Come on, guys; Jazz isn’t bad

“I have a dream…” that all music will be treated as equal, because music is equal! I am tired of this war of genres.

I’m glad to hear Spike Jordan voice his opinion, (Head to Head: Jazz, March 19), without fearing scrutiny from his friends, but I think there are a few things he overlooked in his argument.

I agree that there are defiantly true “Jazz Nazis” out there that will rag on any type of music that doesn’t swing. However, most Jazz musicians are not as closed-minded as you have been led to believe. Just like all other genres of music, there are fast, slow, simple, and complex pieces of Jazz. Insisting that all Jazz is based on self-centered, egocentric, showing-off is itself a bit ignorant.

First off, Jazz music is very easy to understand. I think that one of the reasons Jazz is hard for some people to “get” is because unlike some genres of music, it helps your understanding of the music if you listen with attentiveness as opposed to absent-mindedness. It’s not that Jazz is incomprehensible to the general public, it just requires attention.

Secondly, Jazz is simple in structure. There is a basic chord progression that repeats like most other styles of music. There is a written melody that is usually just as “catchy” as any pop, country, classical, or rock song. Then there is the solo section. This might be what Spike referred to as “musical masturbation.” Jazz songs would barely make it to a minute if there wasn’t room left for improvisation. It is the most expressive part of the piece.

According to a study done by musician and researcher Charles Limb, Jazz improvisation actually uses the same part of the brain that activates when you are having a conversation.

Communication is personally my favorite part of any improvised solo. When a trombone plays an ascending line and the bass player catches it and plays a descending phrase to compliment the trombone player. Or a drummer mimics a syncopated rhythm that the saxophone just played. Or even when a soloist plays quietly and the rest of the band dynamically comes down to match them, it becomes a musical conversation. These nuances are all over jazz; the thing is you have to be actively listening to catch them. Soloists can follow the chord progression or “changes” if they want to, but honestly, there are no rules to an improvised solo. It is simply whatever the soloist “feels” at that time about the song.

I just explained how jazz works in comparison to other music in a single paragraph, so obviously, it’s not rocket science. I believe that music is at its best when it can inspire emotions in other people. In Jazz, held out notes that sing, syncopated rhythms and grooves, quick scalar passages, chromatisism, tonal and atonal runs, dissonance and resolution, and re-composition, can portray a lot of different emotions. Performers recompose the song to their individual mood. Even inspiration from the soloist’s life might seep into the cracks of the improvisation. This also creates emotional music.

This is what the people who listen to Jazz connect with. It can be as complex or as simple as the performer makes it. It doesn’t have to be virtuosic and performers don’t always play a solo to “show off.” The main purpose for any music is to play with emotions of the performer and the listener. Jazz is not some incomprehensible idea that only the “chosen few” can understand. It’s really quite simple. It takes practice to execute well, and it is usually an elitist group of performers who perform it best. But it is really simplistic in theory.

Pictured is one of the more challenging and complex Jazz pieces titled “Giant Steps” by the sax player John Coltrane.

Does this really look that complicated? Well if you cannot read music, then of course it is going to look like Greek but I assure you that it looks more approachable then some other music.

Comparatively, is a virtuosic piece of music that falls in the classical genre, titled “The Carnival of Venice.” To my eyes, the “Carnival of Venice” looks way more challenging than “Giant Steps,” and that is only the first page!

How is this any different from the most complex Jazz solo, except that it is un-improvised? You mentioned you enjoy the band Black Flag. The intro guitar part in “Slip It In” has fast, atonal guitar licks that could be considered virtuosic or “masturbatory” not only because of the speed, but also because musicians who play with tonally, or play out of the key signature are trying to push the limits of tonality and stretch the known harmony. If pushing music past its normal bounds is not emotionally exposing, and out of the box playing, then I don’t know what is.

When soloists are playing ideas that you don’t understand, they are doing the same thing that Greg Ginn, (the guitar player from Black Flag), was doing; they are just experimenting with their own creativity. Virtuosic performance is something that transpires all music, be they shredding metal gods, funky slap bass, fast country “chicken-pickin’,” or even punk rock tunes that play at speed-racer tempos. They are not always trying to show off. That is just what the composer thought the song needed. Much like a Jazz soloist, who play the notes they want in the place they want because that’s the way they intended the song to sound like.

You may say that: “Well, they don’t think that they are better than everyone like them nasty Jazzers.” However, that is totally dependent on the person. Every style of music has had an egotistical way of thinking about the “rest of the world.” They think that they are somehow separated from everyone else by being better in some way, shape, or form. You see this in other forms of art, racial segregation, and even religion.

So, what is the real difference between Greg Ginn and John Coltrane? Style. What else could there be? In the millions of songs written we know that music can sound completely different. But in reality, music has a very finite number of variables. For instance, there are only 12 notes to work with in music. Only 12. Isn’t that amazing that a million different songs have come from only 12 notes? And a million more will be written. All Music is written in the same parameters and limitations.

To say that a certain style of music is the worst music ever written is clearly naïve in the most extreme sense of the word. Not only is it insulting half the population who likes that style. It is also saying that a vast amount of the population is wrong; that you think you are smarter than the whole world. Jazz is really no exception to this problem. I know Spike is very smart and opinionated which is why I truly believe that he doesn’t hate the entire genre of Jazz, otherwise he really wouldn’t like any music at all. I think what he really hates are a few people’s close-mindedness that he’s generally associated with Jazz.

Editor’s note: After publishing last week’s article, several readers commented that references in my satire stood out as malignant toward a particular individual. I recognize how it was perceived as vindictive and apologize for any misplaced criticism. I’m sorry.

Moving on; I’ve learned over the years that vitriol usually accomplishes nothing. However, the purpose of both articles was to gain attention by being as absurd, derisive, and provocative as possible.

As I openly stated in the second paragraph of my column, my true intention was to incite a response. My goal was to spark a discussion and encourage someone with a more intimate understanding of the genre to step-forward and explain it. Rational appeals went unanswered prior to my Wednesday deadline, so I took a non-traditional approach. It worked.

As a writer, I’ve found that sometimes it’s necessary for me to be overly-absurd with my criticism. I feel that when carefully executed, the absurd can be a useful tool for breaking apathy and helps generate a more mature and reasonable conversation.

The fact of the matter: I was wrong about Jazz and this article proved that. —Spike