This is a tricky one. Some players play anything that works. A few view their mission as one with an element of education.


What do you think?


Russ

I will throw in trivia and tidbits about songs or artists, but more for entertainment than education. Makes me look smart. Well, not THAT smart.
For example, did you know that Kris Kristopherson wrote Sunday Morning Coming Down. He wanted to get it to Johnny Cash, but couldn't. So he rented a helicopter, landed it on John's lawn and handed him the tape. John recorded it the next week and they both lived happily ever after. For a while.
DonM

I'm talking about the Winton Marsalis approach. That is using performance venues to introduce more complicated structures...to play obscure but historically significant pieces...concentrate on bookings for Jazz Arts Societies, Philharmonics, conduct workshops for younger players, etc.

You pay the price, in terms of less work and less pay, but a small contingent of players think that this is their mission.

I am involved in these and similar "awareness" efforts.


Question # 1: Anyone else?
Question # 2: See any value to this effort/approach to performance?


Russ

[This message has been edited by captain Russ (edited 05-17-2010).]

Well, I played Body and Soul in a Nashville honkytonk on lower broadway. Any of the normal jazz guys in town could have never stood up there and pulled it off, but because I have such a unique way of playing guitar, and because I'd played a few country tunes prior, the folks actually accepted it quite well.

Whenever I get church gigs, they're gonna hear some flat 9 sharp 11 chords on Amazing Grace whether they know it or not. LOL.

A country/bluegrass-ish record I produced for a client last month really never got more complex than a major 7th chord, but I did introduce a cellist and violinist into one of the balads. The client loved the idea, though he would have never thought to do it himself. So yeah, I try to put some level of artistic sophistication into everything I do.

Rory, wouldn't have expected anything else.


R.

I've pondered this before, and don't really know that I have an answer. Is it OK to dumb down the art in order to try to make it accessible to people? I mean, some folks think what I do is artsy fartsy, but others probably think I'm bastardizing the true art of jazz or classical music by trying to inject elements of it into what I do.

Is weather channel music educating people? It's certainly more harmonicly interesting than Lady Gaga, but true purest jazz guys loath it. The general public probably doesn't give it a thought at all; so is it serving any purpose as far as raising the musical awareness?

Strictly speaking, no, I don't...

But, I will routinely perform a tune that might not be in the top 100 for Retirement Communities or Animal Clubs.

It has to fit the audience of course, but beyond that, I just have to perform it well for the song to sell itself.

They aren't usually very sophisticated songs but usually no one else in this area plays them, so they work for me nicely.

Its kind of a trust thing, I've been told. Both NH and dance people have said they know that I'm not going to through something unsuitable out there, so they just go with it.

Examples would be Waltz of the Angels, Bella Notte, Fools Rush In, How's the World Treating You, etc.

Again, I don't claim that no one's playing these, but at least in this area, I'm not aware of anyone else doing them.

I hear quite often from people at my performances that other acts rarely add new material and plays the same stuff over and over again...

So in some lower brow way, I suppose my audiences get to hear and appreciate material they don't usually get to hear.

------------------
Bill in Dayton

I never really thought about it but I usually add jazz sensibilities to just about everthing I do. I play the same stuff as everyone else but every so often some one will tell me something like "I never heard that tune played like that before"
I guess that's a good thing. I would hate to play just like the recording. Not sure if I'm educating or not...

Well I reckon I'm not educating, just entertaining.
Seriously, as a rule I'm not interested in someone trying to educate me into enjoying a certain musical niche. Now Professor Russ, would be the exception. I'll sign up for your class any time my friend!
I used to go to a Jazz Club, The Rubiot, in Tulsa, when I was college age. But I was there because I thought it was the thing to do, not because I particularly liked it.
Even then, I could truly appreciate the talent level required, but I got really bored after about three songs, each lasting 9 or 10 minutes!
Gimme old Hank anytime. He will educate you about life it's ownself. (That's an obscure literary reference by the way, not just bad grammar!)
DonM Billy Clyde

[This message has been edited by DonM (edited 05-17-2010).]

I guess it depends if you are in a concert or a dance gig situation...

I'm sure Wynton didn't interrupt the dance floor (back when he MIGHT have been playing dance gigs!) to give a short lecture on Jazz History!

I just figure, if you are in a jazz club situation, the audience probably knows as much as you do, and really would prefer to hear music rather than a dissertation Me, I tend to feel trying to 'teach' the masses at a dance gig like the old saying... "Never try to teach a pig to sing- it wastes your time and annoys the pig"

I see your point, Diki. It would be impolite, at best, to try to conduct a pro seminar in any style of music at a party/entertainment venue
(bar, restaurant, etc.). I guess, then, my question is, how do hard line musicians make the choice of when to entertain and when to further the art form and introduce the "new and improved" end product to the public?

Is is worth dedicating your life to furthering the art form and suffering the consequences?(reduced jobs and income, less appreciation, etc.). Is there a compromise position where you can do both?

Again, we're talking about an issue that would matter to an academic or 100% musician and less to entertainer/musicians.

I really enjoy assisting young players understand more about musical history, structure and historic pieces of music.
And, I tend to choose a quiet restaurant where I can play more complex jazz standards, knowing the money and audiences are smaller.


But, I'm not an entertainer, and that always enters into the venue and material choices.

Perhaps it's enough to do what Rory, Montunoman and, I'm sure Diki, Chas and others do...find a middle spot. Play recognized materials, with sophisticated changes, and hope "someone" out there recognizes and appreciates the effort.

Russ



[This message has been edited by captain Russ (edited 05-18-2010).]

And, Don, I could certainly learn a lot from you. Wouldn't it be fun to work as a duo? I really believe, factoring in the friendship/fun element, the preference for different styles would become a minor issue.

Of course, we'd have to negotiate the "Buffet" issue (LOL)!Or, feature me playing (UGH) Buffet tunes overdriven guitar/punk (make that Grandpa punk) style...lots of distortion...spandex overalls...a la Cheech and Chong!

Now, even I would pay big bucks to see that!


Russ

One thing about the New Orleans area within 100 miles or so in either direction, and with-in New Orleans itself, there are many different genres of music such as, Rock and Roll, Rhythm and Blues, Straight up Jazz, Dixieland Jazz, Country, Rock a Billy, Zydeco, Pop, and many more I can't even name and some I don't care to mention. I mean on one corner there is country on the next corner there is R&R, on another corner, there may be Dixieland Jazz.

You really need to be able to play a bit of each to work steady. Just knowing the tunes is enough for the local guys. The Marsalis’ are an exception.

Besides, Cajun’s are known to drink and party a lot. Therefore, I do not believe they would get much from the effort of trying to educate them about different aspects of artist and their music.

Here in Colorado I do maybe 20 or 30 sort of country tunes. I do not know much about country artist and tunes to educate the audience. Some folks in this area sneer at Desafinado, Fly Me To The Moon, Polka Dots And Moon beams etc. The retirement homes are best for me, All I have to do is play and entertain.

Russ you’re lucky. You get to play for folks who appreciate what you’re doing for the most part I am sure.


[This message has been edited by brickboo (edited 05-18-2010).]

Russ, I think this thread is closely tied to Your 'why do you play?' thread. If you're motivated primarily by money, then educating your audience is the last thing on your mind; in fact, you MIGHT be more interested in their educating YOU......on which tunes generate the biggest tips and are most likely to assure you a return trip.

We've discussed the differences between being a musician and an entertainer many times ('though they don't HAVE to be mutually exclusive). I say, if you want to be spiritually happy but financially sad, be a musician; if your main goal is to make money, then be an entertainer. If you want to be a musician AND make money, then you'd better be at least as good as Wynton Marsalis AND carry a rabbit's foot around for good measure.

All lovers of the more complex forms of music, such as jazz or classical, would like to see more sophisticated audiences. I'm sure my wife wishes I would turn off '24' and watch 'The English Patient' but it probably ain't gonna happen.

Frankly (and sadly), I don't know if an audience even CAN BE educated once they hit adulthood. That probably has to happen early on in one's development and supported and promoted by one's earliest influences (usually the parents). If you happen to be born to poor dirt farmers in rural Mississippi, it's going to be a looooong road before you start appreciating Monk OR Beethoven. Luck of the draw, baby, that's all. Anyhoo, if you want to do something, start by making sure the music program in your local school is not the first victim of budget cuts. The road to being a (really cool) jazz lover starts there .

chas

I know some people that know NOTHING about jazz, but still appreciate listening to it. They wouldn't know a Basie tune from an Ellington, but they listen to both!

That's the wonderful thing about music... it bypasses the higher levels in your brain and speaks directly to the emotions, no education required! (thank God! Where would we all be if you NEEDED an educated audience? )

That's all the academization of music is, IMO... an effort to quantify, to explain WHY some pieces of music induce strong emotion, and some don't. But a dirt farmer in the middle of nowhere can decide for himself if he likes it or not. And that in and of itself is the battle won or lost...

Yes, the less educated, the better I sound

Chas, you are right. the "Why do you play?" post and this one are almost extensions of each other.


R.