The record changer (Mar 1945-Feb 1946)

Mr. Pflug-Felder writes: "In the past The Record danger has devoted considerable space to the semantics of jazz. In the June issue, a laudable attempt was made to clarify issues by a series of definitions which appeared in your column. On the whole these definitions were clear and valid. However, the first definition — that of Jazz — didn't quite satisfy me. It would be presumptious of me to say you were wrong, in the light of your remark that the definitions were the result of six months consideration, and meditation on your part. Therefore, let us say that I would appreciate further clarification on one vital point. Dr. Exner says, "If a definition of jazz is to mean anything, it must be definite. To be definite, it must be based on objectively demonstrable characteristics of the music rather than on the emotional response that the music arouses. (Italics mine!) Bravo, Doctor ! No let us examine your definition of Jazz. In particular, let us examine the very first sentence for, in my opinion, there lies the trouble. You say, "Jazz music is a type of vocal or instrumental improvisation (over a regular unaccented bass with an even time signature), as first played by New Orleans Negroes. . . ." The word improvization was italicized in your article and that is the very word I am objecting to. Improvization means extemporaneous creation. By making it an integral part of your definition of jazz you have placed the critic and the listener in a hopeless position. How is one to know that the music one is listening to is jazz? Your definition presupposes that (1) the listener can distinguish improvized music from other music merely by the sound of it or (2) that he has access to additional facts outside of the music itself or (3) that he is clairvoyant. Otherwise how is he to know that the music he is listening to is improvised?14 Let us take a far-fetched, but striking, example of what I mean. Those records made in the '20's by Louis Armstrong and his Hot Five are, in my opinion, perhaps the greatest examples of jazz we have in permanent form. I have been given to understand that they are improvised performances, which they undoubtedly are: but. if tomorrow, we were to dis 14 See point 2. No definition can be established for producer or consumer usage, i.e., you can't learn to play jazz from a definition of it, nor can you recognize it from a definition. The definition merely describes a particular kind of music as opposed to all other kinds of music, but has no practical use beyond that. A' O V E M B E R . 19 4 5 cover unimpeachable evidence that they are not improvised by arranged performances (even to a degree not possible under the present system of musical notation), would they cease to be jazz because they were not improvised? They would fail to conform with your definition of jazz but would conform in part" to your definition of swing. Yet, definitions be damned, they would still be jazz regardless of the means used to produce the sounds engraved on those discs. Of course, the obvious answer to that is that they are improvised performances, that such music could only have been created through improvisation. Such an answer would only prove to me that, up to the present, no one has succeeded in producing such music through notation but would not conclusively prove that it can not be done provided a man with genius enough tackled it. And when such a thing comes to pass (and I think it will) the results would still be jazz improvized or notated.15 No. Mr. Borneman. vour definition NEWSLETTER By ALBERT J. McCARTHY Introduction : Most of the news in thjs letter will deal with countries other than England, as I am informed that several collectors who were stationed over here during the war have nrepared articles covering the English jazz scene. The mail service to the Continent is improving, and it is now possible to keep in touch with the European jazz fans in a manner that has been impossible for the past six years. England : Under the title of Ragtime Revival, a very interesting concert was held in London on July 8th. The highspot of this concert was the playing of the ex-O. D. J. B. pianist Billy Jones. He treated the audience to some fine rags, including Scott Joplin's Fig Leaf Rag and Maple Leaf Rdg, and his own Pork and Greens and Just Hot. It was verv pleasing to hear these rags played in the authentic manner— Jones having been out of the music business for twenty years has not "progressed" to playing in the Wilson maner. Of particular interest was his version of Memphis Blues which he claimed to have been playing in 29 is grand as far as it goes but I think it goes too far. It implies that jazz is a method of producing music rather than the music itself — i.e., the result. Perhaps, the substitution of a phrase such as "generally improvised" or "creating the impression of improvization or sponteneity" might help. What do you think ?"1G 15 Mr. Pflug-Felder is on the defensive here, I suspect, because he thinks that I am attaching some kind of evaluation to my definitions of jazz and swing. If the Hot Fives are called swing, that doesn't necessarily take away from their value as music. 10 All definitions are removed from practice to the extent they sharpen and heighten the lesson pf the latter until they reach a kind of ideal status to which the practice of music can never attain. The music, therefore, can never represent more than an approximation to the ideal of the definition. Far from being a "method of producing music", the definition recognizes thatno creative music can ever be produced by means of a "method". Creative practice is largely spontaneous ; it is the analytic aspect of the theory which follows a "method". And so it must if it is to raise itself above the freaks and accidents of creative practice. 1911, for he used a most pronounced boogie bass. Other artists in the show were the George Webb band. As usual they rendered the old classic jazz tunes well, but I am not so enthusiastic as some of the critics over here about the band. It is essential to keep in mind that they are copyists, and while it is good to hear a group not influenced by jump and jive, they cannot be considered as creative artists in any sense of the word. After their opening we were treated to a calypso group that were inaudible six feet from the stage, and a trio led by West Indian guitarist Lauderic Caton who rendered some Ellington tunes including some of the worst collection of riffs masquerading as "compositions" that it has been my misfortune to endure. For a while I thought that Leonard Feather was back with us. Duncan White gave a goodish Louis impersonation of St. Louis Blues, but the backing was dreadful for his other numbers. Lowspot of the show was some hysterical compering by Denis Preston which was embarrassing to behold. On the whole, the concert, sponsored by him and John Rowe, was deserving of a greater success. France : Charles Delaunay is editing the revived Hot Jazz magazine, the first number of which should be out before this letter is printed. Immediately after the liberation it appeared as the Bulletin of the Hot Club of France, THE RECORD CHANGER