Until cutting-edge pianist Vijay Iyer shows mastery of the tradition, guest blogger Brandon Mezzelo remains a skeptic about him and contemporary “egghead” jazz.
 | |
| Brandon Mezzelo |
Guest post: I have asked Brandon to contribute a piece to this blog in hope of broadening its perspective. Because I am a listener, not a player, I enjoy partaking broadly from the jazz buffet, and I enjoy most of what I consume. Players, having invested a lifetime pursuing a personal vision of the music, often have a much more passionate and defined point of view. [I have addressed Vijay Iyer and this video in a previous post.]
Brandon’s post follows —
Vijay Iyer is arguably the most successful and well-respected jazz musician currently on the scene. Downbeat loves him — he won five awards in the magazine’s 2012 critic’s poll, and he’s on nearly every cover that Esperanza Spalding isn’t.
But as I listened to this recent clip (above) of the next great innovator, I was left feeling quite mystified and unfulfilled. I am not an expert, I wouldn’t claim to have the same level of chops, and I may not have paid my full share of musical dues (which in the modern era refers to numbers of degrees in music and performance you accumulate, not actually paying your dues in a life of playing).
However, the trend of this generation is confusing to me to say the least. In my humble mind, this is not even remotely a solid representation of jazz/swing/bop or any of the things that for me made New York City the great mothership of jazz and soul. I respect this new music for what it is, but I don't see any real genius in it at all. I hear more genius in guys playing much less esoteric music but with far more passion and devotion.
I remember a story from when I was at the Army School of Music. I had to take my final audition to graduate from the program. I was really nervous and not sure what piece to perform. My instructor suggested I go to the library and find a piece that is not often played. This made sense to me. If the judges didn’t know the piece that well, how could they judge it too harshly? They would listen for tone and basic technique, but really it would be over so fast they wouldn't be able to nit-pick me to death over the mistakes.
So I played the piece and took all the liberties that I could come up with, lots of tempo changes (to help me through the hard parts) and lots of physical emotion and gyrating to help sell the performance.
In the end what did I get? A mediocre score for a job half well done.
It’s not that the piece was bad or that my playing was terrible, but with all that messing around, I didn’t show that I had mastered the essentials of the program.
In the same way, I think these “advanced” players would be wise and more interesting if they played some music that we all know and pass their tests in that realm before jumping off the cliff to immortal self-indulged stardom. Can Vijay bop? Can he play a ballad? Isn't that also pretty important in our business of making the jazz?
This cerebral egghead music is cool, for the sake that it is cool. Nobody is up there rehashing “All Blues” or “Blue Bossa” (both excellent tunes by the way). But I will have a lot more respect for these guys when they come out and pay tribute to this great art form in genuine dues-paying style.
Burn it up, play some damn changes that make some sense. Get out “Giant Steps” and “Body and Soul” and show me and the world that you really deserve to be on every damn cover of Downbeat. Until then I remain skeptical that your legacy is really relevant.
1 comment:
To be honest, in having discussed this with you before, I find that a LOT of "Modern" Jazz leaves me cold. Sure, it is chop-heavy, well thought out and a technical marvel but, in the end, the Music just doesn't seem to do much for me. I find, so many times, that when I hear stuff like this, I scramble for my recordings of the masters of the past, almost in an attempt to make sense of it all.
So many times, someone will ask me how I feel about a certain player or singer, as the case may be, and I, invariably, wind up saying that I would "rather listen to Hank Mobley or Anita O'Day and get it from the source"!
There are some wonderful players out there. I just question the Music, in totality. Being an innovator is over-rated, in my own opinion. I hear too many players that have command of their instruments, yet seem to have no history of the Music to form a basis for what they do.
Jazz CAN entertain and enlighten, but I hear too much from some players that seems to alienate the listener. For what it is worth, I think that the Music CAN reach people if you let it. It doesn't mean you are selling out. I have always found it good to try to present things to the public that they can, somewhat, relate to, instead of playing ugly, disjointed Music for the sake of trying to be "hip".
For me, I try to find a bridge between the old and the new, so as to entertain AND educate the listener. Too much of the new stuff, to me, is a showcase for technique, odd meters, vague chord changes and difficulty, yet lacking in any real substance.
Brent Vaughan
Post a Comment