John McLaughlin on the state of the music business

[SuperFour00]

Classical music is doing just fine and women are taking over. They dominate on the violin and increasingly on other instruments.
Hear the one about about the nuns who formed a string quartet?
Couple guys were listening and one says, "they're pretty good".
The other guy say's, "Does the Pope know about this?"

Bah boom!

You won't get a grant for Comedy (but comedy is an Art form that does seem to be doing well in the open marketplace).

[woland]

Bill Ayres and Bernardine Dohrn couldn't have said it any better that this. You must have attended their Hate America ralies nack in the day.

Your point being what? That I personally "hate America"?
1. If you disagree with me then I welcome good discussion.
Personal remarks of that nature do not bring a lot to the table.
2. You are wrong - I do not hate America.
I hate blind faith in empty shell of democracy we have allowed this country to become.

[SuperFour00]

Your point being what? That I personally "hate America"?
1. If you disagree with me then I welcome good discussion.
Personal remarks of that nature do not bring a lot to the table.
2. You are wrong - I do not hate America.
I hate blind faith in empty shell of democracy we have allowed this country to become.

I agree with many points of your previous post. In Patrick's reply, (and sadly, most of Mark's), I think we see the denial of, and failure to address at least, the possibility that there are aspects of our society and our authorities that should be examined for breaches of ethical and humanitarian standards. It's a refusal to discuss any topic that suggests we all may bear a responsibility for, if not immoral actions, at least a failure to confront them head-on.

[Stevebol]

You won't get a grant for Comedy (but comedy is an Art form that does seem to be doing well in the open marketplace).

I guess only classical musicians understand classical music humor. That one always brought down the house with cello majors.

[SuperFour00]

I guess only classical musicians understand classical music humor. That one always brought down the house with cello majors.

As Chet Baker said to Miles, "I really dig what you were trying to do."

[Stevebol]

As Chet Baker said to Miles, "I really dig what you were trying to do."

Lol. Did he really say that? I like the one about Miles telling someone who didn't know who he was that he worked in the service industry.

[SuperFour00]

Lol. Did he really say that? I like the one about Miles telling someone who didn't know who he was that he worked in the service industry.

Here's another one attributed to Chet.

(to Miles Davis): "I heard what you did on your latest record! ... I could help you fix that."

[Broyale]

I don't know about you, but I'm paying what I consider to be a substantial amount of taxes every year. Much of it is going to eavesdropping on citizens via their computers and cell phones and toward an endless war-du-jour in the Middle East. I'd like to see some of it go to supporting the Arts. I'm less concerned with who gets to pick the beneficiaries of these subsidies ... Michelle can pick them for all I care, as long as Jazz is supported as an Art form and Jazz players can create and further the genre.

I personally want to see jazz as a genre survive on its own. The reason why jazz is in the state its in now is because it has never been forced to compete. And when you have no incentive to compete...well, you get stagnation. Throwing government funds at it is gonna do as much good as welfare has for the poor in the long run. Jazz is the equivalent a manchild that refuses to leave home and separate from his overprotective parents. Pumping tax dollars into jazz is like that manchild moving out and taking public assistance because he has no life skills of his own to rely on.

If we want to see jazz grow and thrive, its needs to detach itself from academia and take itself back to the streets, back to the people. Jazz needs to learn to stand on its own. These universities have taken the music and stunted its growth. As long as musicians continue using college as a safety net or substitute for competing, jazz will continue being a slow rotting corpse.

[MarkRhodes]

I agree with many points of your previous post. In Patrick's reply, (and sadly, most of Mark's), I think we see the denial of, and failure to address at least, the possibility that there are aspects of our society and our authorities that should be examined for breaches of ethical and humanitarian standards. It's a refusal to discuss any topic that suggests we all may bear a responsibility for, if not immoral actions, at least a failure to confront them head-on.

Whoa. I think there are many aspects of our society and culture that should be examined. However, a jazz guitar forum is not the place to do that. (I discuss politics and such elsewhere.) Further, I do not think the unpopularity of jazz points to any breach of ethical and humanitarian standards by 'aspects of our society and our authorities.'

[SuperFour00]

I personally want to see jazz as a genre survive on its own. The reason why jazz is in the state its in now is because it has never been forced to compete. And when you have no incentive to compete...well, you get stagnation. Throwing government funds at it is gonna do as much good as welfare has for the poor in the long run. Jazz is the equivalent a manchild that refuses to leave home and separate from his overprotective parents. Pumping tax dollars into jazz is like that manchild moving out and taking public assistance because he has no life skills of his own to rely on.

If we want to see jazz grow and thrive, its needs to detach itself from academia and take itself back to the streets, back to the people. Jazz needs to learn to stand on its own. These universities have taken the music and stunted its growth. As long as musicians continue using college as a safety net or substitute for competing, jazz will continue being a slow rotting corpse.

Classical music, the opera, the ballet, none of that will ever make money. The gist of the video that spawned this thread is, to paraphrase Mr. McLaughlin, that America supports the Classical music and classical Arts, but doesn't support the Creative, Artistic music that was born here. Artistic music will never survive by competing in the marketplace, because the consumers are never going to be equipped to appreciate Art in sufficient numbers. If what has been Jazz, and is Jazz now morphed into something that could be popular with the masses, it would no longer be Jazz, so we'd be in the same fix.

Let me make this simple and straightforward. Popularity has nothing to do with creativity and quality. If you want mediocre music, mediocre movies, or mediocre food, then appealing to the masses will get you that (if you're lucky ... you're as likely to get crap); but if creative and artistic music is to thrive, selling it to the common man will not pay the bills. It never has.

[SuperFour00]

Whoa. I think there are many aspects of our society and culture that should be examined. However, a jazz guitar forum is not the place to do that. (I discuss politics and such elsewhere.) Further, I do not think the unpopularity of jazz is a pressing societal problem, period.

You can ban mention of sociology and politics from the forum (if that's a rule, I missed the fine print), but you've been commenting on those same topics for most of the thread. John McLaughlin came out and said America should support Jazz as it supports Classical music. You do know that America supports the Classics with both private donations and public subsidies? I agree with him. But, why is it not so? You'll never find the answer to that question with your ears plugged and your eyes closed. It affects all of us, amateurs and pros, students and teachers, and in the end, Art even benefits the parts of society that reject Art. A rising tide lifts all ships.

[Broyale]

Classical music, the opera, the ballet, none of that will ever make money. The gist of the video that spawned this thread is, to paraphrase Mr. McLaughlin, that America supports the Classical music and classical Arts, but doesn't support the Creative, Artistic music that was born here. Artistic music will never survive by competing in the marketplace, because the consumers are never going to be equipped to appreciate Art in sufficient numbers. If what has been Jazz, and is Jazz now morphed into something that could be popular with the masses, it would no longer be Jazz, so we'd be in the same fix.

Let me make this simple and straightforward. Popularity has nothing to do with creativity and quality. If you want mediocre music, mediocre movies, or mediocre food, then appealing to the masses will get you that (if you're lucky ... you're as likely to get crap); but if creative and artistic music is to thrive, selling it to the common man will not pay the bills. It never has.

And this is the problem. We're so fixated on trying to protect and maintain "what has been Jazz" that we have never allowed Jazz to evolve into what it could be (and should be by now).

[Patrick2]

[QUOTE=woland;449772]Your point being what? That I personally "hate America"?
1. If you disagree with me then I welcome good discussion.
Personal remarks of that nature do not bring a lot to the table.
2. You are wrong - I do not hate America.
I hate blind faith in empty shell of democracy we have allowed this country to become.[/QUOTE


Reply deleted . . . too political.

[vinlander]

Why Jazz is struggling ? because it is not easy to play, to understand and to identify with anymore in a world focussing on easiness and leisure

[Patrick2]

Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
You suggested that racism might explain the decline in jazz's popularity. If many white people buy records by African-Americans who do not play jazz---and they do---then racism is not a plausible explanation for why those same white people are not buying jazz records. (The most plausible explanation would be that they're, you know, jazz records.)

I did not. Would you like to show me where you think I did?

Of course you did. Just go back and look at the third paragraph your post # 118.

[SuperFour00]

Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
You suggested that racism might explain the decline in jazz's popularity. If many white people buy records by African-Americans who do not play jazz---and they do---then racism is not a plausible explanation for why those same white people are not buying jazz records. (The most plausible explanation would be that they're, you know, jazz records.)




Of course you did. Just go back and look at the third paragraph your post # 118.

You'll need to quote me. What were the exact words? Cut and paste, reply with quote, whatever, point to the exact words that say "racism might explain the decline in jazz's popularity."

[fumblefingers]

Your point being what? That I personally "hate America"?
1. If you disagree with me then I welcome good discussion.
Personal remarks of that nature do not bring a lot to the table.
2. You are wrong - I do not hate America.
I hate blind faith in empty shell of democracy we have allowed this country to become.

Are you an anarchist?


You sound extremely angry and cynical, besides being irresponsibly and almost hilariously off base.

Its really not possible to take you seriously.

[fumblefingers]

You'll need to quote me. What were the exact words? Cut and paste, reply with quote, whatever, point to the exact words that say "racism might explain the decline in jazz's popularity."

Well what did you mean that subliminal racism "killed" it? What does killing it mean if not reducing its popularity?

you should explain your own words, it ain't anyone else's cross to bear.

[Stevebol]

What the heck is an anarchist? I thought it was those guys in Ukraine wearing ski-masks that are playing all sides.
Why would they be on a forum for jazz guitar?

[SuperFour00]

Whoa. I think there are many aspects of our society and culture that should be examined. However, a jazz guitar forum is not the place to do that. (I discuss politics and such elsewhere.) Further, I do not think the unpopularity of jazz points to any breach of ethical and humanitarian standards by 'aspects of our society and our authorities.'

Mark, let me first say, I'm impressed you have the brass to let an interesting discussion like this continue ... you have integrity. I don't agree with many of your opinions, but you have mettle. Let me clarify a couple of points. Racism isn't a political issue, it's a Sociological issue. It only becomes a political issue if a political party or politician raises the matter in a political context. Now, the 14th Amendment is the Law of the Land, and I don't think anyone who's a member of this forum is in favor of racism or discrimination, so it's not even controversial. It's neither Political nor controversial. So, I'm having trouble figuring out what you're afraid of.

Look, can we discuss Blues? You know it was invented by slaves in the cotton fields singing as they worked ... as SLAVES. No, can't discuss Blues, then. Can we discuss Jazz? You know, with contributions from many cultures, it was defined and refined in clubs and saloons frequented by Blacks because they weren't allowed in the White venues except as servants ... until the music caught the eye of White club owners who could make a buck, and then blacks were also allowed in as musicians and dancers. So, let's leave the history of the music that's the subject of this forum out of bounds. It's a little funny, really.

Here's what I think: it would be easy to discuss the history and present state of Jazz, if some of the members weren't literally afraid of the words "Black", "Racism", and ... well that's it really. Are they scary words? Black ... black ... black. There, nothing bad happened. Racism ... racism ... racism. Nope, everything is OK. If you get the urge to moderate, maybe explaining to excitable and over-reactive members that the very music they claim to love evolved in an era of blatant discrimination, so there's no reason to run for your lives if someone points out that there may possible still be remnants of those problems swept under the carpet.

In the movie "Cadillac Records", Chuck Berry was shown playing to a segregated crowd of teenagers, who weren't allowed to ... wait, can I continue with that. It was a good movie. Well, in another part, Chuck Berry arrived at a night club to perform but the manager wouldn't ... oops, that's gonna be a problem. How on earth can you discuss the premiss of this video: John McLaughlin on the state of the music business


if it's forbidden to speculate on the possible reasons that the wealthy and powerful sponsors of the classical arts don't strive to equally support Jazz? What is everyone afraid of?

[SuperFour00]

Well what did you mean that subliminal racism "killed" it? What does killing it mean if not reducing its popularity?

you should explain your own words, it ain't anyone else's cross to bear.

Jazz diminished due to losing most of it's audience between 1945 and 1960. Failure to subsidize it via sufficient private and public grants is killing it. It has nothing to do with popularity. Jazz will never be popular with the masses. It has to do with keeping it from disappearing for lack of support.

Jazz can be "more" popular, if it is enabled by Society to be performed publicly and taught in school, but it will never be competitive with commercial entertainment ... it is Art.

[cosmic gumbo]

it is Art.

That's why it will live on in a museum and not at Walmart.

[Patrick2]

You'll need to quote me. What were the exact words? Cut and paste, reply with quote, whatever, point to the exact words that say "racism might explain the decline in jazz's popularity."

Per your request;

"But I don't think Rock killed Jazz. It may have doomed Frank Sinatra style swing (Michael Buble notwithstanding), but I think what killed Jazz in the end is subliminal racism. The government and the philanthropists will support Classical Music, Ballet, Opera, but Jazz? In the back of the minds of politicians and wealthy business leaders, Jazz is the music that Black folks play and listen to ... the musicians sneak out into the alley on breaks and smoke reefer and shoot heroin. It's OK if popular rock or Country musicians are drug addicts, since they are generating billions in profit and taxes, but these politicians and philanthropists don't want to be connected with music invented largely by and associated largely with the Black Man if it isn't profitable in a big way ... they certainly won't support it to any meaningful degree. The government will pay lip service to Jazz, America's real home-grown music, and PBS will play some Jazz, and documentaries will get made, but all the while, Jazz is dying (as Classical music would without being underwritten by supporters)."

[woland]

Are you an anarchist?


You sound extremely angry and cynical, besides being irresponsibly and almost hilariously off base.

Its really not possible to take you seriously.

I do not think that discussions are to be conducted via slapping LABELS on your opponent.
If you do then you are alone in this game.

[woland]

I agree with many points of your previous post. In Patrick's reply, (and sadly, most of Mark's), I think we see the denial of, and failure to address at least, the possibility that there are aspects of our society and our authorities that should be examined for breaches of ethical and humanitarian standards. It's a refusal to discuss any topic that suggests we all may bear a responsibility for, if not immoral actions, at least a failure to confront them head-on.

Thank you for the support.
I happened to to grow up on the other side Iron Curtain - in the country where jazz was popular type of music. In my hometown there there was a big (week-long) jazz festival every October - and all the time I lived there I would attend it. We had propaganda and censorship and people being thrown in jail sometimes for listening to forbidden news radio from West Germany. Still we knew all that was done to us - we were aware of being manipulated.

I lived in States for over 25 years now and I do not see such awareness here. There is that old story about pot of water - you put the frog in and slowly raise the temperature - and frog never reacts because gradient is so slow. Oh well... enough said - Mark is right that we are here to talk about jazz and less about politics. What I wanted to say is that under communism culture was heavily subsidized and effects were quite obvious. For profit culture results in sliding toward lowest common denominator. Results are obvious. Not everything in enlightened society should function based on maximizing profits.

Coming back to that jazz festival - after the second show ended - around midnight - there would be jam sessions in clubs around town. If you were lucky you would get in - and watch some of the best American and European musicians playing for standing room only enthusiastic audience - jamming until early hours of the morning. I think they must have enjoyed such reception enormously.