The Free Musics
Spring Garden Music Editions
Saxophonist Jack Wright's first encounter with free jazz occurred in 1967, when a chance meeting with Charlie Haden
resulted in Wright's being invited to see Haden play with Ornette Coleman
. Wright, who had been a conventional jazz saxophonist, describes the music as having struck him as "chaotic" and the experience as having been "traumatic." Nevertheless, five years later he was moved to seek it out again. Staring into the abyss had been frightening but compelling. So much so that by 1979, Wright was himself playing free improvisation; since then, he has gone on to sustain a decades-long career as a free player.
Wright's attraction to free playingand the inherent attractiveness of playing freely improvised music at allis captured in what he wrote to describe the aspiration behind his first recording: To play "a music deep into the present time...done for the love of playing...risking itself for its own sake." It is music that goes "beyond the score, genre or prepared aesthetic" and consequently is "a blank tablet on which to write experience not known to be musical." This is the spirit common to those varieties of improvised or otherwise spontaneously created music that fall under the encompassing category of free music. But this spirit needs to be embodied, and an interpretive history of the forms it took is what Wright sets out to give.
Wright's book is a genealogical anthropology of free playing. It traces the historical roots of contemporary free playing while at the same time seeing that history as the product of concretely situated practices developed by generations of musicians who formulated them, took them up, modified them, and otherwise worked with them. It is in addition very much a personal history, filled with sharp observations and often shrewd judgments, with a focus on North America. It doesn't claim to be a comprehensive history or exhaustive description of free improvised music in America, but is instead an insightful account by a long-involved, widely-traveled participant. The Free Jazz Period
Wright's starting point is the upsurge of free jazz around 1959 and its development through the 1970s. Because he was a jazz musician he was introduced to free improvisation through free jazz, and the jazz tradition remains for him a central point of reference.
Free jazz debuted during a period of ferment and radical challenges to established artistic conventions not only in music, but in other disciplines as well. Free jazz specifically challenged the norms that had governed the formal and expressive language of jazz. The most obvious challenge came with the initial shock of what might be called the phenomenology of the music, or the way it appeared to the ear. This was certainly the case with Coleman's free jazz. What Wright first heard as chaotic in Coleman's music was the way it had been organized along new, more egalitarian lines.
Coleman's music disrupted the standard structure of jazzmusic improvised within the confines of a pre-existing harmonic and rhythmic cycle and in which a distinctive solo voice was prominently foregrounded against a supporting rhythm sectionand replaced it with a more fluid, polyphonic form. Wright emphasizes Coleman's innovation in blurring the leader/sideman distinction and introducing a general measure of ambiguity into the normal functions of the jazz ensemble's constituent parts. Early jazz had also used collective improvisation, but within limits set by the composed song form and melody. Free jazz showed how to free players not only from a rigid figure/ground distinction of soloist and accompaniment, but from song form and rhythms divided and defined by the barline. To be sure, other free jazz artistsand Coleman himself at timesretained some semblance of the soloist/accompanist distinction, but in principle the way had been cleared for a collective improvisation of equals.
Music lacking recognizable chord cycles and insinuating a polyphonic texture in place of a distinctive solo voice could be expected to make novel demands on the musicians, and free jazz did. Although some jazz musicians considered the music to be the domain of unskilled players, Wright notes that free playing entailed not a loss of skill as such but rather a "shifting of players' skill orientation" from following chord changes to following the sounds that other players make in real-time. A typical free jazz performance would eschew improvising within more or less elaborate given structures and instead would create structures arising exclusively through the process of playing and responding to others' playing. This emphasis on spontaneous creation ex nihilo meant that what Wright describes as "personal motivation"biography and identitybecame significant elements in the content of the new music. Interpretation of another's composition was effectively replaced by interpretation of oneself and one's immediate musical environment, in real time.
If free jazz made extraordinary demands on musicians, it made them on listeners as well. Wright was far from the only contemporary listener to find Coleman's music chaotic. Without the familiar landmarks of harmonic and rhythmic cycles to orient them, many listeners became disoriented, and as a result, the music struggled to find and sustain an audience. Retrospectively, we can hear Coleman's music as carrying and carrying on the influences of blues, gospel, and then-contemporary jazz, but at the time listenerseven knowledgeable listeners as familiar with jazz conventions as was Wrightcouldn't detect that substrate beneath the seemingly-disorganized surface. And what was true of Coleman's music specifically was true generally of the music of other free jazz musicians as well. But the immediate result of this incomprehension was a loss of an audience for the new music. At a time when even the more conventional forms of jazz were losing commercial presence, free jazz was economically marginal at best. And yet the attraction and retention of an audience was crucial for artists who, for many and often complex reasons, were dependent on a market. Improvising at the Margins
Unlike their counterparts in the world of experimental art music, free jazz artists were not accepted as a legitimate avant-garde. Consequently, they would have difficulty securing support from the kinds of institutions that supported, say, the New York school experimentalists gathered around or associated with John Cage, or the West Coast composers and performers associated with the San Francisco Tape Music Center. By contrast experimental musicians, as members of a recognized avant-garde, were able to draw on the support of institutions both critical and financial rather than having to depend on having an audience. At least in its initial phase, free jazz lacked this institutional critical and financial support.
Wright points out that there were deep-seated social attitudes underlying free jazz's lack of institutional acceptance; he notes that its practitioners weren't accorded avant-garde legitimacy because they fell on the wrong side of the "economic division of white artist and black entertainer." This division was underscored by basic facts governing the professional possibilities and trajectories of the free jazz artists: Like more conventional jazz, free jazz, at least in its early years, was strongly performance-based and its players formed by a kind of working apprenticeship. Experimental music artists, by contrast, largely had conservatory or academic training and followed established Western art music traditions of producing discrete works that were replicableat least in theoryand enshrined in notated scores. In that regard, they conformed to many of the conventions associated with and conveying artistic legitimacy, whereas free jazz musicians, despite the seriousness with which they pursued their art, were seen not to. Standards of what constitutes and conveys artistic legitimacy have since changed and were in fact changing at that time, but in the 1960s that change was still in its early stages and hadn't yet become established enough to have been perceptible.
Also working against the economic viability of free jazz was the rise of the rock counterculture, which through psychedelics and its own version of free-form music offered audiences extreme experiences that could compete with, and out-compete, the experiences offered by free jazz. Wright characterizes free jazz's position vis-à-vis this new culture as an unenviable one of "market obsolescence." Free jazz's market obsolescence only worsened during the 1970s and the rise of what Wright calls "neo-traditional" jazzwhose highest-profile figure probably was Wynton Marsaliswhich defined the main body of jazz and thus further marginalized free jazz as a kind of anomaly standing outside of, and largely irrelevant to, jazz as a discipline.
Wright describes several different responses to this difficult situation. By the 1970s, many free jazz artists, in order to survive professionally, had turned to less confrontational, more commercially viable kinds of music and/or went into new programs established by the universitiesalthough largely, he notes, on a part-time basis. And as Michael Heller documents in his recent study of the New York jazz avant-garde in the 1970s, some musicians were able through their own efforts to secure funding through government and private grants, and to present their music in alternative spaces. But even this means of reaching audiences came to an end largely by the close of the 1970s, partly through increases in the once-low rents that made such venues possible, and partly by the absorptionincomplete, to be sureof the music into clubs and other more mainstream outlets.
Despite only partial success, the New York musicians' efforts at self-organizationinspired in part by earlier avant-garde jazz musicians' associations in Chicago
and St. Louis
as well as in New Yorkprovided an important precedent and lasting example not only for free jazz, but for other forms of freely improvised music that were to follow. But Wright sees this as having mixed implications for the future of the music. While he describes the turn to self-organization as "an emancipation" from a largely unsympathetic commercial establishment, he sees it at the same time as "a defeat." It was a defeat to the extent that it initiated a process he terms "de-professionalization" in that musicians now had to become responsible for the business side of their careers and not just the specialized work of making music. One of the risks self-organizing musicians ran is falling into what Heller calls the "organizer's dilemma"a situation where an artist's organizational and administrative activities begin to eclipse his or her artistic activities. Additionally, de-professionalization entailed abandoning the hope of being able to make a living entirely from musica particularly common predicament facing artists working with challenging, and thus commercially marginal, forms of music. Wright sees de-professionalization as an increasingly common characteristic of free music; often by necessity and sometimes by choice, the history of post-free jazz free improvisational musics is the history of non-career players. The Free Music Revival of the 1980s
In the 1980s, there was resurgence of freely improvised music largely independent of free jazz or the jazz tradition generally. And for the first time Wright was a participant, having begun playing free music exclusively in 1979.