-
In the past thirty years, I have had the good fortune to teach thousands of bands and an incalculable number of students in diverse settings. Though each situation is unique, students share many of the same concerns in pursuit of a more profound relationship with music and with life through music. Every style of music presents distinct challenges which demand the development of different skills. Jazz requires creativity, communication and community.
Through improvising we learn to value our own creativity; through swing we coordinate our communication with others; and through the blues we learn to find and celebrate ‘meaning’ in the tragic and absurd parts of life that afflict every community. Certainly three things worth learning. I believe jazz revolutionized the art of music by vesting the individual musician with the authority to ‘tell their story’ and by positing that an even larger ‘story’ could be told, by choice, by a group of equally empowered musicians. Our educational system has yet to be retooled to accommodate that revolution. Of course there are some educators pointing the way, but many still view this music as exotic, mysterious and unteachable. Some jazz lovers believe the music can’t be taught in schools when, truth is, it can’t be taught THE WAY we are teaching it.
How many decades must we watch these faulty methods fail? It’s time to begin an earnest national effort to teach our kids the glories of jazz. Not a way to play scales on harmonies, or some jazzy misrepresentation of rock tunes, but an engagement with the stories, songs, rhythms, and the lives of those who made this music so vital— from the inspired dancers who blanketed this country in the 1930’s to the many earnest and eager kids now in jazz programs all over the world, to the local musicians playing their hearts out in small clubs everywhere.
Jazz is life music and education is not anti-life.
To achieve greater success in producing students who play inside the reality of this music, the modern teacher should consider combining various methods of instruction:
1) The gradual, graded, literature-based method employed in most traditional music education. Students should perform music of the great composers and arrangers, from Bill Challis to Don Redman, Duke Ellington to Gil Evans and Charles Mingus and so on. A selected and graded canon makes the compositional victories of the music obvious and provides a practical way to assess progress; performing the "best of" of all eras creates a more informed, sophisticated, and technically proficient musician who is better equipped to influence the tastes of listeners as well as develop and defend a comprehensive art.
2) A method that focuses on the substance of all periods of jazz instead of segregating them by decade and arbitrarily assigning greater value to later styles. In this way, free expression (which encourages experimentation and the focusing of personal intentions) and early New Orleans music (which is rich in melody, danceable groove, and triadic harmonies) is taught concurrently to beginners. More structured and/or rigorous harmonic and thematic material is covered later. The initial instruction should be entirely aural in imitation of how we learn to speak our mother tongue. (By the time we study the mechanics of English we have employed them for years). Teaching jazz is sometimes confused with teaching theory. Instead of learning what scales to play on which chords, we should be thinking about HEARING ideas in the context of harmonic progressions and understanding what those ideas mean.
3) A method that teaches vernacular grooves and dance as integral to jazz. For example: a New Orleans two groove is different from a Texas two, or the Kansas City two or a Nashville two. The 12/8 blues-rock shuffle is different from the Afro- American church 12/8…. on and on. Each groove has its own characteristic, meaning, and dance. I call this ‘root groove’ teaching. Many of these grooves were achieved after years of distillation. It’s a shame to discard cultural victories in lieu of grooves that machines can play, or old-timely, corny reductions of the actual groove, or no groove at all. A jazz musician should be able to convincingly play a wide cross section of American vernacular music. Let’s teach our kids how to play the most essential part of our music—-the rhythm—-with authority and feeling and lets encourage all kids to improvise. Of course most are shy at first because it sounds so bad, but any activity (playing ball or singing or doing almost anything) takes time for little ones to develop. The seeds are always there. It’s up to us to tend to them with love, concern and intelligence.
In all of my years of teaching, I have encountered all types of directors. Regardless of philosophical differences, I have found them to be principally concerned about the education of their students. They often ask me to comment on the most common problems confronting the modern jazz ensemble (after improvisation). These are a few suggested solutions to issues I have encountered with bands throughout the world:
1) Implement good listening habits. If students don’t listen to the type of music they play in band, there is no way they will sound good playing it. You want your students to develop their musical taste as well as their playing. At the beginning of each rehearsal have the students listen to a great piece of music. Assign weekly listening and put aside time to discuss what was heard.
2) The band is just too loud! The median volume of a jazz band today is a soft. It should be an intense mp, with a powerful and dramatic f. Rehearse the band at pp so they become accustom to hearing each other while playing. Also, the acoustic bass and rhythm guitar are a great check to balance the power of drums. Checks and balances in the rhythm section were developed over decades of playing. Why should they be discarded so easily for a less favorable result? Jazz is constant communication. Above a certain volume communication becomes very difficult.
3) TEACH a piece of music when rehearsing. Students should know how we get from one theme to the other and what musical devices are used for what effect. Knowledge of form and function lead to a much more listenable performance. Furthermore, improvised solos require detailed listening because you are required to respond with some degree of appropriateness to music as it’s being invented. After playing a piece, ask members of the band to recall what the soloists played, then have the soloists explain what they were doing.
4) Embrace the dance beat orientation of jazz. There is such a proliferation of non-swinging styles bearing the name of jazz; it’s hard to know what to teach. Samba has a principal rhythm, mambo has a rhythm, rock has a rhythm, Jazz has one too: Swing! It is such an elegant, supple, and dynamic rhythm constantly evolving; it must be tended to with care in the same way the most serious Latin musicians tend to the clave.
5) How to make students want to learn … hmmm …. My father used to say, :You can bring a horse to water but you can’t make him thirsty." The best way I’ve found to combat the haze of uninspired participation that engulfs some of our young is for the director to be aggressively inspired. Yeah, that’s what we need to do out here: stay inspired no matter what.
And encouraged that we are not alone.
-
04-20-2023 06:30 PM
-
Are you sure music is that important?
-
Amen!
-
Not in an exploding, crumbling, or unstable world, but otherwise it is that important - to practitioners.
Originally Posted by Bach5G
Popular and folk styles are more straightforward. Jazz is a tough pickle because of improvisation of course, but also because of form and for its overall melodic, harmonic, and rhythmic aspects. Classical music has pedagogy and practice pretty well sorted out. Jazz needs help.
Taking just one aspect of Wynton’s points, a progressive, leveled repertoire requiring multiple periods for every recital (like ABRSM does for classical) is something that I thought of recently. Jazz pedagogy has improved, but there is much more room for improvement. It’s happening, albeit gradually.
-
What hope of inspiration, if the repertoire is limited to styles of jazz that flourished before the students' grandparents were born?
-
It is certain that a good education will make jazz more likely to exist in today's world.
The popularization of jazz is directly related to education.
I attended a jazz workshop with W.Marsalis about 30 years ago in the local music hall.
A brilliant musician with visions and vast experience in educating jazz music.
He does it at a high level .
-
Would it be? I missed that part. Originally Posted by Litterick
-
Marsalis himself writes about it. Originally Posted by Litterick
He writes about good education, or perhaps more about proper education.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzjourney4Eva
'Students should perform music of the great composers and arrangers, from Bill Challis to Don Redman, Duke Ellington to Gil Evans and Charles Mingus and so on. A selected and graded canon makes the compositional victories of the music obvious and provides a practical way to assess progress; performing the "best of" of all eras creates a more informed, sophisticated, and technically proficient musician who is better equipped to influence the tastes of listeners as well as develop and defend a comprehensive art.'
This does not seem progressive to me. Besides, it is Wynton Marsalis; he has form.
-
While I agree with an awful lot of what Wynton says, it does always seem to push jazz more in the direction of becoming a type of classical music. I wonder how inevitable this is.
-
I like teaching the ABRSM grades but there’s some problems endemic in the UK mainstream music education system (I’m guessing you’re a Brit) such as teaching to the exam, everyone learning the same pieces in the book, lack of emphasis on aural music making, parental pressure to take kids as quickly through the grades as possible at the expense of developing their musicianship and so on. I’ve encountered all of these myself as a teacher. Originally Posted by Jazzjourney4Eva
Spend any time with music educators in workshops and seminars etc and one of the topics that comes up right away is the problems of the ABRSM grade system.
Not every country has this kind of thing (I don’t think the US or Germany have anything like it), so it’s worth bearing in mind there’s a downside here and also that the UK model is not universal for classical music education.
-
Following on from that - I’m a bit sad at the cancellation of the plectrum guitar exams by Trinity. I think there’s a place for an exam that focuses on music reading and so on for non classical players. Nothing like this now exists.
I do think the Grade exams have a lot of value if you can stop them from becoming the be all and end all of lessons…
Tbh I question the value of Rockschool exams and so on especially to the aspiring jazz player.
I don’t think I’ll hold my breath until a graded jazz guitar exam appears…
-
In fact, a jazz musician learns all his life.
The most important thing is that a jazz musician can play whether in jazz clubs or in other places.
Without it, we can only talk on the forum.
Which often leads to endless discussions about nothing.
-
Well, selectively quoting one of the problems is not progressive for anyone. Originally Posted by Litterick
-
I think Littericks point is a good faith one and I can’t see why quoting part of Wynton’s essay is a problem.
Canonisation does have a downside as well as the benefits Wynton outlines - we’ve seen in classical music. when Mozart was composing there was no canon. Now it seems that for classical performers not interested in ‘new music’ there is ONLY the canon. Other effects too… but that’s a whole mega post lol
arguably a canon already present in jazz edu.
I don’t think btw that canon and tradition are synonyms. I think a canon is quite different to a living tradition, even if that canon includes more recent/progressive composers that are not mentioned. It’s still a canon.
-
The problem consists of many problems. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
That's why there's such a long Maraslis statement.
you can address all the issues separately, right?
-
All music is canonized; even pop and rock. Maybe not by teachers, since pop and rock isn't really taught in universities (except maybe places like Berkleee?)... but what Wynton suggests is no different than a kid sitting in his bedroom, learning Led Zeppelin and Beatles songs. It all came from somewhere originally. Education usually takes a wide swath for a reason: amassing knowledge, of as much of the -whatever- is reasonable and possible. That way, when you go out into the world to play with others and do your own thing, you can speak the language, and take it where YOU want to take it.
THAT is what cannot be taught. You have to figure that out for yourself. But knowing the language... and as much of it as you can... makes conversing in it alot easier.
-
To those who want to learn music, especially jazz, it should be, it seems to me. Originally Posted by Bach5G
And thank God music was "that important" to all of the gifted geniuses we listen to and love... could you imagine a world without that stuff? I can't.
-
Originally Posted by Litterick
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Slow down and read the post before replying guys. This is literally the next paragraph.
2) A method that focuses on the substance of all periods of jazz instead of segregating them by decade and arbitrarily assigning greater value to later styles. In this way, free expression (which encourages experimentation and the focusing of personal intentions) and early New Orleans music (which is rich in melody, danceable groove, and triadic harmonies) is taught concurrently to beginners. More structured and/or rigorous harmonic and thematic material is covered later.
-
Well, a few thoughts: Originally Posted by Litterick
1. It's best to know the history of something if one is to "progress" it. Our work stands on the shoulders of our predecessor's work.
2. If one wishes to start another art form they can have at it. Jazz needn't apologize for being jazz.
3. It's not a burden to a serious musician and music lover to learn a few songs per semester from a well curated list.
-
I thought RGT had one. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
The ABRSM system needn't/shouldn't be followed dogmatically. And one needn't take an ABRSM certified exam. One can simply work through it with a good "non-ABRSM" teacher. It's not like there are cash prizes at each recital. I get it though, humans are are competitive and are herd animals and tend to jump on band wagons in any field you can think of.
I'm American and found ABRSM on my own. My classical guitar teacher was clueless.
I found it to be valuable in the following ways:
- The repetoire in the 8 levels takes one from beginner to "ready to be a music major"
- It provides structure and a roadmap for beginners, intermediate, and advanced.
- Has well curated literature across three fairly broad musical periods, for all levels 1-8
- The student has choices every semester for three recital pieces, one from each period
- Other pieces from the list can/should round out one's studies, even if not chosen for the semester recital
- It has some refreshing new music in it! (including blues, swing, etc.). A big plus.
- It doesn't stop one from playing/studying the usual Sor, Carcassi, Giuliani, Segovia stuff, or the "standard" method books out there that almost everyone uses.
Last edited by Jazzjourney4Eva; 04-21-2023 at 10:55 AM.
-
I'm afraid it is inevitable. Jazz is the weird little brother of classical music. Most of us didn't grow up with these songs like past generations did (my grandma always had Benny Goodman or Art Shaw playing at her house, and my dad grew up with this music). There are some incredible new jazz musicians. But even as a lover of jazz, a player, and someone who enjoys listening to modern progressions of jazz, huge majority of the time I'm putting on Coltrane, Wes, Ellington, Charlie Parker...the classics...classical. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
I have a love hate relationship with Wynton as a music educator, and I see how his way of thinking really pushes Jazz into a academic corner. But at the same time, this is the jazz I like
-
3) A method that teaches vernacular grooves and dance as integral to jazz. For example: a New Orleans two groove is different from a Texas two, or the Kansas City two or a Nashville two.
Can someone direct me to examples of each of these?
-
I thought he was getting at this Originally Posted by A. Kingstone
Louis Armstrong
Stevie Ray Vaughan
Count Basie
Hank Williams
Reply With Quote
Moffa Mithra
Today, 08:31 AM in For Sale