“You seem to be asserting that once jazz musicians tackle “songbook” material, they suddenly (in your mind) morph into something suspect, something lesser, something somehow not quite ‘legit’”
I neither asserted, nor even insinuated any such value judgement on jazz compositions or pop compositions.
I addressed a question in this thread regarding jazz singers. I am not sure how to define such, as jazz seems to be dominated by instrumental music, and artists’ catalogs like those of Holiday, Fitzgerald, Vaughn, etc. are so heavily populated with pop songs of the ‘20s-‘50s. I don’t see how my language betrayed anything derisive regarding those incredible songs.
I am, and have been for a long time, a deep lover of those songs. My piano playing over the last year has increased noticeably via my constant digging in to those very songs. This music is less intimidating to take on as a player than Sergei Rachmaninoff’s or Thelonius Monk’s, but still challenging and simply a joy to study and play. I just love them, and love being able to actually play them now with something that resembles competence. I am, and always have been, a ravenous, insatiable pop guy.
I consider jazz to be that singular, unique, original music of Parker, Gillespie, Davis, Monk, Coltrane, Mingus, Roach, we could go on and on, and further on into the ‘60s and ‘70s, Coleman, Taylor, Art Ensemble of Chicago, I could go on. I really get excited by the music of those last three, plus Don Cherry, Roland Kirk, again, I could go on.
That’s my take.