Re: somewhat pure klezmer

[Seth Rogovoy <rogovoy...>]

On Thu, 7 Aug 1997, Solidarity Foundation wrote:

[snip]
> problem with klezmer? Personally, I think klezmer allows for much
> wider
> stylistically variability than baroque. But it has its limits. If you
> want to play "Ma Yofis" in the style of Charlie Parker, be my guest, it's
> not against the law, but it's not klezmer, it's a modern jazz piece
> built on a Jewish tune. If ALL so-called klezmer music were played in
> the style of bluegrass, modern jazz, Andean panpipes, Karleinz Stockhausen,
> and what have you, klezmer music would have become extinct. 

there's a wide range between what you describe and what the words "pure
state" imply. I was merely asking for a definition of "pure state," not
implying that klezmer knows no bounds.
 I also think "purity" has no place as a musical or generic concept.
bluegrass, after all, is a "hybrid" music -- part string band, part
Appalachian folk, part jazz. frankly, I find myself repeatedly drawn to
suggestive "fusions" of musical styles, and while I cannot speak for
musicians, I think the most creative ones naturally gravitate to making
things "new" by combining different "influences." This, I would imagine,
would be in direct opposition to musical "purity," and therefore would
spell a dead end.

--Seth Rogovoy