Blog 3

Blog 3

Given that race has always been a discourse in the history of jazz, why did race become explicitly written and talked about in the 1930’s in the “Swing Era?”

Race has been central to jazz music since its inception but the “Swing Era” brought it to the forefront of public attention. Due to the vast unemployment of the Great Depression, the opinions of politically inclined critics and the marginalization of black performers by the new national market the question of race became an extremely prominent issue relating to jazz.

Although jazz music had always been a genre associated with African-Americans and rebellion, during the 1930’s and 40’s it took on a more explicit set of ideological meanings. Previously jazz had simply elicited a range of negative comments but now many of the writers who criticized or reviewed jazz sought to define a political meaning for the music (Swing Changes, 53). The discussions in the journals of the time, such as ‘Down Beat’ and ‘Metronome’, reflected these controversies. Questions like “Did African-Americans play better jazz than whites?” would be debated in issue after issue, drawing heated responses from readers and specialists alike (Swing Changes, 54). Probably the most central figure to these debates was John Hammond, “identified by his contemporaries as the most influential person in the swing industry” (Swing Changes, 54). His writing was often featured in these notable jazz journals and characterizes the political debates that were now being applied to jazz music. In a 1935 article, “Hammond castigated Ellington for distancing himself and his music from the troubles of his people” critiquing him as much on political as musical grounds (Swing Changes, 51). With articles like this becoming commonplace in the jazz commentaries and journals of the “Swing Era” it is inevitable that race would become explicitly written and talked about. 

However, while these critiques and publications did exert vast influence over the issue of race nothing had a greater impact than the Great Depression. Record sales in the U.S had surpassed one hundred million in 1927, but by 1932 they had declined by over 90 percent (Gioia, 127). This had a detrimental effect on the jazz world seriously exacerbating the competition between whites and blacks. Black musicians now had direct competitors with better access to the market and greater resources. White bandleaders were more readily accepted by mainstream America and they typically encountered easier working conditions, received higher pay and had more secure careers (Gioia, 133). Given these circumstances it is not hard to believe that race was a major talking point of the “Swing Era”. The Depression certainly brought about great hardship, but for some it brought opportunity with the creation of a national market for jazz. The introduction of the radio allowed ones music to be heard across the whole country bringing in fame, publicity and income on an unprecedented scale. A few instrumentalists were performing the work that previously required hundreds of bands, doing irreparable damage to most players (Gioia, 128). Furthermore, the larger the market is the more intermediaries one needs to have, “as finance, technology, and artistic production became even more intertwined, a new class of entrepreneur grew in importance: the talent agent” (Gioia, 128). This enabled jazz distribution to the market to be controlled by white agents like Joe Glaser and Irving Mills. These factors increased the opportunity for white bands to play to white audiences and marginalize black musicians. This increasingly made the issue of race more deeply entrenched with jazz. The fact that many jazz enthusiasts berated Benny Goodman’s hiring of Fletcher Henderson as a white musician exploiting the achievements of a black innovator shows how explicitly the issue of race was being debated during the 1930’s.

In conclusion, the “Swing Era” brought about many changes to jazz music. The great depression and the innovation of the radio pushed black performers even further down the economic scale with both successful and unsuccessful white musicians limiting their opportunities. When coupled with the political ideas that were circulated to the public, race was unavoidably able to become explicitly written and talked about during this time period.

Commented on Morgan Brubaker's blog

Blog 2

The Importance of New York to Jazz

Chicago was a city deeply entrenched with jazz in the 1920’s, producing some outstanding artists and giving the music an environment where it could thrive. However, what New York offered far surpassed that of the Windy City. It was the bustling centre of American culture and the creative and competitive demands of the city produced new forms of jazz and took the genre to greater heights.

The conditions of New York city made it a perfect setting for the growth and development of jazz music. With the Harlem Renaissance, during the 1920’s, black cultural and intellectual life was able to blossom, “In this new setting an entire cultural elite had come together, drawing confidently on the full range of human expression” (Gioia 89). However, despite this side of Harlem there was another much darker one reflecting the cruel realities of life. These realities came in the form of economic strife such as low salaries and daunting rent payment. The interactions between these two sides are one of the major factors that enabled jazz to triumph in the city. While the developing intellectual, creative side of Harlem set the cultural context for jazz the harsh economies and rent parties of the neighborhood created the music (Gioia 90). But what New York offered that no other city could was Broadway. The city was the center of American Theatre giving creative minds an even greater platform to flourish on. Performers like Louis Armstrong and Fats Waller now had opportunities to play in the various orchestras that accompanied these productions and even feature in them which only made them richer and more famous. Furthermore, the racial situation of New York helped contribute to the success of jazz. Despite being a largely black population in Harlem many of the African Americans looked down on the jazz musicians perceiving this southern style of music as unsophisticated. They wanted to be able to identify themselves with the higher, whiter echelons of society and thus condemned the cultures that migrated to New York from places like New Orleans. Therefore, in order to best satisfy these cultural desires, the musicians of the city had to create something new out of the crucible of New York.

The community pressure to respond to their temporal and spatial environment forced those with genius to produce new forms of music that wouldn’t exist if they weren’t in that environment (Lecture 1/29). One of these that I feel highlights New York city was stride piano with the most famous New York stride musicians being James P. Johnson, Willie “The Lion” Smith and Fats Waller. Stride piano playing became popular in New York alongside particular styles of dancing and was a key component to the Harlem rent parties. Harlem stride piano, “stood as a bridge between the ragtime idiom of the turn of the century and the new jazz piano styles that were in the process of evolution” (Gioia 91). This competitive world of New York stride piano playing is highlighted by James P. Johnson. Although he wrote many popular songs, some broadway shows and even a one-act opera it is as “the Father of Harlem Stride Piano” that James P. Johnson will always be best known (James P. Johnson article, 30). Johnson’s music linked the worlds of ragtime and jazz but what made him special was his ability to look outside of these styles for techniques he could apply to his compositions. His desire to find these new styles to improve the appeal of his playing highlights the competitiveness of the New York jazz scene. While there may have been better musicians, “few artists of his day sensed so clearly the latent potential of African American music or worked so vigorously to bring it into reality”(Gioia 93).

Although Chicago was very important to the development of jazz New York offered it a larger capitalist nexus. The city allowed jazz to flourish with its creative competitiveness and the economic stimulus it provided..



commented on Steven Bennett's blog

Matthew Oldcorn, Blog 1-

New Orleans: the Cultural Melting Pot of America

19th Century America was a time of great change and progress and one of the cities at the centre of this was New Orleans. With the lifting of trade restrictions on the Mississippi River, following the Louisiana purchase, the economy in New Orleans blew up and soon the city would enter into a, “period of unprecedented prosperity” (Gioia, 27). With the docks bringing in around $200 million worth of freight in 1951 there was a lot disposable cash going around the city and all sorts of different people were able to mix in “The District” (Gioia, 27).  This amalgamation of cultures was pushed further when the Louisiana Legislative Code No.111 was passed. Now anyone of African ancestry was designated a Negro preventing the elitist, European Creoles from disassociating themselves from the black population. Slowly these different cultures were forced closer together and not only in social arenas but also “in the musical subculture of New Orleans” (Gioia, 32). All of this migration of people and goods is one of the main factors that enabled jazz to develop in New Orleans and when combined with the cosmopolitan aspect of the city the foundations for the jazz movement were set. 

When considering the sources of New Orleans jazz one must first look at the musical styles before it. One of these was the Blues which was a style that was able to grow after the civil war. It was a new musical form that emerged with a new black identity and aspects like the unique voices it provided inspired the early jazz musicians. Another musical style that came before jazz was ragtime which Gioia says, “rivals the blues in importance- and perhaps surpasses it in influence- as a predecessor to early jazz” (Gioia, 21). However, jazz is characterized by individuals and strong personalities so we must also look at the people that started the movement. The first name that comes to mind is Buddy Bolden who “is often cited as the first jazz musician” (Gioia, 33). He characterizes the idea of being a source of New Orleans jazz as he was was able to combine both the rhythms of ragtime and the bent notes and cord patterns of the blues (Gioia, 34). His “ragged and raucous” musical style became something that musicians tried to emulate and thus became a key element to jazz music. 

I think it is difficult to say that there is one factor that surpasses all others in an explanation of why jazz emerged in New Orleans. The impact of the city’s growing economy was imperative and furthermore it possessed a “cosmopolitan environment that few cities in the New World could match” thus saying one thing was more important than the other is a hard thing to do (Gioia, 27).What further asserts this point is the contribution of Mexican immigrants to New Orleans jazz. They arrived after performing at the World’s Industrial and Cotton Centennial Exposition in New Orleans, 1884, and from this point on the Mexican influence,“would echo in the jazz and blues of this region” (Johnson, 225). Hart’s music store on Canal Street published over eighty Mexican compositions during the late nineteenth century, a testament to its popularity (Gioia, 9). 

The nature of New Orleans as a city is one that characterizes jazz. The modern, new, urban style with questionable ethics is something that is captured by both the city and the music it produced. The blend of cultures it possessed helped make jazz what it is but is also the main reason why you can’t place superior importance on only one influence.

>commented on Addison Jerlow's blog