A really good piece of writing for sure. However, I have long ago given up on trying to convince people that they should listen to jazz. You really find yourself up against a wall. They will sit there with their arms folded as if to say, “Go on then, impress me”. And, in some cases their resistance will be to all forms of jazz. Including, Armstrong, Ellington, Peterson, Holiday, Davis, etc, etc. The only jazz likely to make them listen will be Sinatra, Fitzgerald and other forms of, but not all, big band swing jazz. I have a lot of tremendously talented musician friends, (I’m a drummer), who would not even consider listening to jazz. It is like trying to convince someone who doesn’t like fish that a Dover Sole or a perfectly cooked Lobster is not only nourishment but food heaven. They ain’t gonna go for it, buy it or try it.
So, I switch off from having to play and learn a countless number of pop & rock back beat classics by listening to jazz on my own, at home. And I guess that’s the way it will stay.
When I was listening to & playing jazz in the early '60s, I was also listening to & playing the mountain music and blues from the 1920s through the 1940s, finding the melodies to be incredibly beautiful. It was all the same...
Yep. After hosting my show last night, 3 hours of jazz (I guess the word avant garde applies - or simply not straight ahead jazz) all I wanted to listen to in the ride home was early aughts Flaming Lips. And I was struck by the beauty in those simple melodies in slightly askew psychedelic rock settings.
Here's the first episode of "Peter Gunn," broadcast in the fall of 1958 with music by Henry Mancini. I was 5 years old. It was the first jazz experience--and for that matter, musical experience--I can remember.
Looking back, I can understand why this hit me so deeply. The sounds were what I learned later were called "harmonies" and were--and are--pretty sophisticated. You have to have an ear for such things, and not everyone does. That's why jazz, classical, and other "art musics" have minority audiences.
I don't know where my affinity for these sounds came from, but my life and career were shaped at this very early age. Thank you, Henry Mancini and producer Blake Edwards.
Thanks for the info & link. I just watched Peter Gunn; dig the cool combo at Mother’s bar. Thought it was Victor Feldman on vibes but I looked up cast/crew, appears to be Larry Bunker, who I thought was mainly a drummer, but he definitely played vibes too! (Another swingin’ combo is in the Johnny Staccato 50s crime TV show)
It IS Victor Feldman, though Larry Bunker also played vibraphone for Mancini. On another episode, Shorty Rogers plays flugelhorn at an after-hours session at Mother's. The "Johnny Staccato" combo was led by Red Norvo.
Thanks, Bill ! I swear I thought it looked more like Victor (that hair & face) than Larry (used to have a mustache?) so I guess whatever cast/crew list I was viewing was completely messed up wrong; was trying to steer away from AI so I thought it was from IMBD. Anyway, I do recall seeing Red Norvo’s name listed for the J.Staccato episodes along w/ a stellar bunch of other names I recognized and I’m sure you do too!
Marc... This is easily one of your best pieces. Anyone who's a jazz fan has had to deal with other music lovers who think it's a waste of time. I long ago gave up trying to convince my musically inclined friends that they were losing out. They just weren't interested. And speaking of interest, I have a twin brother who, like so many others, thinks jazz sucks. Go figure. As a result, I've folded my tent and I listen alone. But, I'm not complaining. Why? Because I know something they don't...that they don't know what they're missing.
Thanks for your kind words, David. You’re not alone at JazzWax. You’re able to hear the beauty that musicians put into the music. This intent doesn’t exist in any other form of pop music. Others can’t hear what you hear because they don’t recognize it and are more conditioned to respond to catchy melodies or a beat that is familiar. You hear the beauty that jazz delivers.
I am sorry, but this just feels wrong. People already look at jazz fans with a raised eyebrow, suspecting us of being snobs. I know that I love jazz but I don’t know why. One thing I’m pretty sure about is that it isn’t good for me or the jazz world in general to make claims about beauty and some special ability to appreciate beauty. Let’s keep the peace. Live and let live. Those folk love their bluegrass. They find beauty there. Fine. Screamo fans over there. House aficionados over there. It’s all good. Isn’t beauty a kaleidoscope? Subjective? Informed by norms and culture?
Hi Jon. Thanks for your comment. I would politely disagree. All beauty isn't a "kaleidoscope." If that were the case, everything would be in the museum and art would be worthless. My post isn't about snobbery or elitism. Anyone can appreciate jazz, with or without money or an education. My point is simply to explain what distinguishes jazz from other forms of popular music, why some people get it and others don't. The only other form that starts from the premise of emotionalism and projecting beauty is classical. But many back in the early years of the LP couldn't afford multiple records that held a full classical work or found the music too demanding. Easy listening stepped in. Jazz approached music the same way as classical, to make listeners feel beauty. At any rate, a good springboard for further examination. Thanks again for weighing in. A joy to read your reaction and perspective in a peaceful and rational forum, something that seems lost today. Best, Marc.
If I had a $1 for every time someone ask me "why I like jazz"! They just don't write them like they used to. I get the "heart" thing, but good music seems to hit me in the "gut" (maybe it's because I'm a drummer?). Until I played the "Charlie Brown Christmas" show a couple years ago (bass/piano/drums trio), I didn't realize a lot of folks first exposure to jazz was Charlie Brown. Here are some reviews I did of my favorite modern jazz/fusion CDs from the last 40 years or so (https://stantonzeff.com/cd-reviews).
Marc: love your books, and read every interview you do for the WSJ!
What is jazz? It’s not black or white - it’s a continuum. Is Glenn Miller jazz? Scott Joplin? Jimmy Lunceford? The Dorsey Brothers? George Gershwin? Ravi Shankar? Frank Sinatra?Rosemary Clooney? Doris Day? Sly and the Family Stone? Billy Joel’s “All the Things You Are” with Phil Woods’ iconic improvised solo?
There are infinfinitely many kinds of musical beauty, which are in the ear, mind, and heart of the beholder. Someone who does not appreciate jazz, as one may arbitrarily define it - and I have several intelligent and cultured friends in that category - appreciates a different beauty.
Hi Daniel. Great points. (I think you mean "Just the Way You Are" by Billy). I'll have to give your comments some thought. I don't think everything is beautiful, in its own way, to quote Ray Stevens. And I think many form of music are wonderful (I write on all of them for the WSJ), but I think a good number make us feel good for reasons other than beauty (nostalgia, comfort, familiarity, etc.). For me, beauty is a prized expression that requires a special emotion to recognize and appreciate it. Jazz is the only popular music form that expresses this singular form of beauty, largely because that's the motive and goal of the artist. Many of the artists you cite above are pop artists who make us feel good, which is terrific. Not opposed to feeling good. And my goodness, what would life be like without them. But I don't think they express jazz's level of beauty because their motive isn't beauty but feel-good music. At any rate, thanks for surfacing a fascinating aspect of today's post. A subject clearly worthy of ongoing examination and discussion. Best, Marc
I had a similar encounter with a friend who is much younger than me. He comes from a rock point of view and loves the Beatles. One evening while he was over, I played a variety of jazz for him, to which he was receptive. Then I put on a record of Johnny Hodges playing a ballad. He stopped dead in his tracks. “Who is this man?!” he exclaimed. Making your point, it was the beauty that finally got to him. He became an avid jazz fan from that point.
Hi Peter. Great story. Funny, I was thinking as I was writing last night whether the Beatles were an exception. Ultimately, I decided they were pop (chart focused) and reasons for loving them had more to do with nostalgia and familiarity. But you make an interesting point, that there is so much beauty baked into their work that a fan can't help but be struck by the beauty in Hodges (and other jazz masters). Thanks for the insightful comment, as always.
Last year Andrew S. Berish's "HATING JAZZ: A HISTORY OF ITS DISPARAGEMENT, MOCKERY AND OTHER FORMS OF ABUSE (University of Chicago Press)" came out. It's a very academic study that largely focuses on racism as a factor in music appreciation. I didn't make it all the way through because of all the jargon, but someone more patient might get something out of it.
A really good piece of writing for sure. However, I have long ago given up on trying to convince people that they should listen to jazz. You really find yourself up against a wall. They will sit there with their arms folded as if to say, “Go on then, impress me”. And, in some cases their resistance will be to all forms of jazz. Including, Armstrong, Ellington, Peterson, Holiday, Davis, etc, etc. The only jazz likely to make them listen will be Sinatra, Fitzgerald and other forms of, but not all, big band swing jazz. I have a lot of tremendously talented musician friends, (I’m a drummer), who would not even consider listening to jazz. It is like trying to convince someone who doesn’t like fish that a Dover Sole or a perfectly cooked Lobster is not only nourishment but food heaven. They ain’t gonna go for it, buy it or try it.
So, I switch off from having to play and learn a countless number of pop & rock back beat classics by listening to jazz on my own, at home. And I guess that’s the way it will stay.
When I was listening to & playing jazz in the early '60s, I was also listening to & playing the mountain music and blues from the 1920s through the 1940s, finding the melodies to be incredibly beautiful. It was all the same...
Yep. After hosting my show last night, 3 hours of jazz (I guess the word avant garde applies - or simply not straight ahead jazz) all I wanted to listen to in the ride home was early aughts Flaming Lips. And I was struck by the beauty in those simple melodies in slightly askew psychedelic rock settings.
Here's the first episode of "Peter Gunn," broadcast in the fall of 1958 with music by Henry Mancini. I was 5 years old. It was the first jazz experience--and for that matter, musical experience--I can remember.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSXd1rSzh14&list=PLJwIFLur634z2MWb5hrAZaJ_1-Ie-9D56
Looking back, I can understand why this hit me so deeply. The sounds were what I learned later were called "harmonies" and were--and are--pretty sophisticated. You have to have an ear for such things, and not everyone does. That's why jazz, classical, and other "art musics" have minority audiences.
I don't know where my affinity for these sounds came from, but my life and career were shaped at this very early age. Thank you, Henry Mancini and producer Blake Edwards.
Thanks for the info & link. I just watched Peter Gunn; dig the cool combo at Mother’s bar. Thought it was Victor Feldman on vibes but I looked up cast/crew, appears to be Larry Bunker, who I thought was mainly a drummer, but he definitely played vibes too! (Another swingin’ combo is in the Johnny Staccato 50s crime TV show)
It IS Victor Feldman, though Larry Bunker also played vibraphone for Mancini. On another episode, Shorty Rogers plays flugelhorn at an after-hours session at Mother's. The "Johnny Staccato" combo was led by Red Norvo.
Thanks, Bill ! I swear I thought it looked more like Victor (that hair & face) than Larry (used to have a mustache?) so I guess whatever cast/crew list I was viewing was completely messed up wrong; was trying to steer away from AI so I thought it was from IMBD. Anyway, I do recall seeing Red Norvo’s name listed for the J.Staccato episodes along w/ a stellar bunch of other names I recognized and I’m sure you do too!
“Without beauty, jazz is worthless. How true..
And as Nietzsche once said, ‘without music, life is a joke.’
Marc... This is easily one of your best pieces. Anyone who's a jazz fan has had to deal with other music lovers who think it's a waste of time. I long ago gave up trying to convince my musically inclined friends that they were losing out. They just weren't interested. And speaking of interest, I have a twin brother who, like so many others, thinks jazz sucks. Go figure. As a result, I've folded my tent and I listen alone. But, I'm not complaining. Why? Because I know something they don't...that they don't know what they're missing.
Thanks for your kind words, David. You’re not alone at JazzWax. You’re able to hear the beauty that musicians put into the music. This intent doesn’t exist in any other form of pop music. Others can’t hear what you hear because they don’t recognize it and are more conditioned to respond to catchy melodies or a beat that is familiar. You hear the beauty that jazz delivers.
I am sorry, but this just feels wrong. People already look at jazz fans with a raised eyebrow, suspecting us of being snobs. I know that I love jazz but I don’t know why. One thing I’m pretty sure about is that it isn’t good for me or the jazz world in general to make claims about beauty and some special ability to appreciate beauty. Let’s keep the peace. Live and let live. Those folk love their bluegrass. They find beauty there. Fine. Screamo fans over there. House aficionados over there. It’s all good. Isn’t beauty a kaleidoscope? Subjective? Informed by norms and culture?
Hi Jon. Thanks for your comment. I would politely disagree. All beauty isn't a "kaleidoscope." If that were the case, everything would be in the museum and art would be worthless. My post isn't about snobbery or elitism. Anyone can appreciate jazz, with or without money or an education. My point is simply to explain what distinguishes jazz from other forms of popular music, why some people get it and others don't. The only other form that starts from the premise of emotionalism and projecting beauty is classical. But many back in the early years of the LP couldn't afford multiple records that held a full classical work or found the music too demanding. Easy listening stepped in. Jazz approached music the same way as classical, to make listeners feel beauty. At any rate, a good springboard for further examination. Thanks again for weighing in. A joy to read your reaction and perspective in a peaceful and rational forum, something that seems lost today. Best, Marc.
If I had a $1 for every time someone ask me "why I like jazz"! They just don't write them like they used to. I get the "heart" thing, but good music seems to hit me in the "gut" (maybe it's because I'm a drummer?). Until I played the "Charlie Brown Christmas" show a couple years ago (bass/piano/drums trio), I didn't realize a lot of folks first exposure to jazz was Charlie Brown. Here are some reviews I did of my favorite modern jazz/fusion CDs from the last 40 years or so (https://stantonzeff.com/cd-reviews).
Marc: love your books, and read every interview you do for the WSJ!
Hi Stanton. You're most kind. Thanks for your lovely words. So interesting. Perhaps a post on gateways to jazz next week. Swell reviews. Best, Marc
What is jazz? It’s not black or white - it’s a continuum. Is Glenn Miller jazz? Scott Joplin? Jimmy Lunceford? The Dorsey Brothers? George Gershwin? Ravi Shankar? Frank Sinatra?Rosemary Clooney? Doris Day? Sly and the Family Stone? Billy Joel’s “All the Things You Are” with Phil Woods’ iconic improvised solo?
There are infinfinitely many kinds of musical beauty, which are in the ear, mind, and heart of the beholder. Someone who does not appreciate jazz, as one may arbitrarily define it - and I have several intelligent and cultured friends in that category - appreciates a different beauty.
Hi Daniel. Great points. (I think you mean "Just the Way You Are" by Billy). I'll have to give your comments some thought. I don't think everything is beautiful, in its own way, to quote Ray Stevens. And I think many form of music are wonderful (I write on all of them for the WSJ), but I think a good number make us feel good for reasons other than beauty (nostalgia, comfort, familiarity, etc.). For me, beauty is a prized expression that requires a special emotion to recognize and appreciate it. Jazz is the only popular music form that expresses this singular form of beauty, largely because that's the motive and goal of the artist. Many of the artists you cite above are pop artists who make us feel good, which is terrific. Not opposed to feeling good. And my goodness, what would life be like without them. But I don't think they express jazz's level of beauty because their motive isn't beauty but feel-good music. At any rate, thanks for surfacing a fascinating aspect of today's post. A subject clearly worthy of ongoing examination and discussion. Best, Marc
I had a similar encounter with a friend who is much younger than me. He comes from a rock point of view and loves the Beatles. One evening while he was over, I played a variety of jazz for him, to which he was receptive. Then I put on a record of Johnny Hodges playing a ballad. He stopped dead in his tracks. “Who is this man?!” he exclaimed. Making your point, it was the beauty that finally got to him. He became an avid jazz fan from that point.
Hi Peter. Great story. Funny, I was thinking as I was writing last night whether the Beatles were an exception. Ultimately, I decided they were pop (chart focused) and reasons for loving them had more to do with nostalgia and familiarity. But you make an interesting point, that there is so much beauty baked into their work that a fan can't help but be struck by the beauty in Hodges (and other jazz masters). Thanks for the insightful comment, as always.
Last year Andrew S. Berish's "HATING JAZZ: A HISTORY OF ITS DISPARAGEMENT, MOCKERY AND OTHER FORMS OF ABUSE (University of Chicago Press)" came out. It's a very academic study that largely focuses on racism as a factor in music appreciation. I didn't make it all the way through because of all the jargon, but someone more patient might get something out of it.