[JPL] Get Out'Tha Ghetto!
MERRILLFLA at aol.com
MERRILLFLA at aol.com
Fri Aug 8 13:06:20 EDT 2008
Amen !!!!! Miles (I love the Name)
You are right on target."If they hear it they will dig it"
I play Jazz in the straight ahead tradition. I get calls from people who are
not Jazz aficionados who happen to hear something with a Beat or a Vocal
that's understandable that they like.That's what makes them a listener.
Getting too technical about the music can turn them off and they could care
less about the label and who is playing (ith some exceptions of course)The
New Listener doesn't know them anyway and doesn't want a music appreciation
course.It scares them away.The regular listener gets the idea and already knows
the details most of the time.
You don't need to be a baseball player to enjoy a baseball game or a
musician to enjoy Jazz
Listen and enjoy it.The rest will follow.
"Melodious Mel" Lipton
" Jazz Party"
WDNA 88.9 FM Miami
In a message dated 8/8/2008 11:35:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mileswillis at wpfw.org writes:
Dear Mr. Davis,
I think that I understand your sentiments but must take strong
exception to your characterization of a commitment to playing 'pure'
jazz as some stubborn 'ghetto-ization' of the music that may
ultimately lead to it's disappearance from the radio airwaves.
I assume that what you are hinting at is the mixing of music that
is referred to as 'smooth' or 'contemporary' along with jazz for the
purpose of gaining greater general audience appeal. You go on to infer
that doing so will lead to "developing a mindset... that programs jazz
as a part of an interesting, challenging, sophisticated general music
format", as though the playing of ONLY jazz cannot precipitate such a
development. This thought makes apparent that you, inexplicably, do
not find jazz itself to be 'interesting, sophisticated and
challenging' on it's own and can only become so by diluting it's
presention with non-jazz music.
Being that you are (or claim to be) a jazz radio programmer, I'm
deeply troubled by your assertion that we must 'rid (ourselves) of the
idea that (we)... owe something to this genre... (or that) it must be
kept "pure"'!? First of all, it is the musicians who keep it the art
form "pure" by respecting and absorbing it's traditions as
they continue it's evolvement. Even more disconcerting is your belief
that it is BOTH musicians and radio people who are responsible for
this 'ghetto-ization', which you define, rather clumsily, as "making
music that appeals primarily to academic circles--conservatory
musicians and a few fellow travellers". While I do acknowledge that
some of jazz' more abstract forms/genres are difficult for even some
of it's most avid fans to appreciate, there is no reason why the more
traditional and/or mainstream works cannot have more broad popular
appeal far beyond the conservatories and academic circles,
particularly if it... you know, swings.
You blame the music and the 'purity' with which we stubbornly
present it as the reason for it's disappearance from radio, implying
is that a larger potential audience awaits if we'd all just 'lighten
up'. The truth is that too few people ever get to hear jazz in the
first place. We, the musicians and 'radio people', need to promote the
music to, shall we say, 'underserved' populations. Let's go to the
schools, community centers, bookstores, etc. to talk about and play
this great music for those who've never had the opportunity to hear
it, which would include just about everyone, everwhere. The music can
create it own demand or, to paraphrase, 'if they hear it they will dig
it'. For nearly a century jazz has stood upon its own merits,
diluting, however well-intentioned, it is the surest path toward its
WPFW - Washington, DC
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
More information about the jazzproglist