JAM Magazine: April/May 1998 Issue: The End of Jazz?

Does The End Of
The Jazz Century Also Mean
THE END OF JAZZ?

There is an emerging school of thought that says jazz is likely to go down as a music unique to its time. That, much like a dying star, it had a beginning, middle and end, an end that, concurrent with the final years of the 20th century, we are now witnessing.

What prompted the idea for this cover story was a new (and controversial) book by Eric Nisenson called Blue: The Murder of Jazz, a mostly pessimistic look at jazz today and (according to the author) the lack of innovation that threatens to rob the music of its customary forward-looking vision.

Are there no more innovators to take the music forward? Will the final chapter in the Book of Jazz be nothing more than a brief entry about the efforts of the so-called "young lions" who looked more to the past, than toward forging new ground? And, most importantly, is jazz, at long last, really "dead"?

JAM put these questions to numerous musicians, educators and aficionados. Here's what they had to say.

DR. DAVID AABERG
(Warrensburg, MO)
Trumpeter, educator, Director of Jazz/Commercial Music, Central Missouri State University

Rather than addressing current "name" performers in jazz, I'd like to take a look behind the scenes at the cultivation of the next generation of jazz performers and listeners.

If one looks at jazz in education, it is difficult to ignore the increased number programs available and overall enrollment. Where 30 years ago, the jazz ensemble was not even within the curriculum of most colleges and universities, most large and mid-sized institutions have at least one jazz specialist on their faculties. Many schools offer not only undergraduate, but also graduate degrees in jazz studies.

I also see significant increases in the involvement in jazz in the public schools. Having coordinated a jazz festival at CMSU for the past 12 years, I would like to note that this year was by far our largest. More importantly, there appears to be a very noticeable increase in the number of public schools fielding not only a big band, but also a combo and possibly a second big band.

I would like to think that all of this indicates that more and more of our youth are being, and will be, exposed to jazz, creating a leap in the jazz listening audience. Additionally, more and more of those individuals seeking a career in jazz will be able to opt for the security of a position in education, again "spreading the word" to future generations.

So... taking all of this into consideration, I would like to think that jazz is indeed alive and well.

JIM CAJACOB
(Bend, OR)
Consultant, trombonist, vibraphonist, composer, longtime jazz fan

Does "The End of Jazz" mean "The End of Jazz as a commercially (just barely) viable genre," "The End of Jazz as we recognize it," or something else? We are elitist and silly to dismiss popular music as less "valid" or "good." As soon as styles like "Smooth Jazz" or "Acid Jazz," or someone like Kenny G or John Tesh achieves a modicum of popular acceptance, we purists feel compelled to heap ridicule on the performers (whose success we envy) and the people who listen to them. According to us, people should be listening to more Coltrane, less Cannonball (who did not escape being called a sell-out who played "mood music").

Birth of the Cool yes, Jack Johnson maybe, Tu Tu no; our appetite for condescension seems endless. Isn't the best plan to create the best music we can, listen to the music we love (especially live and local), and keep our ears and hearts open?

LAURA CAVIANI
(St. Paul, MN)
Pianist, composer, recording artist

Is it too late for new things in jazz? Not as long as there's Karrin (that goes without saying), and Joshua (as in Redman... no one sounds like he does), and Kenny Garrett (not to be mistaken for "Kenny G;" we're talkin' tribute to Bud Powell here). Then there's Christian McBride, who transcends the age gap with his classic approach to the bass; which brings to mind Diana Krall, who also harkens back to her jazz ancestors (like Nat King Cole). And while we're in the piano domain, how about Geri Allen... and Renee Rosnes, who credits her real ancestors on the title cut of her Ancestors CD. And then there's Maria Schneider, who doesn't even have to play an axe; her arranging says it all.

Jazz is alive and well, thank you very much; and that's not even taking into consideration the masters who are still with us -- Ahmad Jamal, JoAnne Brackeen, McCoy Tyner, and of course Chick, and Keith (who gives credit to Handel). And who could forget Herbie? Of course, I'm probably leaving out someone really important, but the point is this: jazz is far from dead. As a matter of fact, we are currently relishing in its revival.

One more thing about the other "Kenny G." He, along with groups like Spyro Gyra, serve an important function in that they bridge the gap between styles of music and draw people closer to jazz. I once heard Kenny say that he listens to jazz, and that he admires jazz musicians for what they do. Is he selling out by not playing jazz? What does it mean to "sell out?" How does one define "quality" jazz? There are far more questions than answers as we move into the next century; but once again, my belief is that jazz is far from dying off. It's meant to evolve; that's its role. There will always be jazz.

DR. ROGER CODY
(Columbia, MO)
Professor of Music Theory and Brass, Central Methodist College, trombonist, past Director of Jazz Studies, Northeast Missouri State University

Anyone who thinks jazz is a dying art form only needs to attend some junior high and high school jazz festivals, particularly in the Midwest. Here one is routinely presented with evidence that there are dozens of young people who have mastered the bebop language. Thus, I think it very likely that the Armstrongs, Parkers and Tristanos of the future will come from what many would think an unlikely place -- like Iowa, for instance.

For at least a decade I have been reminded on a yearly basis that jazz is very much alive at the Iowa Jazz Championships where 80 bands come together and perform. Even the class from the smallest schools in the state will produce 15 or 16 bands with full instrumentation. Many will also have truly outstanding soloists, and a few of these will go directly into professional careers without passing through the halls of collegiate education. Somehow I have to think that among this group will appear one of the next great innovators.

Who would have predicted in the 1940s that Cheraw, South Carolina would produce a jazz pioneer like Dizzy Gillespie? Or that a kid from Kansas City would go to Eldon, Missouri and come out of there prepared carve the mainstream of jazz a new channel? And yet, we may not have to wait for the new young messiah to crawl out of a midwestern corn field. He or she may be among us, already creating a new language that, at this point, we haven't had the vision to recognize.

DR. JOHN LEISENRING
(Kansas City, MO)
Trombonist, Professor of Music, past Director of Jazz Studies, University of Missouri/Kansas City

Saying that jazz will end is like saying that American culture will end. That's silly. Jazz, America's indigenous art form, will only continue to expand, mutate and grow as the culture moves on to new things. Indeed, to assign jazz to any given time period is ludicrous; it has only a beginning, not an end. And its beginning is a two or three century glop that needed time to simmer with different elements added at just the right time in order for jazz to emerge.

Having said that, the next question to ask applies to jazz "as we know it," or jazz "as we like it." I imagine many jazz fans in the '30s were mortified upon listening to bebop when it emerged in the mid-'40s, and I can imagine many people mourning the death of jazz at that time. Indeed, there were many people mourning the death of rock in the early '60s until the Beatles, Dylan and the Stones came along.

This music we call jazz (and rock for that matter; they both have the same birth mother) as an amalgam of African and European music -- a musical compound mixed and baked during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries in and around New Orleans -- is not finite, just as music is not finite. It will continue to influence and be influenced as long as there is music to be made. Which is: forever.

STEVE LENHERT
(Kansas City, MO)
Bassist, award-winning Missouri jazz educator

Jazz has worn many different hats since its beginning. We had early "dixie," "big band swing," "be-bop," "fusion"... Each period left us gifts to be enjoyed and also to be built upon by present innovators. Who today doesn't like to hear a good Dixieland band at times, or Benny Goodman's clarinet virtuosity.

The kids in my high school jazz band pushed me to play Ernie Wilkins' arrangement of "Moten Swing," but they also loved the time charts of Don Ellis, and Stan Kenton ballads.
Jazz will last because of the sound musical principles it employs. Highly sophisticated harmonies, complex rhythms and ornate melodies put it on a level with all the fine quality music in the world that has passed the test of time. I am confident that it will survive. The audience may be limited as with symphony orchestras and with chamber music, but its loyalty and enthusiasm is strong and will carry jazz into yet unknown parameters.

DR. MIKE PARKINSON
(St. Louis, MO)
Chair, Webster University Department of Music, trumpeter, past Director of Jazz Studies, University of Missouri/Kansas City

In a 1967 Down Beat article, the great guitarist Gabor Szabo stated that jazz was dead. What an outcry that caused from readers and musicians alike! Jazz is not in danger of dying, but it is in danger of being damaged by:

1. The ever-increasing reasons to stay at home for pleasure rather than go out to clubs and concerts to hear live music;
2. The emphasis on "young lions" who are working in the tried (tired?) and true traditions of hard bop without innovation;
3. The claims by our media geniuses that Kenny G is the equal of Charlie Parker;
4. The racial dividing lines that seem to be showing up more and more which divide musicians and the supportive public (this is the issue that all of us should work on improving for our society as a whole!); and,
5. The lack of air time jazz receives on radio (not counting NPR) and television (not counting BET & Bravo).

On the plus side:

1. There are more videos, books, educational materials, magazines, recordings, festivals (educational and professional), summer camps and organizations (like the KC Jazz Ambassadors) than ever;
2. The Internet has greatly helped spread the jazz gospel worldwide while bringing all jazz people closer together;
3. The 1998 IAJE conference in New York was attended by 8,000 people, an all-time record (and thousands of these were jazz fans from around the world);
4. Jazz continues to expand in all areas of education in the United States as well as internationally, with levels of musicianship and knowledge continually improving year after year, one generation after another;
5. The National Association of Schools of Music, which accredits American schools, is mandating that improvisation and composition be taught to all music majors; and most importantly...
6. Veteran and/or "younger" musicians such as Blanchard, Brookmeyer, Corea, D'Rivera, DeJohnette, Garrett, Hagans, Hancock, Harrell, Henderson, Holland, Jarrett, Liebman, Lovano, Marsalis, Metheny, Roach, Rollins, Schneider, Shorter, Tyner, Marsalis, Wheeler, Werner, and countless others keep building on the shoulders of "the saints" -- Prez, Bird, Diz, Lady Day, Klooke, Evans (B & G), Sarah, Bud, Tatum, Basie, Satch, Duke, Mingus, Hawk, and Swee' Pea to name just a few.

What about Kansas City? Check out the list of musicians in JAM, and call the Jazz Hotline to hear a veritable "who's who" of KC jazz. At your fingertips are: Abel, Adams, Allyson, Alaadeen, Auwarter, Braggs, Cartwright, Cushon, Crain, Dunn, Fleeman, Freeman, Harman, Henry, Kessler, Mahogany, McBeth, Mathews, Metheny, Ning, Park, Pearson, Perkins, Perryman, Ruskin, Frank & Paul Smith, Sivils, Spaits, Strait, Strayer, Talley and Williams to name just a few... as well as "Fiddler" Williams and Jay McShann who still take no prisoners. The same can be said of my new home, St. Louis; the music is very healthy here!
Jazz did not ask to be born, it did not seek nor does it seek to be popular, and no one can make it die. Jazz comes from a spirit which cannot be extinguished!

CHARLTON PRICE
(Kansas City, MO)
Consultant, writer, longtime jazz fan

The end of jazz? Never! A new jazz each decade? Inevitable! Dave Frishberg reminds that "when it was hip to be hep, I was hep." Now I dig Karrin Allyson, Rebecca Kilgore, Rachelle Ferrell, Steve Gadd... yeah, Wynton, too!

Retro, jazz ain't. And never will be. Thanks to the infinite electronic archive, we're forever in the presence of all the great ones, from Jelly Roll on. So we all, always, will have jazz to celebrate, to comfort, to inspire. As Ken Burns' video epics show the world, and especially Kansas City:

The Civil War + Baseball + Jazz = "E Pluribus Unum"

...the American story, our living legacy.

STEVE SCHENKEL
(St. Louis, MO)
Guitarist, Professor of Music and Media, Webster University

Jazz has never been healthier! Those who prophesize the demise of jazz make the mistake of assuming that jazz needs to exist on a constant upward trajectory. Art does not grow in a linear fashion; rather, as an art form matures, many different strands of tradition co-exist. Each of these dialects nourishes the basic principle we call jazz.

Has there ever been a finer piano trio than the current Keith Jarrett ensemble? At the same time, have there ever been finer proponents of the piano "tradition" than Dave McKenna or Ralph Sutton? We live in a time of brilliant saxophonists. Sonny Rollins and Lee Konitz are playing magnificently, while Kenny Garrett and Josh Redman lead the way to the 21st century. Groups like Oregon and Trio Globo have enriched jazz with world music traditions, while Marcus Miller and the Yellowjackets have stretched the boundaries of fusion. We have fabulous singers (Cassandra Wilson and Shirley Horn come to mind) and boundary-shattering guitarists like Pat Metheny and David Torn.

Jazz has never offered such a wide variety of styles and genres under its huge umbrella. As long as the jazz community functions with open arms and ears, jazz will continue to be the most dynamic creative music tradition on the globe.

The golden age of jazz is now.

DOUG TALLEY
(Kansas City, MO)
Saxophonist, recording artist, educator

Jazz is certainly unique to its time, as is any music, but there is no reason to believe its days to be numbered. It will always have its innovators and neoclassicists, each with a legitimate contribution to an evolving music. If "young lions" looking to the past could adversely affect music, then Bach or Brahms would have been the kiss of death to "classical" music. Fortunately, art music and jazz are survivors. Each will continue on its path, unique to its time, past and present.

DOUG TATUM
(Kansas City, MO)
Executive Director, Kansas City's Folly Theater

In every period of jazz, great innovators have been followed by imitators. And you can probably count on two hands the greatest jazz innovators like Louie Armstrong, Lester Young, Charlie Parker, Duke Ellington and John Coltrane. So no, I don't think jazz has "run its course." There are fresh voices out there. Like guitarist Bill Frisell. I'm totally fascinated by his compositions and his approach to the guitar. And I should also mention Pat Metheny. Pat is obviously an innovative voice in the development of the music. So I think there's much more new ground and new territory to explore. And I'm optimistic about how there are still more great innovators to come down the road and point the way.

TERRY TEACHOUT
(New York, NY)
Music critic, Time Magazine, Wall Street Journal (former jazz critic, Kansas City Star

No, I don't think jazz is dying. I can very easily think of a dozen jazz singers and instrumentalists between the ages of 30 and 50 -- Karrin Allyson is one of them -- who are at least as interesting as anyone I've heard in the past quarter-century. The problem, as I see it, is that the major record labels are currently trying to squeeze big money out of an art form that is no longer a "popular" music. This explains their relentless focus on very young musicians whose styles are still derivative and predictable, thus making them easier to market (especially if they're good-looking). It won't last, though, for even the simplest jazz is too sophisticated to appeal for very long to an audience weaned on MTV. Sooner or later, the money will dry up, and the corrupting effects of mass marketing will vanish from the jazz scene. Then we can all start concentrating on making music again, and on handing out more pieces of a smaller pie, which in the long run will be much healthier for jazz than the converse.

JIM WIDNER
(Jefferson City, MO)
Bassist, educator, clinician, leader of the Jim Widner Big Band

Speaking as one who is heavily involved in jazz education on a national scope, I see no end of jazz in sight. The emphasis may change with the demise of jazz clubs and road bands, but the desire of today's youth to play jazz (along with the growth of school jazz programs) is stronger than ever. High school and college jazz festivals are flourishing and that creates a demand for guest artists. As I stated before, the emphasis has changed, and today's jazz artists are required to host clinic sessions for the students as well as perform. While this is not a new concept, thanks to legends such as Stan Kenton, Clark Terry and Louie Bellson, it has carved a new territory for today's young lions like Wynton Marsalis, the Breckers, Dave Weckl and others. And yes, there are a few of us like John Fedchock, Frank Mantooth, Bob Florence, Maria Schneider and myself who still possess a passion for big bands.

The end of jazz? Hardly!

TODD WILKINSON
(Kansas City, MO)
Saxophonist, educator, former jazz club owner

Just as it is with any music, jazz is unique to its time. All music is temporal. Music gives us a perspective into time. Its continued existence connects us to the past. Is this not why we still hear the mantra, "Bird Lives?" Beethoven's Ninth Symphony retains the power of its own unique time, yet it speaks with as much relevance today as ever before. "Beethoven Lives!" To be forgotten, that is truly death. The young lions are keeping jazz alive. They are remembering. Museums of music. However, jazz innovation has not stopped; the fusion and infusion is not over. Listen to anything by John McLaughlin. Check out Tribal Tech, Maria Schneider, Kenny Garrett, Steve Turre and Dave Liebman. The list is exhaustive. Innovators and preservers, all. There are thousands of great performers, composers, connoisseurs and chroniclers of jazz. Many are imitators. Many are mediocre. Some extraordinary. But at every level we are many. It's too late; jazz cannot die. And, any "school" that compares jazz to a "dying star" must also believe that jazz is for old people. Sorry, but jazz is for smart people. Intelligent people who can see a world in perspective. Jazz lives!

BROOKS WRIGHT
(Boston, MA)
Writer, novelist, former KC jazz drummer

I remember years ago Gabor Szabo causing a mild uproar when he announced, "Jazz, as we know it, is dead." Much debate ensued. It was a natural enough thing to say, what with the likes of Albert Ayler and all the rest that was going on then. What started as pure innovation with Charlie Parker ended as pure theater: Roland Kirk (one of my favorites) finishing a solo by tearing a chair to pieces on stage a la The Who, perhaps a tongue-in-cheek commentary on the demise of music in general. But dead? Not so. What Szabo meant was precisely what happened: evolution. Armstrong in the '20s and '30s; Parker in the '40s; Coltrane and Coleman in the '50s and '60s; Weather Report in the '70s and '80s; and of course Miles through all of it. What can they mean, dead? If bebop in the '40s, and what followed in the '50s and '60s, was a renaissance of sorts, then perhaps the neo-traditional efforts of Wynton Marsalis and Marcus Roberts of late is a sort of neo-classicism which will eventually lead to a new romanticism and another round of innovation. And what could be more innovative, anyway, than some of the stuff Pat Metheny is doing? "World music," or whatever you want to call it, is a welcome innovation in its own right that extends to jazz. That's how it started in the first place -- a blending of African, European and South American music. And now we have a consolidating effort -- a distilling of the tradition. Establishing a cannon of past genius, as they are doing at Lincoln Center, is precisely what will cause the music to survive. Besides, historically speaking, 30 years is nothing, and the quality of music that I'm hearing, not only by the greats but at the local level as well, is better than ever. After all, it wouldn't be innovation if it was an every day thing. It takes time for the pressure to build. Kind of like in a good jazz solo.

RETURN TO APRIL/MAY 1998 MAIN INDEX

------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Kansas City Jazz Ambassadors 1996-2001. All rights reserved.