Fantastic document, Alex; thanks for that. One of the many beautiful things about Jazz is that it is a never ending continuum; always evolving. Some may not be willing to accept (or like) this fact, but a fact it is and it would serve "aficionados" well to put their favorite period in the history of the music in the context of this fact. There are no "best" nor "most influential" in this music since our favorites from any given period would not have been possible without those who came before them. Bird would not have been possible without Pops. So, with that in mind, who then is the "most" influential? Personally, I find early jazz fascinating and very enjoyable just as I do quality examples from any other period, early or recent. I would never suggest that everyone has to like jazz from every period in its history, but I would suggest that to not be dismissive of the music that led to our favorite period adds a great deal to our appreciation and enjoyment of our preferred style of jazz. I would also suggest that to be so quick to dismiss those early styles belies a fundamental flaw in a person’s understanding of the music.
The origins of the word "Jazz" is one of the most researched in the English language and the spelling "jass" is not "wrong". It is, in fact, how the word was originally spelled; along with "jasz", "jasm" and with origins in the word "jism" (!). It’s a very interesting story which every "aficionado" should be aware of; just like the very important fact that Pops was far more than an "entertainer". Personally, until I understand things of this nature, I would not be so quick to pat myself on the back for being so unique and insightful compared to others. We tend to think we know a lot more than we do; human nature, I suppose.
The origins of the word "Jazz" is one of the most researched in the English language and the spelling "jass" is not "wrong". It is, in fact, how the word was originally spelled; along with "jasz", "jasm" and with origins in the word "jism" (!). It’s a very interesting story which every "aficionado" should be aware of; just like the very important fact that Pops was far more than an "entertainer". Personally, until I understand things of this nature, I would not be so quick to pat myself on the back for being so unique and insightful compared to others. We tend to think we know a lot more than we do; human nature, I suppose.