On May 31, 3:57 pm, "David Webber" <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> "LJS" <ljsche...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:5cec4653-ab6d-40a3-88cf-52821a97d40e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Two visits to New Orleans and you are an expert!
>
> Both true, to a certain extent, but the causality went the other way.
> Being there gave me a general idea of the place about 30 years after i
first
> got into the subject: being there doesn't make anyone an expert in what
was
> happening nearly a century ago.
>
> > I don't even know if
> > Gunter Schuller even visited New Orleans. I made not comments that
> > Jazz was in full bloom in 1803. I stated that the roots were there
>
> You said that in acknowledging the very large contribution to jazz of
the
> creole community, I was claiming it for Europeans. I pointed out they
were
> Americans and you said they only became Americans after the Louisiana
> purchase, as if some kind of jazz was going on before that.
No it doesn't. But if you live there and you are part of the community
and you speak to a lot of old people that come from long lines of
people that were there before the recordings that you heard were ever
even a possibility, you certainly know a bit more than someone that
has been there only twice and that relies so heavily on a limited
amount of research done by someone else that had only sketchy and
biased sources of information. I spoke to musicians who's fathers were
well established players at the turn of the century and their grand
fathers were part of musical families way before then. When one is
interested in the evolution and the heritage of their profession,
being there does make a difference. You can read about it all you
want. It can not substitute for reading about it, interviewing people
about it and living and working in the culture consistently since the
mid 40s.
As to the European influence on the music, you either mis read what I
said, took it out of context or there was an error in my writing! The
only European influence on the music, would have been the musicians
listening to and or learning European music from music teachers. The
European tradition of education did play a big role. It gave the
Creoles the education necessary to read and write the music that was
already going on there and it gave some, that you mentioned like
Joplin, and Handy, etc the education to take the music they heard and
"correct" it to fit into the European language of music that allowed
it to be acceptable to the American and European culture. Any
reference to
>
> There was no jazz in 1803 and absolutely nothing like it. It's first
> exponents were born three or more generations later. If you're talking
> about roots that far back, you may as well credit Mozart and Beethoven
with
> jazz, and credit Chopin with ragtime, or point out that my great
grandfather
> was into Rock and Roll.
You are sticking to the absurd notion that it just happened to appear
on one day when it was recorded! In spite of citations that I have
provided concerning people, bands, descriptions of the music and
anything else that you need to see that this just wasn't true! Really
Dave, you seem to think that one day Jelly Roll just woke up and said,
"Hmm, I will go down and record the first improvisational recording of
music that is entirely new and has nothing to do with the past." And
the record company said, "Hey, this guy has a new sound. Lets make a
recording."
It just didn't happen that way. The early recordings were a ***ulation
of decades and more evolution and mixing of all the aspects of life in
New Orleans. There as music at the funerals since before anyone can
remember. There was blues taken from the African music, this was
crafted by use in the churches, there was Caribbean influences of
rhythm and dance and melody from the VooDoo services. There was
marching bands that were part of the social clubs formed by the freed
slaves as well as the Creole families, there was music with the Mardi
Gras parades there was music in the Opera houses, there was music
everywhere. We were, and in some ways still, the gateway to the United
States. Everything that was ****pped from the Rockies to the
Alleghenies came through our ****t and then up the river. This was the
place.
The music was spread by many in its earlier stages and in its
component parts. Way back before there were recordings. The reason
that it was such a hit, was that sophisticated people in Chicago, New
York and other parts of the world had heard about this music, they had
talked to people that was down in New Orleans and thus when Jelly Roll
(I think that was the one you mentioned, we have so many early greats)
and the other bands were recorded by the recording companies, they
were well established. The market was hot to hear this sound that was
already called Jas in the whore houses and was already a part of the
music scene for a long time in New Orleans. The early recorders
discovered Jazz. It was not created with these recordings. Musicians
were playing it long before they were exploited by the recording
industries. There was no internet where an "Indi" can post an mp3 and
spread their sound. Music was not created at the session. They only
sunk their money into music that they knew would sell. People were
already buying the sheet music, and now they could hear how it was
actually played. Think about it Dave, its not only the tons of
do***entation that I provided, it just could not have happened the way
you ****tray the inception.
>
> >and
> > that Creoles had little or nothing to do with them.
>
> Displaying your comlete and utter ignorance of the origins of jazz as I
have
> shown at some length. But I'm forgetting myself - you were born there,
and
> so my extensive collection of recordings and books means nothing - so
you
> must be right.
Your extensive collection of recordings and early books certainly do
mean something. I have never said that they didn't. (you do like to
change the context of things said don't you!) They are very im****tant.
I hope that you are making digital copies of them in case you have
some that have been omitted from the archives because of oversight or
lack of the originals! They are extremely im****tant as I have also
said about your knowledge of Jazz from the era of 1915 through today.
BUT, that was not the beginning of the music. It was the beginning of
the "recorded history" of our music. I am proud that you have been so
influenced by it and that you have devoted so much time to learning
about it. The history of the spread of the music is very im****tant.
Once it became "hot" there was also a rush to provide background
information on this revolutionary new art form. Re****ters and
journalists poured all over New Orleans to write a story that would be
read by this new audience of music lovers. Just as today, they were
not beyond making things up and publi****ng what ever they thought
sounded good and romantic and thus pandered to what their readers
wanted to hear. The readers needed stories to talk about at parties to
show how "hip" they were on this music. In case you haven't noticed,
most of the public would rather talk about the music and the musicians
rather than actually talk about the music itself.
The end result? Well until fairly recently, most of the research was
in these romanticized and less than perfect accounts of what actually
went on. more recently, through the work of the Tulane Archives and
WWOZ radio station, there has been interest in the real story and how
it all really started. You seem to think that they and I don't know
what we are talking about. Well, it is a bit different than the books
written in the early stages by people that, hmm, shall we say, got
more into the culture of New Orleans when they were here (if they came
at all!) researching their book than they actually got into research!
The early writings were rather shallow. Through letters, articles,
accounts and interviews that have surfaced (people of this area have
an affliction that requires them to keep everything and not throw
things away, as they die, some of these things become public. It all
takes times. That's the way we are!) and have filled in a lot of the
gaps.
Just because there was no interest outside of New Orleans while Jazz
was in its infant stages does not mean that it did not exist. Even in
its simplest forms, it is a very complex form of music when you get to
the actual sound and how and why it all works. It did NOT just occur
overnight in the first two decades of the 20th Century.
>
> >It was you that
> > stated that it magically appeared as a creation by the Creole
> > musicians around 1915 when they were first recorded!
>
> Actually I didn't. You're making it up.
I believe that you said several times that there was no Jazz before
the recordings that you have. And you said that there was no Jazz in
Storyville and that it was all a creation of (I may have the wrong
person here) Jelly Roll Morton. If I must, I may be able to find time
to quote you exactly on this. I know that I repeated it to you and you
verified that I was wrong to think that there was Jazz before that!
Not to mention that I have stated this at least 100 times in our
writings and you have never disputed that you have said it until just
now!
>
> > I can assure you
> > that this music, even in the form that impressed you so much, was not
> > a "spur of the moment" thing. These bands had been doing this same
> > thing in Storyville years before ...
>
> I'm sure your assurance is well meant - it just flies in the face of all
the
> historical evidence, including the recordings, and so you'll have to
forgive
> me if laugh. :-(
I see. So you HAVE NOT read the do***entation that I sent you. Until
you do, you will not see how your research is out dated. There is new
do***entation Dave. If you want to understand what happened and update
your views to a more realistic view that will make the older research
that you have done to be more relevant, I suggest that you actually
take the time and follow those sites and see what you find. Its all
there for you or anyone else to go through the group's archives and
learn about the pre-recording history of Jazz. It really is quite
interesting. AT least it is for someone that is living here and still
can see and hear threads of all the various parts that are a part of
our contribution to American music.
LJS
|
