Re: Klezmer article in this week's Forward

[George Robinson <grcomm...>]

I don't disagree with anything you have written. I was referring pretty much
to the issue of "period" instruments and charts.

Of course Wynton knows all and sees and all and is happy to dictate to the
rest of the world what he knows and sees. But that's another story.

I would mildly challenge your assumption, though about "three
minute bits of songs that ordinarily would have been
stretched out for much longer solos."
I believe the general consensus among jazz historians is that it took Louis
Armstrong to move the improvising soloist so much to the forefront that he
was allowed to stretch out further; I guess what I'm really saying is that
it is unclear to me what timeframe you are talking about -- pre-Armstrong
and post are different things in that respect.

As anyone who reads my stuff will tell you, I'm not wedded to "tradition,"
whatever the hell that is. I think we have to accept that jazz and klezmer
are, as you say, fluid forms that are always evolving.

George (Always revolving) Robinson

When I play with my cat, who knows whether
she isn't amusing herself with me more than
I am with her?

   --Michel de Montaigne
----- Original Message -----
From: "avi finegold" <afinegold (at) yahoo(dot)com>
To: "World music from a Jewish slant" <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Klezmer article in this week's Forward


>
> >
> > (It's interesting that these questions never come up
> > in the same way for jazz, perhaps because nearly the
> > entire history of jazz coincides with the existence
> > of recording technology. Of course there are other
> > questions of 'authenticity' in jazz, but that's
> > another story for another thread.)
>
>
> i dont think thats true at all. the best example of
> something similar in the jazz world was the ken burns
> ducumentary, and the "wynton-world" that it seemed to
> represent. marsalis mentions buddy bolden in the film
> and (im paraphrasing here) he says something along the
> lines of no known recording of buddy bolden exists,
> but he sounded like this (proceeds into stream of scat
> singing). now whether or not we  know how he sounded
> or whether he really was a patriarch of the jazz
> movement will probably never be resolved but his name
> keeps floating around on lists of "authentic" early
> jazz.
> as well the argument for traditionalism is always kept
> alive by those who feel that anything beyond the
> heyday of bop is no longer jazz and we should strive
> to recreate that sound regardless. remember that most
> of what we have recorded in early jazz are three
> minute bits of songs that ordinarily would have been
> stretched out for much longer solos. so the argument
> can be made that we dont really know how they played
> in a real live setting. (except for these recording we
> have of charlie parkers solos that this one guy
> did-apparently to save recording wire he turned on his
> machine right at the beginning of every solo and off
> after the band resumes- but still).
>
> to me the fundamental question both in klez and in
> jazz is, how important, other than for historical
> significance, is this notion of authentic
> as-it-was-played-many-years-ago tradition of where the
> music was. but more where its going. neither group
> ever intended its music to remain in stasis, rather
> (to me at least) klezmer and jazz is and have been
> fluid traditions incorporating now sounds to make the
> musics more relevant and vibrant. so its all wonderful
> to debate what was, but what will be seems to be the
> bigger question for me.
>
> avi
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>


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