Re: somewhat pure klezmer

[Solidarity Foundation <svzandt...>]

On Thu, & Aug 1997 23:29:52 -0400 (EDT) Seth Rogovoy wrote:

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

I assume that's why Eric Goldberg, in his posting of 6 August, spoke of
klezmer and bluegrass, respectively, as "SOMEWHAT in a pure state." Now,
when you speak against the idea of "purity" as a musical concept, I think
you have a point. Looking simply at ethnic musics, every one I've ever
heard of incorporates elements from the neighboring or co-territorial
musics, and often from more distant musics. I've heard "Oh Susanna" played
by a Tatra mountain string band from southern Poland, and I've heard
a version of "Oh My Darling Clementine" done by a group of pygmies from
the Ituri Forest (Congo) in their own language. The point is, I think,
that not all elements in music are of equal significance in defining a
style. If you "jazz up" the Humoresque by Dvorak, you haven't really
changed the melody. You haven't changed the chords too much, but probably
you throw in chords of the 7th (including major 7th), 9th, 6th, and
other "dirty" chords. The rhythms are the main thing. And we also know
that jazz is a style that particularly "likes" borrowing tunes from just
about anywhere. So it's become jazz, because the more important elements
tell you it's jazz, even though it's not "pure" jazz (whatever that is).
Now let's apply the same principle to klezmer. Klezmer has very signifi-
cant borrowings from Romanian, above all Eastern Romanian (Bukovina and
Moldavia) music. It has very significant affinities with certain elements
of Greek music. It has significant borrowings from Ukrainian (especially
Western Ukrainian, like the kolomeyka) music. But there is a unique
Jewish core repertoire. And above all, there is a unique ethos, a unique
"feel" to it. For example, dance tunes borrowed from Ukrainian or
Romanian are not played as fast, they have a distinctly different sense
of movement to them, instrumental styles have a particular "feel." I could
go to great efforts to define all this in words, but no matter how 
precisely I worded it, it could never be more than an adjunct. You could
not even capture the distinctive nuances in musical notation. The real
definition comes only in HOW IT SOUNDS, or HOW YOU DANCE TO IT. In this
sense, which to my understanding IS definitive of a musical style, 
klezmer is a unique folk creation of Eastern European Jewish culture,
just as Greek folk music is of Greek culture, and Romanian of Romanian
culture. None of them is "pure" in all its components, but there is a
certain definitive "feel" and particular MIX of elements such that
each is unique, and a maven of each could tell right away if the
performers have got "it" or not, just like you can tell with jazz
whether somebody "swings" or not.

All of these musical traditions develop and change, add new elements and
lose old ones, etc. But I think you'll find among the Eastern European
ones (just to keep it to those more closely related to klezmer) a certain
anxiety that things may be changing too fast. I recommend taking a look
at an excellent book _May It Fill Your Soul_ by Tim Rice, which deals
with these kinds of questions. Why the anxiety? Because folk music is
part of the "felt" definition of who we are -- I mean our own folk music.

Now, you write:

> 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 is one particular theory of musical creativity, which was pioneered
by Gunther Schuller at the New England Conservatory, and one of whose
disciples (in klezmer) is the very talented Frank London of the Klezmatics.
But this gets back to the point made by Owen Davidson, Fri, 8 Aug 1997 12:32:41 
-0400
:
between a folk-srtyle and a "synthesized form of popular commercial music,
created by one single genius... The former places the musician in the role
of transmitter of a musical force larger than any single person. The
latter makes the music subservient to the artist's personal expression
and ultimately results in a cult of personality."

The "third-stream" or "fusion" approach, which is now becoming very
commercial thanks to the phenomenon of World Beat or World Music, has
nothing to do with the borrowing of elements from neighboring cultures
in folk music, but is a technique of "individualistic" creativity,
of a kind very much emphasized by modern art. Klezmer is a professional-
ized folk tradition, such as is found in many cultures, where the players
are professionals but the music is still a vernacular folk tradition.

I have no quarrel with people experimenting with stylistic fusion, and
some beautiful things have been produced, even though for the most part
the fusions seem to me superficial and meaningless. But some people,
among whom I include myself, are specifically interested in participating
in and continuing a musical tradition "larger than any single person."
A certain kind of creativity takes place within a tradition -- look at
the beautiful music that comes out of it -- but it's a very different
kind of creativity, kind of a by-product of continuing the tradition 
rather than being seen as the top priority. 



Itzik-Leyb Volokh (Jeffrey Wollock)