Re: Why categorize Klezmer?

[moshe denburg <denburg...>]

On Fri, 20 Sep 1996 14:15:04 -0400 (EDT) estaylor (at) cris(dot)com wrote:
>
>Since that time, 
(ca. 1967), 
>when for many reasons jazz-rock fusion of various kinds took 
>off - mostly for commercial reasons, with occasional genuine artistic
motivation 
>- jazz means "fusion" to probably the majority of non jazz buffs. They are not 
>familiar with the glorious, unique, tradition of the art form. So what "jazz" 
>gained in some quarters in superficial popularity cost it substantially in
terms 
>of dilution both in jazz musical excellence and audience recognition- Kenny G, 
>Grover Washington, Oregon - you name 'em - they are not jazz artists( although 
>they may be sometimes marketed as such) certainly not in the way Armstrong, 
>Parker, Powell, Ellington, Coltrane, Garner, etc. are jazz artists and
share the 
>basic musical conceptions, sensibilities and common tradition. So there are 
>costs associated with this dilution. Where to draw the line is never hard and 
>fast. Wynton Marsalis, even though he's not a great trumpet player, I respect 
>for the fact that he recognizes that over-"hybridizing" jazz (or any art form) 
>nullifies what is special and uniquely emotionally/musically compelling about 
>it.

This is a good point in my opinion. It would seem that art forms are
perennially in a state of transition, and yet specific musical principles
which define their practice are not only valid but necessary. But let's face
it, the last thing a creative artist wants is to be seen copy-catting a
fixed form. Mind you, we probably have an overblown individualism in the
Western world which underrates the importance of a solid education in a
given tradition.

Accepting that no one ought, or can, still the processes of variation and
change in art, why are we so late in giving a new name to something new? To
bring the question home to Jewish Music, why do we not have several
appellations for the different forms of Jewish Music, rather than just the
one catch-all term 'Klezmer'? Jewish Music is a  many branched tree -
Klezmer is only one leaf on the Ashkenazi branch - certainly as artists and
true music lovers we agree that there is a need to listen to many kinds of
musical expression. An artist can ill afford to accomodate a narrow focus.
And yet this one term persists, at least here in the diaspora, as an almost
blanket designation for Jewish Music. Why is this?

I believe that part of the reason has to do with the very deep human need to
feel oneself part of a living tradition. This need is coupled with the -
perhaps very Jewish - need to be recognized by the society at large. Using
the term 'Klezmer' today satisfies both these needs, and thus it's very
difficult for us to resist co-opting the term at every opportunity. For
whatever historical and sociological reasons, Klezmer, in the minds of the
majority of ordinary people, Jews and non-Jews alike, has become synonymous
with Jewish Music. This is not ideal, but new terms can and will be found
eventually. As an artist, I still place the act of creation first, the
definition of this act second. Mozart didn't codify the systems of classical
harmony which are in great measure based on his acts of creation. Likewise,
traditional Klezmer Music, or Jazz, did not begin with a full blown
definition of their components. Actually, Jewish Musicians have always had a
hand in  'outside' cultures, and have brought many musical materials from
outside of the Jewish context into the Jewish mainstream. Sometimes this has
been pursued a bit too compulsively but, over-all, and the history of Jewish
music making bears this out, cross-cultural fertilization is a hallmark of
Jewish Music. 

It may be a good idea to begin to look for terms of reference that will
differentiate Klezmer from other valid, and competing, forms of Jewish
Music. This of course will not solve the problem entirely, since there will
always be competing claims regarding authenticity. But perhaps we can begin
by agreeing that variety in art is its life blood, and that which is
authentic is that which is learned well and expressed with conviction. From
an artist's point of view, there is no need to bicker endlessly about
terminology.

The sort of thing Tzimmes is doing I sometimes call 'Jewish Worldbeat'.
Perhaps the term Klezmer (which was originally coined to denote a Jewish
Musician) can be utilized with a variety of suffixes - Klezrock (e.g. The
Klezmatics), Klezjazz (e.g. John Zorn), and so on. Add to these terms
Traditional Klezmer and we might hold off the bickering to an extent.  

There is another human tendency which compounds the problem of creating new
terms, new designations - the tendency to want to wrap everything up in *a
word*. This has proven very effective, so they tell us, in advertising.
There are so many competing interests going around that we're all hard
pressed to say or do something memorable! So the advertisers need a word, no
more, that will stick to our neurons like crazy glue, like the Macarena (the
new fad dance with the repetitive-motion-sickness cutesy tuney). This
tendency is bogus from a creative point of view. The alleged success of this
ploy is attributable perhaps to the general Pavlovian state of mind
inculcated in most of us from a young age. ;-)

There are other branches of Jewish Music that generally receive short shrift
in Western society. Sephardi Music, with its North African/Mediterranean
context, needs to be brought to the fore, IMO. Actually, one of the pillars
of Klezmer rhythm, the Bulgar, is, as its name suggests, from Bulgaria. The
Jews of Bulgaria are Sephardim, not Ashkenazim. Some of Klezmer's origins
are tied to the musics of the Eastern Mediterranean region. Perhaps some of
the Klezmer experts on this list could elucidate this issue further.

The Mizrahi (Eastern) musical tradition is one that, even in Israel, is only
beginning to be given some recognition. It includes the modes and 1/4 tone
intonations of the Music of the Near East. It includes the instruments of
the Arabic world, whose exponents over the centuries have been Jewish
Musicians. There are vast resources of mode and timbre that have yet to be
tapped by Western musicians. How will we be true to our global visions if we
insist on cultivating a narrow band of interests to the neglect of all others? 

There is much more that needs to be said, but I've given a mouthful enough
for one post. For those of you who may be interested, please see my essay on
Jewish Music at the Tzimmes website:
http://www2.portal.ca/~jsiegel/tzimmes.html

There I try to map out a basic tri-partite overview of Jewish Music:
Ashkenazi - Sephardi - Mizrahi. 

My artistic view is that the confluences of the Mizrahi, Sephardi, and
Ashkenazi musical traditions is what gives Jewish Music its richness and its
new possibilities.

Moshe Denburg