I recently began reading the companion book to Ken Burns' documentary on the history of jazz. The book (at least what I have read so far) is really interesting. However, from numerous but vague comments that occasionally pop up on other threads, this film doesn't seem to be held in very high regard by jazz purists. Being a historian/educator I am very familiar with Burns' best known project about the Civil War. While it was interesting, well made, and exposed millions to viewers to the war for the first time, it did distort some facts. For example, the film gives the impression that the war was solely about ending/preserving slavery, but most historians feel that the big issue was states' rights (with the slavery issue being a major part of that larger disagreement). So, is there a similar problem with the jazz docmentary? I have not personally seen the film but am just curious.