Jazz Music Today: Looking Forward in a Genre that Usually Looks Back

Three recent developments in the jazz world have inspired this post. First, the NYT ran a feature article a few weeks ago describing the booming jazz education industry in the United States.  A few days later, Michael Brecker, an accomplished and celebrated tenor sax player, tragically died at age 57 from leukemia. Lastly, Norah Jones has received a flood of recent press concerning the January 30^th release of her third album. These three stories, all occurring in the span of a few weeks, symbolize the state of the jazz industry today.

No matter how anemic the jazz industry may be, there is little doubt that jazz education has become a mainstay in the music departments of most high schools and colleges across the country. While sales of jazz recordings only continue to fall, the popularity of jazz education has boomed. Illustrating this paradox further, it is ironic that the foundation of jazz education in schools is often centered around the big band, a format that became largely extinct in the professional world fifty years ago. 

The expansion of jazz education makes me extremely hopeful for the future of jazz music in general. As a product of an elite high school jazz education program myself, I have to say that my life would be extremely different if I hadn’t had the experiences that I did with jazz music in my teenage years. I was extremely fortunate to witness first-hand the potential of an exceptional high school jazz education as my high school jazz band placed 3^rd overall in the Essentially Ellington competition in New York.  My band’s performance alongside Wynton Marsalis before a packed house at Avery Fisher Hall is one of those life-long memories that I will never get tired of recounting.

In the context of a thriving jazz education world, why does the professional jazz world still occupy the fringes of the American music consciousness? One theory is that jazz education overwhelmingly presents the music as a historical artifact to be replicated and emulated, rather than a genre that continues to evolve in the 21^st century. It doesn’t help that the public face of accomplishment in the jazz industry continues to dwindle. Michael Brecker was a preeminent player who honed a unique style, and found inspiration from musicians across genres. His death comes as a shock to the jazz world. Just the other night, I was talking to the bass player at a U street jazz bar here in Washington, and when I mentioned Brecker, he solemnly asked “so you’ve heard?”

As I’ve written before, the sudden and unexpected success of Norah Jones’ first album, largely inspired by jazz musicianship and tradition, should rejuvenate the jazz industry and provide hope to the professional musicians attempting to make a living playing jazz today. Sure, Norah Jones lacks the brilliant technique of a John Coltrane or Charlie Parker, but she has shown that when pushed in new directions, jazz music still reverberates in the American psyche.

While I respect and admire the avant-garde jazz musicians experimenting in the gloomy basements of NYC bars and college music buildings, I think the future of the genre in general will depend on whether forward-looking artists can figure out how to redefine the music in a way that connects with the public ear. Our high schools and colleges are graduating an abundance of music students familiar with the traditions of jazz music. Perhaps the problem, nowadays, isn’t the demand for this music, it’s the supply. Professional jazz musicians need to understand that if we wanted to hear Coltrane or Bird, we would buy their recordings. There’s no sense in rehashing something that was perfected fifty years ago. Norah Jones understands that, and hopefully others will follow in her success.

Comments

[TGL]

"While I respect and admire the avant-garde jazz musicians experimenting in the gloomy basements of NYC bars and college music buildings, I think the future of the genre in general will depend on whether forward-looking artists can figure out how to redefine the music in a way that connects with the public ear."

Fuck that. While you're right to say that the future of how the genre will be remembered in music history classes will be determined by the extent to which it connects with the public interest, you're wrong to suggest that the vitality (of the "future") of a music depends primarily on wide listenership and public acclaim. We'll discuss this over the phone.

Have you listened to Norah Jones's new album? Aside from the fact that it's terrible, she's biting Regina Spektor more than she is Ella.