Dear All About Jazz Readers,

If you're familiar with All About Jazz, you know that we've dedicated over two decades to supporting jazz as an art form, and more importantly, the creative musicians who make it. Our enduring commitment has made All About Jazz one of the most culturally important websites of its kind in the world reaching hundreds of thousands of readers every month. However, to expand our offerings and develop new means to foster jazz discovery we need your help.

You can become a sustaining member for a modest $20 and in return, we'll immediately hide those pesky Google ads PLUS deliver exclusive content and provide access to future articles for a full year! This combination will not only improve your AAJ experience, it will allow us to continue to rigorously build on the great work we first started in 1995. Read on to view our project ideas...


Randy Weston: The Spirit of Our Ancestors

Ludovico Granvassu By

Sign in to view read count
AAJ: Do you think the situation has changed in the last years?

RW: Not in the media and not in the schools. When we'll see a major TV channel playing a great jazz artist at 8PM on a Saturday night, when we'll see the history of jazz music in the schools, when we'll see a Hollywood movie dedicated to the life of a jazz artist then we'll have a change. But until this happens we are not going to see any difference. We are in a technological society, in which people are influenced by what they see, and we don't see much jazz on TV (or you see it very late at night and often on a small station); we don't see any real jazz in Hollywood movies nor in the schools.

I am sure that at some point this will change. I believe that you can't hide something as beautiful as music.

AAJ: Speaking of jazz popularity, at the beginning jazz was a very popular form of music, it was music people were dancing to. At one point, though, jazz became a very technical music and probably alienated most of its popularity. What do you think is the situation now?

RW: You see, after the start of the second World War, they put a 20% tax on dancing places because of the conditions and necessities of the conflict. For this reason, most of the places where people used to dance closed down and jazz became more of a listening music, rather than a dancing music.

When we grew up we played at a lot of dance clubs; african-american people and all other people, they all love to dance. It was a completely different expressive direction than playing at concerts. You had to make romance on your instrument —this is something that is almost completely forgotten about: these days you listen to lots of music and people are just playing technique... who can play fastest and all that stuff. Before, instead, you had to play romance; you had to play for a woman and move her. In the music of all our ancestors, Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Ben Webster, there was lots of romance and this is completely missing today.

AAJ: You have mentioned the obsession with technique of many musicians of today. Do you think modern musical education can be considered —at least in part —responsible for this situation?

RW: This is why it is important to bring artists to the schools; this is why it is important to have the history of this music taught in the schools. This is the result of one great advance of technology: today we can buy CDs with the music of the '20s and the '30s. This enables you to study jazz seriously, as an art form. But one should not only study the notes and the technique; it is important to analyze what was the life of the African-American people like at that time; the great segregation, the great racism. This music was for them a form of survival. It was not only music. It was culture. People today don't realize that. They all say, "Oh, I really love jazz!" but they don't know its history. We should realize that this history is the struggle of the people, it is the result of tremendous sacrifice but also of tremendous dignity and pride of people that could produce these big masterpieces and —yet —they could not stay in hotels, they could not ride trains. This is what today is missing: the spirituality of the music, something that you can't get in the conservatories where everything you learn is notes, scales and techniques. When we grew up, instead, music was a very spiritual experience for us. Of course those great masters are not here anymore but we have their recordings and this is why I always encourage young students to do their research. We should all also study African music, because what we are doing today is also the result of what happened before us. It is necessary to see the connections. When that happens musicians have a better sense of direction. They won't forget romance; they won't forget love, family, people.

AAJ: In the younger generation what are the musicians and styles that attract your attention?

RW: There is a great deal of very fine young musicians, but now I am discovering the musicians of the '20s and the '30s which I never really understood up to now, and I am more excited with Duke Ellington or Art Tatum than I have ever been before. These are the men that created this music. We cannot do better than them; we have to learn from them. So to answer to your question, even though there are all these fine young musicians I spend most of my time listening to the great masters of the past, like Louis Armstrong of Billie Holiday.

AAJ: Among the great masters of jazz music, Thelonious Monk has had a special importance for you. What kind of personal memories and what musical lessons of Monk do you bring with you?

RW: Monk put the magic back into the music. Monk and Ellington were my favorites. They could capture the serious sound of the piano. Monk was also a tremendous composer. His compositions, his harmonies, his sense of rhythm, his sense of silence are magnificent. Monk had an orchestral conception of the piano. When he played I could see images; he was a great storyteller. He was a real innovator but —at the same time —you could always hear the blues tradition underneath. He was a completely original human being. He was clearly ahead of his time but this is what happens with great artists. However he was lucky to live enough to get to see people appreciate his music. Some artists, unfortunately, are not so lucky. I know how that feels. I cannot compare myself to Monk, but in the '50s when I was doing African music people did not understand what I was doing. Thirty, forty years later things have changed. You have to live long enough to see these things happen.

Monk was also an example for me. I was very impressed by his great dignity. There was a period were he could not work for something like six years, but he kept playing his music... Ellington did the same ... they never compromised. They kept producing their music, beautiful music until they died. Even when he wasn't working, when he had no money to live, Monk never complained, never begged. I really admired him. Any time I was at his house he was always very proper, very elegant, immaculate. The musicians of that period were not only very spiritual in their music, but also in the way they acted and appeared.

The musicians of those days were very open. Monk would show you anything. I could go to Monk's any time and the door was open. The same with Max Roach... They loved to have younger people come by. This is what I mean by spirituality.


comments powered by Disqus


Start your shopping here and you'll support All About Jazz in the process. Learn how.

Related Articles

Chuck Deardorf: Hanging On To The Groove
By Paul Rauch
January 19, 2019
Satoko Fujii: The Kanreki Project
By Franz A. Matzner
January 9, 2019
Ted Rosenthal: Dear Erich, A Jazz Opera
By Ken Dryden
January 7, 2019
Jeremy Rose: on new music, collaborations and running a label
By Friedrich Kunzmann
January 6, 2019
Ronan Skillen: Telepathic Euphoria
By Seton Hawkins
January 5, 2019
Ron Carter: Still Searching for the Right Notes
By Rob Garratt
December 30, 2018
A Conversation with Music Author Alan Light
By Nenad Georgievski
December 16, 2018