Jazzophobia
Just in time for PDX Jazz Fest, WW offers a crash course in the notoriously daunting genre.
July 23rd, 2008
PDX Pop Now! WW Music Staff Picks0 comments
July 23rd, 2008
Here Comes Your Fan • First Love, Last Rites | What happens after you get what you want?1 comment
July 23rd, 2008
Gang of Four | A handful of PDX Pop Now!’s founders reminisce, persevere & conquer genre.0 comments
July 23rd, 2008
On the Radar | TOMORROW’S SHOWS TODAY0 comments
July 16th, 2008
DIRTY MITTENS, Pinky Swear (self-released)0 comments
July 16th, 2008
StarChile, host of KXJM’s Hood Radio0 comments
July 16th, 2008
LSD&D, Wednesday & Saturday, July 16 & 19 | Seantos McDonald wants your taste to differ from his mother’s.0 comments
July 16th, 2008
Here Comes Your Fan • Moral Support | Menomena’s Danny Seim steps into the spotlight.0 comments
July 16th, 2008
Return Of The King | The long, strange musical trip of King Black Acid’s Daniel Riddle.1 comment
July 9th, 2008
THE OLD BELIEVERS, Eight Golden Greats (Fine/Romantic)0 comments
 Don’t Fear the Jazz Cat: Ornette Coleman (left), Maceo Parker (center), and Cecil Taylor. IMAGE: Maceo Parker photo by Ines Kaiser / collage WW |
[February 13th, 2008]
“I listen to everything but country.” In my small hometown of Florence, Ore., that statement was a tool used to separate oneself from the perceived redneck masses. Jazz music wasn’t an omnipresent radio force on the Oregon coast like pop country was, but it would have been safe to add the four-letter word to the no-country mantra: “…and jazz I just don’t get.”
I’m still learning to “get” jazz myself. My dad’s baby boom-ish generation loves the stuff, but that’s to be expected. They started with big-band music and watched it transform, over the course of decades, into ever more exciting and musically revolutionary incarnations. They not only grew up with jazz, jazz grew up with them. But, just as my dear old dad is befuddled by punk rock, my generation has largely ignored jazz. They consider it music for old people, the stuff of sit-down venues and wine intermissions.
In a way, they’re right. Even current fans usually admit the genre hasn’t been the same since Miles Davis tried his hand at pop, and many of today’s players treat jazz like an artifact, paying constant tribute to the old guard instead of finding their own unique voices. And yeah, most of the big names at this year’s Portland Jazz Festival are playing sit-down venues with wine intermissions (white wine, even). That said, this year’s fest is also a hell of an achievement, combining some of today’s great traditionalists with the most influential jazz radicals of their time.
None of which helps you, the unindoctrinated listener, figure out what this whole jazz thing is about—nor does it help you navigate the festival’s massive, 10-day-spanning lineup. To that end, I’ll pass on some of the best advice I’ve ever received about learning to love jazz. Thanks, Dad.
1. Learn the standards.
Jazz is interpretative music. A talented player can take your favorite song and make you hear it in a brand new way. The canon of jazz standards has expanded in recent years to include tunes by the Beatles, Elvis Costello and Radiohead. But the foundation is built from old musicals: the work of guys like Jerome Kern and Cole Porter (who penned songs like “Smoke Gets In Your Eyes” and “Night and Day,” respectively). A late addition to the fest, Chicago-based jazz vocalist Kurt Elling (Friday, Feb. 22, Newmark Theatre) sings standards relatively straight. His tunes are a touch on the slick side, but he tackles his craft with a rich, emotive voice that can emulate a saxophone’s mournful wail, swinging trumpet blasts, or just a fragile, human cry.
Story continues below
advertisement
2. Find what speaks to you.
Instrumental jazz—unlike vocal jazz, which can hook you with a narrative—isn’t going to be much fun unless it moves you. And if Maceo Parker (Sunday, Feb. 24, Crystal Ballroom), the legendary James Brown saxman who travels freely between the realms of jazz, funk and R&B, can’t move you, you best check that pulse. Parker is one funky motherfucker (in jazz talk that just means “dude”), and he’ll get the Crystal’s bouncy floor shaking hard.
3. Take some drugs. Get your mind blown.
All right, my dad never recommended drugs (in a jazz context, anyway). And weed certainly isn’t the only way to appreciate the endless lungs and crisp, adventurous stabs of Ornette Coleman’s sax (Friday, Feb. 15, Arlene Schnitzer Concert Hall) or pianist Cecil Taylor’s spacious, cartoon cat-and-mouse piano arrangements (Sunday, Feb. 17, Marriott Waterfront)—but if this is your first time out, it might just help. These are two legends of the art form who helped usher jazz into some of its most exciting years. They continue to challenge traditional structures today, though both are acutely aware, and respectful, of jazz’s rich history. Oh, and they’re more than a little eccentric. Coleman is obsessed with geodesic domes, and Taylor talks like James Lipton from Inside the Actor’s Studio. Which is another thing you ought to know about jazz: Almost all the greats are crazy. That’s what makes jazz awesome. It’s the music of the eccentric, the outcast and the underdog.
MORE: Read a continued rant on the shape of jazz today, as well as live reviews of festival shows, on WW 's LocalCut.com.
I'm not quite sure what to say. The writer here obviously has no clue what jazz is, what it is about or anything remotely worthwhile to say about it. This article is essentially useless. But then, there is a part of me (being a jazz musician) that is so happy to see anything about jazz in WW that I can't help but appreciate even this stilted, inadequate piece. Though jazz is America's true artform it is sadly neglected by society, ignored in favor of empty pop, heartless rock or soulless Hip Hop. Even the PDX Jazz Festival has taken several years to actually invite jazz musicians (as opposed to grunge leftover guitarists, marimba bands and punk singers.)
I guess in the end I just have to say "Thanks" for any mention of jazz at all and take solace in the knowledge that the coming week brings two monster sax players to town and that their presence, at least for a short time, makes Portland's music scene at least somewhat worthwhile.
I've been a jazz musician, and this article just pisses me off--I've been reading this type of crap and watching its TV & film equivalent for decades.
Jefe, I've seen you make quite a few insightful comments in these pages, but it seems to me that if you want to say "Thanks" to someone for making fun of your art, then you can't really complain about the quality of the article. WW used to feature extensive jazz coverage, but lately it seems to me that they no longer have anyone above the (mental) age of 19 writing about music--at least judging by the artists & styles they seem to idolize. You're apparently satisfied with any 'crumbs' they throw you and I think that's a shame.
To "Non-Jazzfan" readers: Regarding "today's players...finding their own unique voices," there are plenty of unique voices out there, but thanks to media apathy you have to spend a considerable amount of time and effort listening and reading to find them. Some of them even live and perform in Portland, but you won't find that out by reading this weekly. Take the time. Make the effort. You'll be glad:) It's a music that lives and evolves in spite of indifferent journalism or revisionist spokespersons.
Hey, I hear you keys. (Bonus points to anyone else who gets the meaning of his name BTW) Don't get me wrong, I have no love for this article nor the WW when it comes to their coverage of music and especially my beloved jazz. Knowing what amazing talent we have in the area and how it is completely ignored in favor of the talentless hacks who usually get featured in WW kills me. I guess it just comes down to this; would you prefer no coverage at all or at least some coverage, even if it is mediocre and un-insightful? In a perfect world WW would have someone with the knowledge and love necessary to do our local jazz scene justice, but this isn't a perfect world and so do we take what we can get or refuse it and wish for more? I don't have the answer, but for now I'll take what I can get and hope that maybe someday it will lead to more. Trane might have had Giant Steps, but with WW I'll take baby ones over none.
I'm sure y'all know more about me. I've been listening to jazz literally all my life (some of my first memories involve Giant Steps and Out to Lunch�another of Wynton Marsalis rubbing my head outside of his trailer), but it took me an awful long time to really get it. I know there are a lot of other people in that same camp. I wasn't trying to poke fun at the genre, as it's one I really, really love. I was just trying to speak in my normal speaking voice to people who may have had some of the same apprehensions and trouble understanding the music that I have had as I've tried to delve in over the years. Listening to standards helped me immensely (ella fitzgerald, andy bey and chet baker especially helped in that department).
You're right that there's some great stuff out there, even locally (i like rob scheps and farnell newton and the great mel brown quite a lot, as well as the wild spirits in the evolutionary jass band�and I guess you missed lance's feature last week if you think we never cover jazz, though i'm the first to admit that we can and will do more in the future).
I think there's another barrier to potential jazz listeners, and it's that fans are often territorial and (pardon me) stuck up towards new listeners. It's a form that has been so institutionalized that we forget that some of its favorite sons and daughters came from ghettos and struggled with addictions. I'm a fan of finding a way to bring this music back to the revolutionaries and free-thinkers who made it great at every step of the way. I'm a fan of introducing it to teenagers and street kids who can see the politics behind folks like Roland Kirk and Charlie Haden's music. This is not music that should just be taught in prestigious universities and via the non-prime hours of some end-of-the-dial public radio station.
I may have been less than eloquent in getting that across, but I hope you'll believe me when I say that I had no intention of "shitting on" a music that I love. We've had year after year of coverage that is fantastic for the converted, but a little hard to digest for the amateur. This wasn't for musicians and longtime fans, it was for rock, soul and hip-hop fans with a spark of interest in discovering the roots of their own music. If I got one rebellious kid to lay down $20 for a cheap seat and see what Ornette or Cecil is all about, I'm more than happy to have lost some embedded fans in the process. Hope you'll bear with me as I continue to learn the music.
-casey
Yeah, how dare this punk write an article celebrating the music we love! He doesn't even love it for the right reasons, i.e. the exact same reasons I do! And he even has the nerve to suggest that people who don't already know everything there is to know about jazz, i.e. everything I know, might possibly look into it themselves! Get off my lawn. Kids today, blah blah, grr argh, etc.
Rock on, Casey.
"Which is another thing you ought to know about jazz: Almost all the greats are crazy." Well, apparently this article was intended to inform potential listeners who are not jazz fans...and perhaps entice them to attend a concert or two. Or maybe it was intended to poke fun at a music that the writer doesn't understand. In any case it seems that you could have found a writer who has at least some respect or even a little bit of affection for the music. I won't bother to point out all of the other lame statements made here. As usual America takes a dump on it's truly original art form, even while pretending to promote it. IF the greats are usually crazy, this article may give some indication of how that comes about.