|
Clicks
and Slaps!
Jazz is usually praised for its convivial atmosphere, the artists’ comradeship and the ongoing intelligent, mutual relationship with the public. However in the past few years some festivals have progressively drifted from the reality of jazz, its history and origin, due to the changing times and evolution of their scale in terms of visits, economy, length, stage, technical aspects, stardom. Their size isn’t necessarily the only blaming factor –the same phenomenon is ocurring in some clubs– but rather the accumulation of different factors. | The life and philosophy of jazz is affected by changes in our society with its megalomaniac behaviours, power shifts, money, clientelism, prioritization, wideranging communication as well as with the loss of a democratic framework.
I often write about programmation slanting more pop and becoming more commercial with the progressive retirement of a generation of festival pioneers and the rarefication of clubs, benefiting professional ‘politics’ that are less hot. They confuse jazz with other genres, elitist and institutional, or teen pop (youthism), while sometimes interesting more ofen resulting from global marketing trends and brain washing communication methods for economic gain. Realities that relate to jazz as well as the television, cinema and other means of expression.
The direct consequence of this evolution in the mindsets that rules jazz is a drift in the standard practice of jazz, from the public reception and the treatment of the musicians (there is sometimes a major lack of respect and humanity of the artists, including the established veterans) to the press, peripheral and poor it’s true, but essential, provided its independance (that makes it more peripheral), if we want to hear more jazz in the 21st century in France and elsewhere.
Thus we realize how difficult it is has become for the amateurs to take photos during the gigs and for the specialized press to review them. The venues, even the clubs in Paris, the agents and sometimes the artists themselves forbid the silent ‘clicks’ of digital cameras. We can understand how festivals want to regulate the increase of photo-taking, but should we go as far as to forbid it ? This is a big step towards disrespect of the public and the press that should not be taken. The champion of the world in this category is Keith Jarrett whose secret dream is to ‘execute’ jazz in front of puppets with pre-recorded applause sounds switched on and off from his piano behind a hygienic screen, which is the image of his music. His calling for classical music –impeded due his lack of skills– standardized as well as inhibted (but it’s getting better) audiences, must not let us forget that it is not jazz. What is most distressing is to see renowned jazz clubs, seemingly more welcoming, like the Duc des Lombards, in Paris, or Marciac among others, who are the latest examples to date (Alvin Queen and Bobby Watson-Dado Moroni gigs) that fall into this category. This is completely contrary to the spririt and the history of jazz. Thanks to amateurs and of course to the specialized press, jazz is and remains documented.
Futhermore, the audience’s welcome sometimes ressembling cow herding with its overcowded logic and treatment forgetting that the client is the artist’s natural partner, that restrictions and distancing the artists, isn’t inducive to preserving the spirit of jazz a savy recipe that has built its history and composed of its success: proximity, exchange, friendliness, simplicity, mutual respect (of the artists and of the audience).
Our review of a gig simply consists of a text with a photo and a caption which in 20 years from now will help us remember that the great Bobby Watson gave an excellent concert in the spring of 2013 in Marciac or that Alvin Queen’s performance was remarkable at the Duc des Lombards. This activity is somewhat undermined because if we cannot take photos or listen in good conditions, our review will be influenced no matter the qualities of an artist nor his performance on that day, no matter the goodwill of Jazz Hot’s columnist for instance. The clubs’ welcome do not always live up to expectations like at the Duc des Lombards, at the Sunset, in Paris, and in other venues (which is a paradox because this is clever and free communication), and this varies irrationally. It is often linked to this shift and to the concerts of more established musicians, a phenomenon of swollen heads, as it is difficult to think of other reasons to avoid judgements of intentions. A lack of professionalism that contrasts with the English and American practices more respectful of the press, not necessarily of the public, in similar venues, not to mention nearly all the smaller fetivals in France, Italy and elsewhere, where the audience and press welcome is always very warm and friendly, no matter its aesthetic orientation when the founder is still in charge.
Beyond that, the memory of jazz is at stake and every chord of jazz is determined by its legacy. It is even more essential than for classical music as the creators were recorded while they were alive and remain alive in the public’s memory.
The economy of jazz is also at stake because jazz is not stardom music and it needs to keep on developing humility, solidarity, warmth that allows for everyone to play and express themselves as well as to listen to one another, participate, comment and feel good. It is a fundamentally democratic, popular music, in the original sense of the term.
That is why it is about time that the entities of jazz, beginning with the professionals to start with, and all those who are aware of the exceptional legacy, the huge opportunity for an independant, alive creation that originates this spirit of mind of jazz and its humanist philosophy before throwing the baby (jazz) out of the bath water (current mindset about jazz). They would define key principles based specifically on jazz with organizational models that guarantee quality service and atmosphere as essential criterias.
The entities of classical music have done it (often under the pressure of the authorities and academies for two centuries, which explains its stiff character) and one is free to join these classical music venues. We know the rules, we accept them and respect them. The entities of pop music, commercial music and rock music have done it too. We attend a pop concert relaxed, to a teen music concert with a lighter or under a 3000 watts amp. No one is forced to accept a state of mind that is incompatible with the music one listens to.
It makes no sense for the jazz audience to do so. It took jazz a century to define its vision, atmosphere, exchange of quality between the artists, the audience and the professionals, not to abandon it to other worlds’ values simply because our times are under the influence of global events, mass market, mass consumption and because we confuse popular music with commercial music, genre and trend.
The welcome we get, whether the public or the specialized press, remains very friendly in many venues. But care must be taken in the standardization of practices such as prohibitive photo-taking, audience herd management, the separation of the simple relationship between the artists and the audience, the star system and commercial programming which increases ticket prices, contributes to weaken jazz by changing its audience, its atmosphere essential to new creation and the passing on of the values of jazz, equally essential to the aesthetic variety of the movements within jazz, to the lives of the artists and to the emergence of new talents that need to play alongside experienced musicians (but not at their own place, that is another necessity of jazz), and so to the excellence of programs.
Since its birth a century ago, jazz has remained a sort of ecological miracle. Let’s not turn it into a threatened culture as a result of ignorance or interest (whether it be by the one of a megalomaniac organizer or under ‘political’ pressure that needs a larger turnover rate), despite the increase of so called jazz clubs that do not always deserve this great word inspired by high standards.
< Yves Sportis >
Translation by Mathieu Perez
|
|
|
