Jazz for aficionados

'Politics' aside, I have another question, regarding ongoing discussion.

We are all aware that 'jazz' is very diverse and very broad term as well.
So, we have all these different styles and I guess that we can all agree that at some point there were influnces from one to another, no matter in which type or form.

In documentary Wynton talks about history of music and jazz and he says 'this led to that' and so on ('there was swing, than came the bop', etc)

So, if we follow that line, it looks quite logical, even the musical examples are making sense, it seems that really some styles are developed from the previous ones, or on the base of it.

So, my question is this. At which point do you think that jazz, as music form was created, pure and free from any possible previous influences?

What would be the best example of such music, meaning, how did it sound? 
If you had to name it or describe it, what style it was?

**** In documentary Wynton talks about history of music and jazz and he says ’this led to that’ and so on (’there was swing, than came the bop’, etc)

So, if we follow that line, it looks quite logical, even the musical examples are making sense, it seems that really some styles are developed from the previous ones, or on the base of it.****

That is exactly right; it is quite logical. It is even more logical when, as you noted, the musical examples make the point. This goes to another one of the misconceptions about this music on the part of some. There have been many attempts to discuss this here with, unfortunately, little success. Some think that, for instance, bebop appeared in a vacuum; that all of a sudden ”Modern Jazz” appeared independent of what came before it. Far from it. The evolutionary process in Jazz is one of the most important in understanding the music. Btw, same idea applies to Classical music; the music of one era builds on what was done before.

The evolution of Jazz builds on what was done before. Bebop could not have occurred had there been no swing; it built on what swing did. Swing could not have occurred had there been no Ragtime; it built on what Ragtime did.

**** At which point do you think that jazz, as music form was created, pure and free from any possible previous influences? ****

Did not happen that way. Could not have happened that way. That is the whole point of the evolutionary process. Even in its infancy, Jazz was built on previous influences.

In Ragtime, Scott Joplin created a music style which has as a primary feature the syncopated, or jagged, rhythms of the Cuban “Habanera”; which itself was built on the influences of European and African music. Is it a surprise that Cuba is very near New Orleans? Then we had W.C. Handy who collected folk songs as he travelled through Mississippi which used what we now know as “the blues form”. Jelly Roll Morton is credited with “creating” Jazz around the turn of the 20th century by incorporating the jagged rhythms of Ragtime with the “Blues” sound and form. 

Btw, it is probably best, for the sake of a discussion such as this and to avoid confusion, to not use “form” as a synonym for “style”. “Form” is a particular structure that a music or specific piece of music uses as its framework. For example, the Blues typically uses a repeated 12 measure form.

Important elements of what we call “Blues” can be demonstrably traced to Africa. The elements of harmony in Ragtime and Blues can be demonstrably traced to Europe. I don’t think it needs to be explained why there existed the cultural influences of Europe and Africa in places like Cuba and New Orleans. All these cultural influences came together in then very cosmopolitan New Orleans in a melting pot of musical ideas to create Jazz; and that was the foundation for all the Jazz styles that followed.

Jazz is a continuum of concepts and ideas that builds on and expands on concepts that preceded it; all with the underlying primary concept of freedom (improvisation). This is why Jazz is considered the quintessential American art form. As American culture developed (for better or for worse) this development (evolution) was reflected in the changing Jazz styles. Think about what was happening politically in America and with the encroachment of technology in American culture and you will find an almost perfect parallel in Jazz.

https://youtu.be/oUaLc1zabVo

I wonder why the people who can talk music to death can not play music to death.

I do one thing and I do it very well, I listen to music. I don’t need nobody to tell me the dramatic difference between "Bop" and "Swing"; the difference between Lester Young and Charley Parker.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK4FsQzUqB4


That was Lester Young; this is Charley Parker;

    
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCpL1zjBgI

Can any one tell me how swing sounds like "Bop"?


There was a revolution in music like no other that preceded anything before it, and the man primarily responsible was Charles "Yard Bird" Parker..


That case has been closed for ages. I even feel foolish debating it.

Third time posting.
Paul Desmond intervews Charlie Parker

https://bobreynoldsmusic.com/paul-desmond-charlie-parker/

He does not seems to be an individulal close in his own universum of ideas and closed for other influences


Frogman, my last question was for Rok, or Op.
I am curious to understand why they think that Wynton is ’bending’ the truth.

Also, I do not beleive that anybody would consider jazz to be less significant because its creators have been influenced or exposed to other styles of music which they incorporated to that new sound.

Why is that even an issue?

**** Also, I do not beleive that anybody would consider jazz to be less significant because its creators have been influenced or exposed to other styles of music which they incorporated to that new sound.

Why is that even an issue?****

Excellent point and excellent question. I have some thoughts on the matter, but ultimately I think it comes down to human nature and how difficult it is for most of us to admit, if only to ourselves, that we have been wrong about something for a long time.

**** I wonder why the people who can talk music to death can not play music to death****

By that ridiculous notion (and silly attempt at a dig) it could be said that Bird, Blakey, Desmond, Coltrane, Miles.....you name it, “could not play music to death”. All, and just about every Jazz musician of any standing, have supported what Wynton speaks of and many have been very vocal about it.

None of this knowledge is necessary to enjoy the music. However, it can definitely add an entirely new dimension to the experience and enjoyment of it. Why some feel the need to take that away from those who do appreciate that perspective is something that is way above my pay grade as far as the psychology of it all goes.