promiscuous fusionizers

[JeffSchan <JeffSchan...>]

     We seem to be having a classic difference of opinion between
     traditionalists and modernists here.  Although I consider myself 
     to be in the latter category, I am quite happy that there are
     people around who try to keep various musical traditions alive. 
     Of course, there are problems inherent in both approaches -- the
     traditionalists run the risk of making their tradition static,
     and any culture which does not develop will die, while the
     modernists run the risk of divorcing themselves from the culture
     they are modernizing altogether -- Reyzl's point on the problems
     of divorcing klezmer from its social context is a good one.  One
     of the interesting consequences of mass media is the destruction
     of the distinction between "art" music and "popular" music, so
     that pretty much any music can be performed in a concert hall or
     a club or dance hall these days.  The confusion in social
     functions of music is going to take a bit of getting used to.
     
     What troubles me with Henry's statement about "promiscuous
     fusionizers" is that I have seen a similar dynamic in another
     musical form: jazz.  Wynton Marsalis has not only helped to
     institutionalize traditional jazz, he has sought to ostracize all
     those "free jazz" musicians who he feels have broken from this
     tradition.  This has led to a terrible divisiveness in the jazz
     and black communities.  Perhaps I am particularly sensitive to
     this at this time because of the death of my friend Lester Bowie
     last month, who was one of Marsalis' favorite targets for
     derision (probably because Lester's trumpet playing was so much
     more distinctive than Marsalis').  I don't know Henry personally
     and am sure he doesn't go around attacking others the way that
     Marsalis does, but his statement worried me.
     
     I was also interested in Henry's use of the Ellington quote about
     knowing the rules before you break them.  When I was returning to
     music after a 10-year layoff, I thought that way too, and began
     learning how to play traditional jazz changes.  However, I didn't
     like what learning rules did to my playing, and so stopped.  In a
     lesson with Morton Feldman, he told me that a composer defines
     himself just as much by what he doesn't do as by what he does. 
     At the time, we were studying counterpoint and Feldman admitted
     that he never really got beyond first species counterpoint (one
     note against another).  He liked that method so well that he
     decided never to go beyond it.  I decided years ago not to learn
     rules, whether they be traditional "classical," "jazz" or any
     other theories.  I listen to different kinds of music and take
     what interests me in their formal, melodic and harmonic
     qualities.  When I want a traditional sound in my work, I hire
     someone who knows something about that tradition.  An example is
     hiring Margot Leverett as a klezmer improviser in my cantata "The
     Past Is Present."  Then again, I don't label myself as a "jazz"
     or "klezmer" or any other kind of musician, so as not to give
     people the impression that I follow a specific tradition.
     
     So while I like discussions like these, I hope we can all value
     the contributions of those who have different perspectives than
     we do.
     
     Jeffrey Schanzer

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+