New book explores topic of frequent debate on Jass Bored

[Ian Thumwood]

I wonder if anyone had picked up on this book review?

https://www.allaboutjazz.com/in-with-the-in-crowd-book-review

The book looks at the conflicts between art and commerciality within Black American culture in the 1960's. This is a debate which has been mulled over on this bored for as long as I can remember but Mike Smith's new book appears to take a fresh approach in assessing what jazz remains in the public consciousness and contrasts it with aspects of jazz which were once popular yet are no longer so highly regarded within the jazz audience. I think that Bluesnik will be very interested although I can envisage that the conclusions and examples that appear to ve given in the book will perplex the likes of SA.

There appear to be some really salient points that are being made, especially with regard to how it has been white critics and jazz fans who have helped define which jazz musicians are seem as being "important" as opposed to those perceived as selling out. The snippets off some interesting points as they run counter to some of the arguments that have often been presented here about musicians such as Cannonball Adderley, Ramsey Lewis , Orentte Coleman and Albert Alyer. I was surprised by some of the assessments noted within the review such as Adderley did not consider Ornette highly although the "popular" misperceptions of Adderely by the jazz audience were something I was aware of since I first discovered his music. At his best, he was terrific.

There seems to be masses for debate here. For many of the people posting here, I feel that there is a tendancy to conisder "Black jazz" as being genuinely authentic and perhaps some will cut more commercial artists like Ramsey Lewis less slack that say, a dud record by an avant garde musician. The premise of this book could be quite boring but the perspectives offered strike me as being quite refreshing. I like the idea that there is another way at looking at what these musicians were producing, whether it was any good and why, perhaps, their music has not sustained the kind of repuation it deserves.

Has anyone read this book or does anyone have any thoughts on the issues raised in the review? I am tempted by this , although I already have a mountain of books to get through.

[Serial_Apologist]

Although I am on All about Jazz's emailing list I must have overlooked this book. I have to say the review is very badly written. One book that has come recently to my attention is Alan Stanbridge's Rhythm Changes. Alan, whom I knew in the 1980s when he was in Bristol, now teaches and lives in America. Rhythm Changes has evoked strong opinions; in the past couple of days I've been following an angry online discussion between Alan and Vijay Iyer on Facebook. The arguments are based very much in the longstanding criticism of a number of black American, mainly avant-garde jazz musicians of repute of white musicologists and critics, and how they treat the issue of race, citing Stanbridge in this light - to which Stanbridge answers that none of his critics have actually read the book but have gleaned their assessments from superficial social media exchanges. Those who know much more than me will appreciate essential differences distinguishing Black Studies, starting from a sociological standpoint, from Jazz Studies, where the starting point is music-based, and sometimes narrowly academically so; but it all goes to show how careful one has to be in making judgements of any kind when writing on jazz in this age where the political accent is heavily slanted towards Identity.

http://www.routledge.com/Rhythm-Changes-Jazz-Culture-Discourse/Stanbridge/p/book/9781032251899

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

This does looks interesting if it lives up to the blurb and is detailed, although the basic thesis is surely not that original? I will probably buy it. Smith's have it listed for June at c.£30. I'll look out for what the Organissimo crew make of it as well.

[Ian Thumwood]

i agree that the premise is not new but,if the review is correct, the perspective might be quite original.


Oneof the most interesting books I have read in the last ten years about music is Elijah Wald's "Escaping the Delta" which, in one chapter, sought to understand what kind of music black audiences were listening to on Juke boxes in the 1930s with a view to understanding what it was that appealed. From recollection, the results were not unexpected although the conclusion that blues records were primarily bought by Afro-American women as opposed their men folk reflected the reality of who had disposable income. The results were fascinating.

By the same token, jazz musicians in the 20s and 30s were often frustrated in how white music executives sought to ensure that the material that was recorded reflected the whote perceptions of what black music should sound like. As a consequence, the records left by bands such as Fletcher Henderson's orchestra was skewed insofar that commerical / vocal / dance music rarely made it on to disc despite the fact that this is often what was played for black audiences. A prime example of this is Dave Dexter whose name often crops up in relation to bands he recorded for the Decca label (There are tracks by both Basie and Jay McShann where he was the dedicatee) who also had an ear open for Decca's market in Europe which was certainly more jazz-orientated.

Smith's book seems to explore similar issues albeit some thirty year's later. The comments did remind me of a remark I read on "All about jazz" a few days ago which startled me as it made the same observation I had regarding Herbie Hancock and Pat Metheny who are probably unique in the resepct that they have the ability to capture a fan base beyond jazz by creating high quality and sophicated jazz. I would concur that there are other musicians in jazz who could do this in the past but I would agree that Hancock and Methemy are unique in 2024. The scenario Smith's book seem to take was certainly much more relevant in the 1960s. Regrettably, I do not feel the argument matters these days because jazz is rapidly becoming less the signature of black, American musical identity and nowadays reflects global academia. This is partly why I have no interest in following the likes of Vijay Iyer ranting on Facebook with an academic on Canada about issues of cultural / tribal identity politics. Notwithstanding the fact that I not on Facebook, it is an argument that probably does not matter on 2024 because so few people are listening to jazz and much of the jazz that does exist is strugging to be relevant. In my opinion, this is not an issue solely for jazz but for music as a whole as people consue their music differently and have less interest in seeing it performed live unless it plugs into some kind of nostalgia. If there is an agument, then it is probably more appropriate to take a decade like the 1960s when Miles Davis "lost" a large part of his audience, when Blue Note could put out records which featured songs that were snapped up for TV advertising campaigns, when good quality jazz could still be considered middle-of-the road and when it was white, Jewish liberals like Bernstein who were championing black avant garde musicians like Ornette Coleman.

[Alyn_Shipton]

I have read Alan Stanbridge's book and my review was in Jazzwise last year. You can view the page from the magazine on Alan's webpage here: https://alanstanbridge.com/rhythm-ch...ure-discourse/ (It just happens to be adjacent to another interesting book...)

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

"Adjacent"!

I can heartily recommend Alyn's OUP book on the Gerry Mulligan quartets which actually spreads wider. A great read that I got through in one and a bit sitting.

"Blues going up" by Mulligan is a track that first got me into jazz and the interplay and spontaneity still fascinates.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Btw just ordered up Bob Porter's book "Soul Jazz" which came out in 2016 and appears to cover similar ground. Porter produced a shed load of records and had a fine weekend slot on WBGO.


"Soul Jazz" is a history of jazz and its reception in the black community in the period from the end of World War II until the end of the Vietnam War. Previous histories reflect the perspective of an integrated America, yet the United States was a segregated country in 1945. The black audience had a very different take on the music and that is the perception explored in Soul Jazz."

[Ian Thumwood]

By and large, books about jazz are very difficult to put down. It is rare if I haven't finished a book about jazz within a week or two and have similarly had some book that I have cleared in a few sittings. When books start getting published for sale at around £100 a pop, I have to admit that this is not really reasonable, I spent more on antique books and have similar "coffee table" books on other subjects that interest me but I begurdge paying out the sums quoted in the book mentioned by SA. If the book is not going to take such a short time to read, I would rather spend the money on a paperback by someone like Ian Rankin who I would polish off on the same time. The recent book about Chick Webb was good value for money and fascinated me . I think "in with the in crowd" book is part of the same series.

Picking up on SA;s comments about All about Jazz, I do find that this website does have a particular house style. It never seems to have much interest in jazz from before Charlie Parker and seems to concentrate on more of the modern mainstream and not so much on the more reknowned musicians. I have never heard of 90% of the musicians whose records they review. It does colour my perception of what they review.It is also a site where the reviews always seem to be positive.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Btw just ordered up Bob Porter's book "Soul Jazz" which came out in 2016 and appears to cover similar ground. Porter produced a shed load of records and had a fine weekend slot on WBGO.


"Soul Jazz" is a history of jazz and its reception in the black community in the period from the end of World War II until the end of the Vietnam War. Previous histories reflect the perspective of an integrated America, yet the United States was a segregated country in 1945. The black audience had a very different take on the music and that is the perception explored in Soul Jazz."

Just received this and quite disappointed. I was expecting a lot more of the economics, sociology, stats etc, very little of that is here and what is is interspersed into short (sometimes bland) biogs of players and producers etc.

A shame because Porter worked in the industry and was an producer/ associate of Gene Ammons and Grant Green etc etc. It also has the hallmarks of being self published. A good editor could have maybe pulled it together.

So, onto the next...

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

* one thing I learnt from this book, and there are lots of these snippets to be fair ...

Hal Singer's "Cornbread", tenor sax honking from 1948, a big hit with the black community and something of a template for similar "artistry", featured a v. young (16 ).Wynton Kelly on piano, his recording debut. We are a long way from Miles Toto!

http://youtu.be/dv9F-m9WJa8?feature=shared

[Ian Thumwood]

Thanks for posting the review.

It is a shame when you hold out hopes on a book and it is rubbish. Someone who worked for a book shop told me about the issue with some publishing houses. I had picked up two books about later Roman Britain which is something that interests me a great deal. Both were published by Amberley and I struggled to understand them. One concerned Geoffrey of Monmouth;s "History of the Kings of Britain" and was about the alleged accuracy of a book which has long since been ridiculed and about an "supposed" missing source. I really struggled to follow the argument. A second book was about Magnus Maximus also quickly went down a rabbit hole concerning Welsh folklore and late anquity memorial stones. It eas effectively a list of people's names Again, the book was so poorly edited that it was impossible to follow one page at a time. I gave up about 70% as i was not retaining anything and could not understand it. Apparently ths is not uncommon with small, independent publishers sho do not have the budget for an editor. Ultimately you end up with books like these which are unreadable.I would tend to be wary of Amberley in future although they do have some very interesting titles.

I am also having issues with books written by Spanish writers that have been translated in to English. A book I read abut Megellan last year was dreadful and failed to capture the excitement of the adventure which was a total disaster. Another novel by Isabell Allende was stacked full of stereotypes and nowhere as near as good as the blurb would have you believe. I am currently reading a book about the evolution of football in Uruguay in 1876 -1917 and whist interesting, the phrasing by the South American writer is a bit odd.

In a nutshell, I think some technical books can be pricey but not especially well put together. I feel that if an author can produce a dull book on either history or jazz, it is almost criminal. These books should be gripping and not a slogg to read.