Jazz for aficionados

****The most interesting thing about this music is that the composer considered it Jazz. This begs the question, where did he get his concept of Jazz? Not from Pops I would wager. This says a lot about what we talk about often on this thread i.e. "what is, and what is not Jazz.

I am absolutely sure, that as far as he was concerned, the music qualified as Jazz by some definition to which he had been exposed / taught .****

You would, of course, be incorrect about this; and the reason I bother responding to this is that there is much truly interesting stuff that would be overlooked and misinformed if there were no response.  There is a gulf of difference between being influenced by, having elements of, and "considering it jazz".  Dig deeper and read about the influence of jazz on Classical composers (Shostakovich, Milhaud, Copland, Stravinsky, Ravel and others) at the beginning of 20th Century and you will see that an absolutist and protectionist attitude does not apply.  These composers had no illusion that their music was jazz, but used elements of it in their music; and did this, if anything, as an homage to the "new" art form.  This goes to the issues being discussed here recently and which are not understood: how does a music come about?, the evolution of the music, influences on styles, etc.  Very little of this happens in a vacuum.  My earlier comment in response to yours about how Classical composers "steal" from jazz  was to point out that there would be no jazz as we know it today were it not for the harmonic concepts of the European Classical music tradition.  I know some will bristle at this notion; but it is absolutely true.  Again, nothing happens in a vacuum; and, as always, one has to have a notion about what harmony is all about and its role in jazz to appreciate this idea.  To say "we are not talking about harmonic concepts, we are talking about jazz" is like saying we are not talking about food, we are talking about gumbo.  Btw, one could point to as many 20th Century jazz composers who "stole" from Classical composers as the other way around.  Which brings me to this:

I point this out, not to personalize matters, but because if explains (to me) where some of these notions (and ultimate disagreements) come from.  I always find your choice of words very telling: you refer to this interactive relationship between genres and composers as "stealing", or that the accurate observation that jazz composers studied the work of Classical composers as "wishfull thinking".  The composers themselves (any genre) did not hold these attitudes and were much more inclusive.  These composers (any genre) were/are musical giants with giant intellects and to suggest that they did not have a more fair and evenhanded grasp of all this is ridiculous. 

Some fun and interesting reading:

http://www.jerryjazzmusician.com/2004/01/great-encounters-1-when-charlie-parker-played-for-igor-stra...

http://www.npr.org/sections/deceptivecadence/2013/05/26/186486269/why-jazz-musicians-love-the-rite-o...

He was one of the acknowledged greats on the alto saxophone. Unfortunately, Phil Woods was hugely unrecognized as a composer and arranger. This is a gem of a record in a genre not talked about much here, the "small big band"; or, octet in this case. One of my favorite small ensemble records, the title is a play on Stravinsky’s "Rite Of Spring". It features many of the names mentioned here including Julius Watkins on French Horn playing a very nimble (😉 ) solo.  Those familiar with Stravinsky’s work will recognize his quote @ 3:55.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL55774CEA75D0E052&v=Lt61t0Hnt0w

And Benny Bailey, one of the truly unsung heroes of the trumpet:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL55774CEA75D0E052&params=EAEYATgBSAFYAmILOF9JTG44R0RWdHNoAA%25...

"Music is found in every known culture, past and present, varying widely between times and places. Since all people of the world, including the most isolated tribal groups, have a form of music, it may be concluded that music is likely to have been present in the ancestral population prior to the dispersal of humans around the world. Consequently, music may have been in existence for at least 55,000 years and the first music may have been invented in Africa and then evolved to become a fundamental constituent of human life."

So we can say that there would be no Jazz and also no "European Classical Tradition" without our log beater in Africa.   I will agree that Jazz is a eventual result of the first human attempt to make music.   That would be about 55,000 years ago.   I think that predates Europe, let along the "European Classical Tradition".  Nice try.


***** Unfortunately, Phil Woods was hugely unrecognized as a composer and arranger. *****

"If they are unknown, not respected or ignored, it's for a very good reason"
The Frogman's First Law of Musicians.

Cheers

 

***** To say "we are not talking about harmonic concepts, we are talking about jazz" is like saying we are not talking about food, we are talking about gumbo****

No, it means we are talking about the finished or final product.  

Cheers

Rok, I realize that this stuff is very difficult for you to grasp, but there existed a European Classical music tradition long before any European set foot on African soil.  It can be said, however, that there also would be no jazz without your log beaters; but, you already told us way back that you don't believe that.  Try for some consistency; please.  As far as Phil goes, as I pointed out to O-10 (I think) recently my words were: "there is USUALLY a reason why........".  Now, let's keep things interesting and relevant: I just posted two clips of Phil's writing.  Tell us in a way that is informative, why you don't think it is at the highest level of writing and arranging.