@clearthinker Once again, you’re just flat out wrong.
The race of an artist, or group of artists, of a particular time/place, was completely irrelevant to the argument at hand. Yet, you inexplicably interjected such into your argument. By no means did you (as you’re now trying to characterize) effectively “merely point out the fact that jazz was created by black people.”
Again, even if that was indeed “all you did,” this was completely irrelevant to the topic. An inexplicable choice.
But, of course, this was not “all you did.”
You said, “jazz is the most complex music ever created, by black people no less.” Clearly suggesting (‘…,no less.’) that it is “surprising” or “remarkable” that black people would create something exceedingly sophisticated.
That’s racist.
“How many here can argue the complexities of “jazz.” Frankly, unless you’re a musician educated in jazz, who can truly play, it’s beyond your comprehension. So in essence, there’s no argument to be had.”
Goodness gracious me.
Once again, you’re just flat out wrong.
This oversimplified, grandiose bluster (perhaps betraying an insecurity more than anything else), this foisting of a qualification for one’s legitimacy of opinion, is not merely a shovel; it’s a JCB 5CX backhoe with which you’re digging yourself a deeper hole.
1) Simply pointing to a transcription that has a glut of chords listed over the top of each bar, chords with titles 8 characters long, marked by 11ths, 13ths. 13#11ths, augmentedness, diminishedness, and general harmonic esoterica, does nothing to prove that the transcription is “more complex” than that of, say, Le Sacre Du Printemps, or the countless microtonal pieces written over a span of multiple centuries preceding the existence of jazz (and concurrently during the existence of jazz), or the general complexity of an orchestral score that goes on and on and on, page after page, written for a dozen-odd different instruments.
An instrumentalist may, in jazz, display virtuosic improvisational acumen, doing so seamlessly while negotiating exotic harmonic structure, esoteric shifts in modes, key, and time signature.
This doesn’t make the music, necessarily, more “complex” than classical.
2) To suggest that it takes an educated, trained, fluent-in-music-theory-person to recognize the relative complexities in jazz and classical is untrue.
Sure, such a person may be able to boast of their knowledge of fancy musical jargon.
Sure, a person outside of any particular field may not be able to hold their own in a room full of folks actually in the given field, if attempting to speak authoritatively on the subject.
A classy expert, secure in their knowledge and competence, would not need to flippantly dismiss the entirety of the “outsider’s” opinion on the subject. This more-knowledgeable person may indeed take what the outsider has to say with a grain of salt given the outsider’s relative ignorance, but wouldn’t need to protect their own ego by hiding behind insider-jargon, a supercilious, elitist perspective, and an outright, wholesale dismissal of that “outsider’s” opinion.
When I perform music, whether solo as a piano-vocalist, or a guitar-vocalist, when I arrange scores for and perform with orchestral and jazz ensembles, when I play music of virtually any kind (and I do), I may indeed, at times, have an attitude of, “anyone who doesn’t like this is an ignorant rube whose opinion is inadmissible.”
That’s me needing to protect my ego against any less-than-effusive opinions others may have of my music. It’s not good.
Being true to one’s self with no regard for appeasing and pandering is good.
Being a dismissive, arrogant elitist is bad.
