Jazz for aficionados

***** Rok, on to the next "jazz artist" and forget about it.*****

It's already forgotten.

Cheers

jazzcourier, I have a great deal of respect and admiration for your knowledge of jazz and its history; and, I certainly respect your writing chops.  However, I believe you are taking this matter way too far.  First of all, unless you have followed this thread closely since its inception, you cannot have a good sense of the communication and writing styles of its active participants so as to keep comments that are made in their proper perspective.  The phrase that you object to has been used, rightly or wrongly, many times on this thread and there has been no indication that it has ever been used with any kind of racist intent.  I realize that you may feel that the phrase that you find offensive is offensive under any circumstances and in any context.  However, you have no way of knowing what is in the heart of the person who uses what is a fairly common phrase that, while possibly and rightly considered insensitive, is not necessarily anything more than that in the heart of the person using it.  Likewise, I don't know you personally and know you only from your interesting and educated commentaries on jazz so I have no way of knowing what is in YOUR heart; so, the following comments are not directed at you personally and are simply an expression of my skepticism as concerns reaction to this kind of "negative activity".

Political correctness run amuk has become a kind of cancer and an opportunistic tool to, ironically, stifle freedom of expression.  Moreover, experience has shown me that, especially as concerns racism, those who see racism at every turn are sometimes, in fact, the worst racists of all.  Again, this is only an explanation for my skepticism and a plea to not make possibly unfair assumptions and is nothing directed at you personally.

Now, you made your feelings known and admonished the use of and the person who used the phrase and demanded an apology.  It was made clear that no apology was forthcoming.  Then you escalate matters by taking the issue to the "authorities".  This begs the question: did you escalate matters because you found the behavior even more offensive than you first did, or did you escalate matters because Rok would not apologize?  Considering that you had no way of knowing whether he would ever use the phrase again, then escalating matters because there would be no apology is uncalled for.  Who, then, would be playing "security guard on duty"?  Additionally, if per chance the "negative activity" you refer to is the comment about talking about "the origins of black music and slavery", you should know that those two topics have been the subject of very intense and interesting discussion on this thread and it has been done in nothing but the most positive and respectful way; even when there has been disagreement.  Since you have not been a part of those discussions you would not know that.  Just one more reason why proper context and restraint in jumping to conclusions is so important.  

I strongly urge you to reconsider escalating this matter and I look forward to more of your interesting comments about the music.

O-10 & The Frogman:

Thanks for the intervention.

Cheers

Frogman,  I've been waiting for an answer to those questions since 5:30, and it's now 11:15,  what's up?

Enjoy the music.

EDIT: my, my, we are impatient. I believe I said "later this evening". No? Perhaps my "hav(ing) gone mad" has affected my sense of time.
--------------------

O-10, eventhough I am not a cynic by nature, I seriously doubt that the "major war is over"; but, I always welcome a cease-fire.

Re you question, and please understand that I am taking your questions at face value. If you meant something different by any one of them, I have no way of knowing:

A well known jazz artist would not go to St. Louis and then decide that he wants to gig. Unless, of course, he goes to spend a summer vacationing with O-10 or other personal reason and then decides he wants to gig. A well known jazz artist would generally go to St. Louis AFTER he or his booking agent has lined up some engagements in clubs or festivals. Simply showing up in St. Louis does not guarantee being able to get gigs at all; even when well-known. Clubs and festivals have artists booked and rosters filled WAY in advance.

Now, lets assume that the scenario IS that the artist decided to hang with O-10 for a few months and then decided that he wanted to also do some playing while in St. Louis. A "gig" is a paying job and he might be able to get some gigs in small clubs on short notice by virtue of the fact that he is well known. These gigs pay very little. The artist may also simply want to play (for no money) to keep his chops in shape. Being well known means that he probably already knows who the best players in town are, or knows someone who does. By contacting those persons he can find out if there are any scheduled jam sessions in town or can put together a trio for an engagement that he may have been able to book. If the artist goes to St.Louis because his agent has booked some gigs for him, the agent may also book the other musicians by contacting booking agents in St. Louis or hiring the players that the artist wants to play with based on recommendations by other players or personal experience.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by "improvisational jazz, no Moonlight In Vermont or other standards". If you are talking about "free" jazz, where EVERYTHING is improvised and there are no "tunes" or predetermined structure to the music, then "gigs" will be just about impossible to get as there is a very limited audience for this kind of jazz. It will also be more difficult to find decent "free" players. If you are talking about the kind of jazz that is discussed here where there is typically a "tune" (melody) and then the players improvise over the chord changes of that tune, then "Moonlight In Vermont" qualifies as much as any other tune that has been posted here. It has a melody, a certain form, and a set of chord changes. It is an appropriate vehicle for improvisation and, in fact, has been played and improvised on by many jazz artists. As recently posted, there is no reason that Sonny Rollins playing "How Are Things In Glocca Morra" should not be considered "straight up jazz".

The community of jazz musicians is a small one and players know each other or know about the ones who can play. I suspect that the clip of Eddie Fisher playing live is a perfect example of a player showing up to play with a band he had never met before. This has been discussed before. While the idea that players who had never met can play so "coherently" is impressive, keep in mind that, especially in the case of that Fisher clip, it’s pretty formulaic music with very simple chord progressions or even one single chord for all the improvisation. Most decent players can do this in their sleep; and , in fact, the players accompanying Fisher are decent and no more. Now, to play "Giant Steps" with its complicated chord changes or to play simpler tunes at the highest level of artistry is a different matter altogether and only a well rehearsed band can do that credibly.