By Henk de Boer
We're at it again: the big "What is Real Jazz Wars". And I must say that I'm amazed. Amazed that this dispute still arises over that great musical notion called "jazz" with its overall history of about 100 years (myself having enjoyed around 50 years of it). Amazed after having heard hundreds of discussions about who astrayed from the right path (you name them: The ODJB, Jelly Roll Morton, Sidney Bechet, Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Wynton Marsalis). Amazed at the vitriolic way in which critics are so much more ready to condemn than to applaud. Amazed too at the near absolute divisions that still emerge, as if jazz were just a static phenomenon instead of a profoundly creative and therefore findamentally dynamic expression.
Being Dutch I can't pretend to have first hand knowledge into the daily lives of (especially American) jazz musicians, neither past nor present. Nearly everything I know about them and the history of jazz has emerged from written documents and stories. In my country most of their music could only be heard in unnatural settings like the grand concerts of Norman Granz's Jazz at the Philharmonic or through their records. Still I'm glad that as a youngster I saw and heard most of the "masters" like Ellington and Basie, Billie and Ella, MJQ as well as the Messengers, Hawkins and Mulligan, Eldridge and Webster. They and others have indeed become very dear living memories. And their records are monumental reminders as well as daily companions.
Still the kind of music I listen to will largely depend on the mood I'm in. Like the quality of a performance always will depend on the special quality of that very moment. That is part of the thrill of jazz - a musician will never perform the same way twice, and even less so the interaction between the different players. Getting to listen to and to capture the inner message of that special moment is the great discovery we have all made at some point in our lives. But each in our own way, as will be the way we transfer this feeling to others, especially to our children. It is a sweet challenge and I'm sure this must be Mr. Marsalis' motivation too. And yes, he has his own preferences. As I have, as you must have. That is what music, and especially jazz is all about...
And something else... like every artform jazz has had it's historic path. Up to a point it has grown as an eager tree grows out from its roots, bearing big, edible fruits. As Western symphonic music has grown over a long time. Then, at a certain moment there is a change of heart and instead of gradual growth there's a change of direction. That's the start of another attraction. The adepts of mainstream jazz won't necessarily love Ornette Coleman as well, in the same way as Bach's Inventions represent something completely different from John Cage's prepared piano pieces. What's wrong with that? From where sprouts the necessity to like fusion if you're mad about swing? Why devote yourself to free jazz if you like the old chord progressions?
In about one hundred years that great musical expression called "Jazz" has produced a wealth of wonderful music to listen to. Also there are those joyous, often touching and alas too many sad stories to tell. Ken Burns, Geoffrey Ward and Wynton Marsalis, among others, undertook this huge task and in doing so made their own choices and compilations. I've seen, read and heard a lot of other "albums" as well and must admit to liking this one, especially for the historic sequences, the engaged portraits of many key players, the wealth of photographs and the well presented musical samples. Agreed, other choices could have been made as well, but I still think here was a difficult job well done. And maybe in 20 years time someone will deliver Jazz II, A History of America's Music from 1960 on...
