But his scenario of jazz as magic peacemaker was only a slight exaggeration of Jazz Day’s more official rhetoric. UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova launched the big day with these words:

“Jazz is more than music. Jazz embodies values. Jazz is a school of diversity, a school of dialogue and tolerance. Jazz has set the rhythm for struggles, for dignity, for equality, and civil rights. Our goal of UNESCO is to transfer these values to give voice to this message of dialogue and freedom.”

It’s worth stepping back to unpack this loaded rhetoric. The idea that jazz embodies values has growing currency in mainstream culture, where the music has become a popular model for everything from conducting a business meeting to crafting a sentence. More specifically, the diversity, dialogue and tolerance that Bokova finds in jazz are characteristically democratic values. 

Among political and cultural institutions, jazz has had a recurring role as an exemplar of democracy. (First Lady Michelle Obama introduced a 2009 White House jazz concert like this: “There’s probably no better example of democracy than a jazz ensemble: individual expression but with responsibility to the group.”) Just as democracy comes with both individual freedom and collective responsibility, a jazz musician is simultaneously a soloist and a part of the group, contributing a personal sound to the ensemble as a whole. Sometimes a bandleader’s directive leaves little room for democratic participation, but more often than not, a jazz band can be seen as democracy in action, with diversity and tolerance necessarily coming into play.  

Jazz diplomacy has a rich history in U.S. foreign diplomacy. In the 1950s, Willis Conover’s Voice of America radio program began broadcasting jazz to the world with a distinct political message. “This is Willis Conover’s Voice of America Jazz Hour,” he’d announce at the start of each week’s show. “The music of jazz parallels the freedom we have in America. Something that not every country has."
The U.S. State Department decided jazz’s democratic ideal and artistic sophistication made it the perfect cold war weapon, a worthy opponent of Russian ballet and classical music. In 1956, the State Department sent Dizzy Gillespie out to win hearts and minds in its first jazz tour, with stops in southern Europe, the Middle East and south Asia. Louis Armstrong, Dave Brubeck, and Duke Ellington soon hit the road on behalf of the American government, too.  

Notably, while these musicians connected to the citizens of the world through music, they stepped out of their official roles to confront injustice when and where they saw it. On a State Department tour, Gillespie looked down from the stage at a privileged audience in Pakistan and demanded the “ragamuffin” children be let into the show before he’d continue playing.

University of Michigan historian Penny Von Eschen tells this story in her book about the State Department tours, Satchmo Blows Up The World. Von Eschen says the touring jazz musicians emphasized a dynamic and inclusive democracy. “The musicians brought to these tours a much more egalitarian sense of what democracy was than the state department had,” she told me. “The musicians themselves had experienced exclusion in this generation—they’d go into the back door of restaurants, back door of clubs they played in; they were refused service in many places. To go into a venue anywhere overseas where they saw that repeated was unbearable, and they challenged that on every count.”

Before the civil rights movement, black musicians lived with the deep contradiction of representing freedom for a country that hadn't yet extended all its freedoms to them. With their advocacy of the oppressed, mid-century jazz emissaries sent a message that humanity superseded nationality or any institutional agenda — even the State Department agenda they officially represented.


Planning To Cultivate An Interest

Now Jazz Day ambassadors come from all around the world. In Istanbul, the Americans were joined by Hugh Masekela from South Africa, Keiko Matsui from Japan, and Anat Cohen from Israel, just to name a few. Though jazz is still connected to American democracy, Jazz Day ambassadors officially represent UNESCO’s peace-building mission. And today’s emissaries would have to go well out of their way to mix with the proverbial man on the street. In Istanbul, Jazz Day musicians were whisked from rehearsals to their five-star hotel, from panel discussions to palace receptions, none of which exposed them to mass culture or politics. The main Jazz Day concert was invitation-only, with so many Turkish A-listers in attendance that a fusillade of flashing paparazzi greeted concertgoers at the venue’s entrance. But there was little chance of Dizzy’s “ragamuffin” children being spotted, let alone championed, by jazz ambassadors in Istanbul. The ragamuffins didn’t get close enough.

Especially revealing was a Jazz Day morning concert at Istanbul’s elite Galatasaray High School—and by elite, I mean Galatasaray’s graduates include two Prime Ministers, eight Foreign Affairs Ministers and a good part of Turkey’s diplomatic service. A few of the students greeted the concert with enthusiasm and even ecstasy. A majority of the young audience seemed to accept the performance as another boring but necessary element of a finer education. After the concert, when I asked how students liked the music, most answered with the polite tact of the diplomats their school is training them to become: No, they didn’t listen to jazz, they said, but planned to cultivate an interest. 

I’m not proposing that Jazz Day musicians toss their champagne flutes over the palace terrace and head downstairs to join in solidarity with disgruntled kitchen staff. But I would like to suggest that Jazz Day programming broaden its approach and reach. Considering jazz’s longtime beleaguered reputation, it’s encouraging to see the music getting some respect in select social milieus. Jazz Day’s focus on legitimacy would be fine if the event’s only goal were to make jazz the official soundtrack of diplomatic functions. Jazz Day organizers say they also want to use the music as a school of dialogue and tolerance in the broader culture.

Jazz’s power to fulfill this role hinges on something it’s been lacking for a while: popularity. Back in the 1950s, when the state department jazz tours began, the music was still relatively popular in the U.S., and wildly popular in some parts of the world. A Jazz Day photo exhibit in Istanbul featured black-and-white images of Louis Armstrong being paraded on a throne in the Congo and Benny Goodman crowded by fans in Red Square. Today, hiphop is a more influential medium. At the morning concert, organizers might have conveyed a true message of cultural unity by holding a free outdoor concert in the street, and maybe inviting a Kurdish rap artist to perform with jazz musicians. For a less radical option, R&B-flavored jazz pianist Robert Glasper was in town; he might have moved the young crowd. Instead Jazz Day brought in the current class of Monk Institute musicians to perform a proficient but straitened jazz history lesson for the Galatasaray students.


Toward A True Cultural Exchange

So I grew ever more curious about Jazz Day’s strategy. At a press conference in Istanbul, I asked a panel of musicians to talk about their modern vision of jazz diplomacy. Could jazz still win the hearts and minds of young people? Could it offer a message of peace and unity to, say, moderate young Muslims in Syria or Iran?

By way of reply, UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador Herbie Hancock invoked technology, mentioning the Jazz Day concert webcast: “Streaming is something we didn’t have in the last century,” he said. Trumpeter Terence Blanchard answered my question more directly. “The liberation that happens when people get involved with this music is extremely powerful,” he said. “It’s only a matter of time before people of all these other countries like Syria and these other places—Iran—can pick up this music and be liberated by this music, and we’ll be the beneficiaries of their efforts.”

Playing jazz is no doubt a powerfully liberating experience for musicians. But Jazz Day comments often equated the experience of playing  jazz with its impact on the world; they espoused a belief that the music itself can somehow correct injustice and ease political conflict.

It was this sort of idealism that 1950s jazz ambassador Dave Brubeck took on in a biting musical satire called “The Real Ambassadors.” The musical was recorded in 1961 with Louis Armstrong in a leading role. A few sample lines:

“The State Department has discovered jazz,

It reaches folks like nothing ever has.

Like when they feel that jazzy rhythm, they know we’re really with ‘em.

That’s what we call cultural exchange.

No commodity is quite so strange

As this thing called cultural exchange . . . ”


If Armstrong's sarcasm doesn’t come through in the printed lyrics, it sure does on the recording, where his voice doesn't just drip but overflows with it. Armstrong and Brubeck had some fun with the notion that music could be a panacea for international conflict. 

Yet this seems to be Jazz Day’s very strategy: play jazz and peace will come. Organizers seem to believe they can avoid addressing conflict because music does that work for them. But of course jazz is not necessarily political or peacemaking on its own. Out of the dozen or so Jazz Day musicians I interviewed, Esperanza Spalding was the only one who emphasized this distinction to me. “There’s a lot of potential within the music for it be used, because it’s so potent,” she said. “It can move people’s hearts and minds . . . can manifest in symbolic ways those ideals of democracy . . . I guess it’s just important to note that it won’t do those things by itself."
Picture
Interviewing Esperanza Spalding at a Jazz Day afterparty in Istanbul. (Monique Jaques/Getty Images)
In Istanbul we saw why it’s important to make that distinction. If an international cultural event subscribes to a jumble of artistic and political idealism, and wraps that idealism in the smooth, flattering language of diplomacy, organizers might say stuff they don't mean--and even condone something problematic, like a restrictive, censoring government. At Jazz Day, successive speeches celebrated jazz’s “message of dialogue and freedom” and assured Istanbul that it “exemplifies the beauties of jazz.” Dialogue and freedom aren’t at the top the Turkish government’s agenda, as the crackdown on protesters just weeks later made all too clear.  

Overconfidence in jazz’s natural peace-making ability also obscures some trenchant realities of the music. For a jazz band, every night on stage is an exercise in conflict negotiation—and it’s not all friendly. There can be serious drama in that give and take between self and collective, individual and group; there might be ruthless prodding from a drummer or a mean tempo from a pianist. Yet jazz players manage to lay down paths of meaningful expression through musical war zones every night. At Jazz Day I’d love to hear a panel of Miles Davis band alumni discuss some of the darker tensions on the bandstand, and how exactly they resolved them, both inside and outside of music. If jazz is going to be a model for dialogue and tolerance, group conflict as well as resolution needs to be considered—and thoughtfully explained, since again, music doesn’t do the work of diplomacy on its own.  

Jazz Day provides a rare opportunity to share some valuable messages, even if it’s only with the relatively limited audience that jazz claims today. UNESCO’s imprimatur and the Monk Institute’s organizational expertise make for the closest thing the jazz world has ever had to a superpower. So now is the time to demand the event come a little closer to doing what it says it wants to do.  

Any future host city is likely to have some of Dizzy’s “ragamuffin” children. Let’s make room for them at the official Jazz Day events. Let’s make sure the invited musicians, our jazz ambassadors, are briefed on the host country’s politics and culture. Let’s study the history of jazz diplomacy, looking at what made it effective in the past. The modern world is vastly different, but we can take some tips from the jazz ambassadors of old, who stood with people more than with institutions, who connected through music but pointed out injustice where they saw it, who treated artistic freedom and democratic struggle as matters of vital interest. 

I sure don’t have all the answers. So let’s start a conversation now about how to make next year’s Jazz Day better. Have you seen modern events of musical diplomacy that genuinely worked to bridge cultural divisions? How did they work, exactly? 

Like Michelle Obama and so many others, I believe jazz can be a thriving example of democratic values. I’d like to see International Jazz Day become a true reflection of the music’s many strengths.  
12 Comments
John Fenton link
12/17/2013 03:53:39 am

A great piece of journalism and deeply thought provoking.

Reply
Howard Mandel link
12/18/2013 06:52:21 am

Well-written and carefully considered article, Michelle. I think you're right to suggest that people, not institutions, should be the target audience for efforts of jazz diplomacy. However, also as you imply, jazz needs a "superpower" like UNESCO (and the Monk Institute) in order to do international outreach. So the Jazz Journalists Association last year launched JazzApril, an effort to stimulate grass-roots activities in widespread (so-far only North American) communities to celebrate their own jazz scenes, in conjunction with Jazz Appreciation Month culminating in International Jazz Day. We propose a model of media use for improved networking that can be freely adopted and freely adapted anywhere to raise jazz's local profile and accessibility -- which would enable the kinds of more personal exchanges you suggest are necessary. So far we're working in 2014 with organizations from the Anacostia Community Museum (Washington DC) to Kuumba Jazz Workshop (Santa Cruz), Jazz Boston and San Jose Jazz, with JJA members among the point-people convening interested others to reach out to people who don't know jazz much at all. Jazz diplomacy, as you seem to me to suggest, happens within diverse strata; the JJA is trying to identify, solidify and expand upon the foundation here at home, with techniques that can be applied at little if any expense (beyond activists' time and effort) anywhere. See www.JazzApril.com if you're interested. And watch in archival form the JJA's Dec. 18 web panel on "Jazz Diplomacy Now" with Danilo Perez, Simon Rowe and Jamie Baum talking about the Berklee Global Jazz Institute, the Brubeck Institute's outreach interests and realities of recent US Dept of State "jazz ambassador" tours.

Reply
Michelle
12/18/2013 11:10:59 pm

Hi, Howard,

Thanks so much for your comments! I'd love to get involved with the JJA's efforts (guess that means I'll have to reinstate my lapsed membership). Heading over to watch the archived Jazz Diplomacy panel--excited to see what everyone says.

Michelle

Reply
Charlie Gans
12/18/2013 12:24:56 pm

Hi Michelle,
Thanks for your informed and well-written piece on International Jazz Days - Istanbul, where I participated as a panelist and shared some unforgettable moments with you.
It's interesting how one can attend the same event and see things from a somewhat different perspective. I believe that IJD is a work in progress and there's definitely room for improvement.
Granted that the main concert at Hagia Irene _ a spectacular setting with limited seating _ was an invitation-only event with seats reserved for government representatives, Turkish media and cultural figures, and the foreign diplomatic and press corps. But the organizers also arranged for large screens to be set up in parks on both sides of the Bosporus so the concert could be seen by ordinary Istanbul residents. Of course, the concert was also live streamed around the world via UNESCO, the State Department, the Monk Institute, etc..
Apart from outstanding individual segments, the concert did send a certain symbolic message of jazz's ability to bring people together - particularly when you had a front-line of Israeli, Russian, American and German horn players jamming together at the end.
But the concert was only the culmination of a broad range of events going on in Istanbul that day which drew an audience of Turkish students and artists.
Robert Glasper might not have been at the high school in the morning, but he took part in an afternoon forum at which he spoke and took questons about jazz. Hugh Masekela and Marcus Miller and myself took part iin a panel on "jazz and freedom" which mentioned what jazz meant for people in totalitarian countries. The Monk Institute student fellows gave hands-on workshops for young Turkish musicians, and there were many programs spotlighting more established Turkish musicians such as Okay Temiz.
I think that going ahead International Jazz Day should expand and spread to perhaps another day these programs. Also, I think that more of the international musicians who come in to the host city for IJD should be encouraged to take part in panels, workshops and concerts outside of the gala concert. It doesn't make sense to go to the trouble of flying in all these jazz stars just to have them play a couple of numbers in the main concert.
I also happen to think that the morning program at Galatasary High School was one of the highlights of IJD. The students were somewhat indifferent and restless at the beginning but they seemed much more enthusiastic at the end, particularly when two of their classmates got a chance to jam with Herbie and Wayne. Granted this is Turkey's elite and oldest high school. I'm not sure it's the worst thing to expose the country's future movers and shakers to jazz _ after all Ahmet and Nesuhi Ertegun were the sons of Turkey's ambassador to the U.S.
I did have the opportunity to talk with some of my Turkish friends, journalists and the young people working for the Istanbul cultural organization who put on the annual jazz festival and other events. I think IJD gave them a boost at a time they felt beleaguered. As a veteran female journalist who is quite secular explained to me the ruling Islamic party which won an electoral victory based on its strength in the countryside and smaller cities s gradually introducing more restrictive, religiously inspired laws. She likened it to how a New Yorker would feel if Tea Party Republicans gained a national election victory.
Granted there is a dilemma because government and business support is going to be needed to pull off having a host city for IJD because of the logistics and costs involved in arranging transportation, lodging and the venue. Should the event be held in "safe" Western democracies like Germany, Japan or Australia or would it have more impact in less than perfect countries. I don't know.
I agree with you that some of the musicians engage in hyperbole that somehow jazz is a healing force that can bring about world peace or whatever. They are dreamers and idealists not realists or pragmatists which is probably why their music makes such a strong impression on us.
I do think that you've started a helpful dialogue on what can be done to make International Jazz Day a better event that can live up to its potential.

Reply
Michelle
12/18/2013 11:07:53 pm

Hi, Charlie,

Thanks for your note. It's so good to hear from someone else who was on the scene in Istanbul, and I appreciate your perspective. You raise some interesting points here. Let me just say again that IJD is a valuable event. Its huge potential is exactly what makes me speak up for its improvement.

Streaming and big screen broadcasts are nice, but I don't see how they count as real engagement with the masses, or mitigate the concert's elitism. Of course it can be useful to court the social & cultural elite, as you say. Jazz Day says it also wants to reach the broader culture. Hoping for a trickle-down of its message from A-listers is one way to do that. In the meantime, I'd like to see more of an effort to reach out to other segments of the population. You mentioned the workshops for young Turkish musicians, which may have been a way of reaching out. I'm curious to know which Turkish musicians took part in these workshops?

As far as the concert's symbolism goes, it's a beautiful thing, and a good start. But I think IJD relies too much on symbolism and rhetoric. I'd like to see the event build on the music's symbolism with meaningful dialogue and action.Your idea of having more international musicians participate in forums is perfect. Of course, the subject matter for forums and degree of local participation will make a big difference in how useful they are.

Your panel on Jazz And Freedom was fascinating. And it's important to say that Jazz Day panel discussions were open to the public. But one moment in particular haunts me. Remember on the shuttle bus to your panel, how I talked with a Jazz Day guide, a young Turkish woman? It came out that her father had served a prison sentence for "writing about freedom." While we spoke, Hugh Masekela, an important musical voice in the freedom movement under Apartheid, sat in a shuttle seat near us, listening to us talk. Masekela did not join our conversation about art and freedom in Turkey. When the shuttle stopped, we got out, and the young Turkish woman guided Masekela into the official Jazz Day discussion where he held forth charmingly on the history of artistic dissent in South African politics.

Masekela could have had any number of good reasons for staying out of our conversation on the shuttle; I'm not absolutely sure he was following it closely. Probably he wanted to rest a little before your long public discussion! Still, this moment felt somehow emblematic of IJD: Artistic freedom and democratic struggle were matters of historical interest and ideals to celebrate in speeches, but nothing to address in the here and now. An opportunity for true cultural exchange was missed on the shuttle, I felt. Since Jazz Day, I've been wondering how we might create an environment in which those sorts of personal exchanges would be more likely.

You probably have an entirely different perspective on this, Charlie. And I'll be glad to hear it. Thanks so much for caring enough to respond to my article. My aim here is to improve the event.

Michelle

P.S. Do you have the photos from our visit to the Blue Mosque? I'd love to see them.

Reply
Peter Pallai link
1/9/2014 03:21:44 pm

Dear Michelle,
I've read your article and found it very illuminating and thought-provoking. One could argue whether the aim
of such a day should just be a narrower one, i.e. making jazz regain some of its lost popularity. But, since UNESCO sticks to voicing loftier ones, it is only right to take a critical attitude.

As a teenager in hardline Communist Hungary in the 50s, I used to be at the “receiving end” of US jazz diplomacy. I listened to Willis Conover’s Music USA from the start. What made it especially popular in my country was the fact that jazz was virtually banned between 1948 and 55. To us, it was the music of freedom. We listened night after night on shortwave despite the constant jamming (in the non-Kansas City sense) by the Communist authorities. I used to play mind games during the jammed bits, in the days when improvisation was harmonic, trying to work out where we will be chord-wise when the music becomes audible again. However, jazz was then more approachable for a 15-16 year-old kid like I was than it is today. Also, jazz at the time was forbidden fruit for us and what healthy child could resist that? It being American music and the US being the enemy of the USSR, “my enemy’s enemy was my friend”. Admittedly a most unsound artistic or ideological starting point to a life-long love affair.

Nevertheless, I don’t think jazz ought to be endowed with ideological content, nor should it pretend to have philosophical or even humanitarian aims. It should stand on its own merit but should be made more approachable. As for the rest of this response to your excellent study, I’m going to cheat inasmuch I just copy and paste the much abridged end of a study I originally wrote for the Hungarian magazine, Kalligram. Please bear with me.

Having transformed itself into a sort of art-house music, jazz has never regained and has no hope of regaining the widespread popularity it enjoyed in the thirties and the early forties. Lots of youngsters stay clear of it because it’s considered “too intellectual”.
The genre itself is fragmenting rapidly. Perhaps it’s in the very nature of jazz to go forth and multiply. Jazz has become universal, part of our general cultural heritage. It probably started back in the forties when Stan Kenton and Dizzy Gillespie introduced Afro-Cuban elements into their music. The bossa nova craze of the sixties so ably exploited by Stan Getz was another much needed shot in the arm for the genre increasingly losing audiences to pop-music. Miles Davis opened up the border between jazz and rock and launched to stardom the likes of Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea, John McLaughlin, Keith Jarrett, Wayne Shorter, Joe Zawinul and a host of others. Indian themes pervaded some of Coltrane’s music and even more so that of John McLaughlin. Also the radicalism of some African-American musicians drove them to conscious efforts to discover and incorporate into their own the music of their ancestral lands. John Coltrane, Pharoah Sanders Randy Weston, Archie Shepp, the Art Ensemble of Chicago and numerous black jazzmen reached back to their African roots, while from South Africa apartheid drove into exile some great musicians, both black and white, like Chris McGregor, Hugh Masekela, Dudu Pukwana or Monghezi Feza who went on to enrich the jazz-scene in Britain or the United States. Since it transcended the American shores it has started to draw its raw material and inspiration freely from almost any source, be it African or Indian, Cuban or Brazilian, Hungarian or Norwegian, Arabic or Roma Gipsy, classical, rock or reggae. In the process a lot of jazz is beginning to sound less and less its old self. Starting with Jan Garbarek and Terje Rypdal right up to the phenomenal success of the recently deceased (2008) Esbjörn Svensson, Scandinavian jazzmen managed to create a musical world entirely their own. György Szabados and Mihály Dresch had started to explore with startling originality the rich folk heritage of not just Hungary but the whole Carpathian Basin and even part of the Balkans for the purposes of improvisation long before the phrase ‘ethno-jazz’ was coined. The virtuoso French Gipsy guitarist, Bireli Lagrene, rediscovered the magic of his great forerunner, Django Reinhardt and Gipsy Jazz became fashionable in Europe, although an earlier and certainly the most inventive exponent of that school is the great Hungarian pianist, Béla Szakcsi Lakatos who reached new peaks with his New Gipsy Jazz outfit in 2005. Electronics have also made an impact on the music starting with the introduction of the Moog synthesiser into the jazz world by Sun Ra right up to today’s electronic outings by Bugge Wesseltoft or the thrash-jazz of John Zorn and his friends, not to mention the extremes of “death jazz” as performed by British groups like Acoustic Ladyland and Led Bib, or Supersil

Reply
Peter Pallai link
1/10/2014 03:44:50 pm

Apologies, it seems not the whole of my writing went through yesterday. Here is the rest:
Electronics have also made an impact on the music starting with the introduction of the Moog synthesiser into the jazz world by Sun Ra right up to today’s electronic outings by Bugge Wesseltoft or the thrash-jazz of John Zorn and his friends, not to mention the extremes of “death jazz” as performed by British groups like Acoustic Ladyland and Led Bib, or Supersilent from Norway. There is an infinite variety of fusion, not just between rock and jazz but between all genres. The tabla, the sitar, the cimbalom, the kaval, the oud, the tárogató and multiple ancient folk instruments have claimed legitimacy in jazz during the past few decades. At the other end of the spectrum, some avant-garde jazz is practically indistinguishable from contemporary music. The music of Anthony Braxton and György Szabados - reunited at the Kanija jazz festival in Serbia – almost defy definition. The doggedly individualistic and brilliant Hungarian pianist, Károly Binder, incidentally Head of Jazz at the Ferenc Liszt University of Music, once said to the author that “if you wrote down what free improvisers play it would pass as contemporary music. If you play it from your head, it’s jazz”.
At jazz festivals nowadays one finds an amazing variety of music. There are still the brilliant, fiery hard bop players alongside the ultra-serious, self-absorbed almost classical sounding Scandinavians and the European ethno-jazzers who use their own folk heritage as a springboard for improvisation much the same way Afro-Americans used the blues. Festival organisers are more than conscious of the fact that, outside of the great household names, jazz is not an easily saleable commodity and, for that reason, they augment their programmes with a lot of blues, Latin and world music acts.
The audience has become as fragmented as the field itself. This, in turn, has elevated the status of critics whose knowledge, expertise and skills have matured with the genre itself anyway. They have become relatively more important because when a type of music is riding the crest of the wave and attracts a mass following, a relatively lower percentage of the fans bother with critical opinion, whereas in a narrow specialized field the audience tends to be more informed and analytical, therefore attributes greater importance to reviews. Jazz critics nowadays are in a far easier position to make or break trends than they have ever been before. Although jazz carries within itself the constant need for renewal, critics’ expectations tend to accelerate change even further and make it practically mandatory for all jazz musicians to reinvent themselves on an almost daily basis. This is an impossible demand and I suspect most critics are probably unaware of the immense strain the sum total of their efforts imposes on musicians. Many critics, especially in Western Europe, tend to declare passé those who still play bebop or hard bop. Yet Kálmán Oláh, the brilliant Hungarian pianist, grand prize winner of the 2006 BMI-sponsored Thelonious Monk International Jazz Composer's Competition, said in an interview that “bebop is the common language of jazz”. No young jazz musician learning his or her trade can omit bebop and nearly all of them play it from the heart with great gusto. At jazz club level, certainly in Britain and in Hungary, audiences still tend to react best to gutsy, virtuoso performers of bebop or its latter-day incarnation, hard bop – even if they inevitably traverse the paths well trodden by the likes of Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie, Bud Powell or Cannonball Adderley. Bebop or hard bop played well is a raw and emotional music still rooted in the blues but far more sophisticated and requiring a sound mastery of one’s instrument. As the noted American jazz critic, Gary Giddins wrote: bop as initially presented, was surely the most demanding virtuoso music ever to take root in the American vernacular, much as rock and roll, as initially presented, was very likely the most elemental. (Gary Giddins: “Visions of Jazz”) True, it ran its course and its mould had to be broken by the next generation in order for jazz to move on. Clarinetist Tony Scott put it succinctly when he said Charlie Parker opened the door, showed the world, and then he shut the door behind him.
So what do we do now with bebop? I once owned a useful book, The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Jazz, co-authored by Stan Britt and Brian Case. Since I lost it some time ago I cannot quote verbatim the one passage from the foreword that has stuck in my mind ever since. The authors argued that for an outsider to find out something about the essence of jazz, he or she should not go to a concert hall to hear some American jazz giant do his routine stuff on the umpteenth stage of his world

Reply
Peter Pallai link
1/13/2014 03:17:15 am

Dear Michelle,
I couldn't put on the whole of my writing on this site but it doesn't matter any more. Let me tell you that we had a Jazz Forum at the Budapest Palace of Art and, as a result of your article (that was validated by the Turkish musicians and club owner present) all the jazz clubs in Budapest have decided to open their doors free on International Jazz Day in the true spirit of Dizzy Gillespie and Michelle Mercer:)

Reply
Michelle
1/14/2014 01:09:54 am

Peter: I'd love to see your full article if it's available. Sorry about your trouble posting it here. How amazing to hear your stories of jazz's significance to you as a teenager in Hungary! "My enemy's enemy" is a great title, by the way. I'm thrilled that my article might have helped focus your discussion at the forum. And with free admission in Budapest clubs, I know exactly where I want to be for Jazz Day 2014! Thanks, Peter.

Reply
Thomas Conrad
2/11/2014 10:58:29 am

This piece is typical of Michelle Mercer: articulate and committed to searching for truths below the surface. Reading it made me embarrassed to realize that, to the extent I had given any thought to International Jazz Day, I had been complacent in accepting the platitudes and pollyanna claims. Michelle's most powerful argument is that international Jazz Day represents a unique opportunity for the jazz community to (as Esperanza Spalding puts it) "really contribute"--but only if we get real. MIchelle's piece is a call to action that we all need to answer.

Reply
Chennai Hotels link
9/23/2014 06:20:58 pm


Well somehow I got to read lots of articles on your blog. It’s amazing how interesting it is for me to visit you very often.

Reply
Logan W link
1/13/2021 06:49:28 am

Great read thankyoou

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    March 2022
    December 2013
    March 2013

    Categories

    All
    International Jazz Day
    Jazz Diplomacy

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.