***** But "No soul, no jazz"? I just don't understand that.*****
He should have said, "No Blues, No Jazz, Know Blues, know Jazz"
One of those pesky things called facts.
Cheers
Jazz for aficionados
Post removed |
Pryso, I agree with every word you wrote. A different style does not have to mean lacking emotion or “soul”. I hope my comparison of Brubeck’s piano style to Dr. John’s did not imply that. I also agree with your comment about why the bias against Brubeck may exist. As you point out, Brubeck was an extraordinarily well rounded musician with training and vast experience in several musical disciplines. Interestingly, the bias against that kind of background has been demonstrated here quite regualrly. Glad to see that, at least for some, that attitude is changing. Still, as always, the contradictions abound. Personally, I don’t believe that for music to have “soul” it has to be drenched in “blue notes” or have a certain feel. Soul is an expression of......what else?.....one’s soul; and one’s musical soul is determined by one’s background and life experience no matter the ethnic history. The black experience is not the only one that has “soul”. Try telling a great Japanese shakuhachi player that he has no soul; or a great Russian orchestra that they don’t play with soul. As far as what it takes to qualify for being called “jazz”? Well, no point in going there for the 100th time. So limiting. And to what end? Is it good music or not...that’s all. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/uncommon-time-dave-brubeck/ |