Probably silly to post so long after initial thread, but my take is that the jazz purists (only partially autobiographical) kept watering at the mouth at all of that great footage (remember kids - this was before YouTube had so much available jazz footage) that they'd been dying to see for years and then got caught blueballs (or bells for all of our female jazzheads) when 30 seconds into Wayne's solo the show suddenly cuts to Wynton or Ken telling us how it is. What could they possibly say that is more important than listening to the music?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass What is it about Ken Burns?
- Thread starter Steve Killingsworth
- Start date
As a bassist I have to say that series was a bit insulting. Jazz is dance music. You cant have serious discussion about dance music and barely discuss the impact of and changes to the rhythm section. It's like Eddie Murphy said: "Are you dancing to the words or are you dancing to the beat?"
And, lest we forget, both Mr. Burns and Mr. Crotch (who, BTW, called Bill Evans "a punk"), simply became mouthpieces for Mr. Marsalis, at least in this period. Wynton has, by most reports that I've heard, grown up to degree.
I remember seeing a TV series with Wynton where he was playing classical trumpet with an orchestra and a Jazz big band - he switched between the two and was very impressive and good at communicating what was going on - great for kids to learn about music!
But it always stuck with me that he was approaching Jazz like it was classical repertoire....? Which it of course is not and what makes Jazz distinctive, is that the fact that you cannot just say : " and now I am going to play a Jazz tune" - it's as much about how you play and not about the material.
So - in the BG forums I often see this fundamental misunderstanding of what Jazz is - and I think this is what Wynton's approach is promoting and films like Ken Burns' are saying : "this is Jazz" - and it perpetuates this fundamental error about the nature of Jazz!
But it always stuck with me that he was approaching Jazz like it was classical repertoire....? Which it of course is not and what makes Jazz distinctive, is that the fact that you cannot just say : " and now I am going to play a Jazz tune" - it's as much about how you play and not about the material.
So - in the BG forums I often see this fundamental misunderstanding of what Jazz is - and I think this is what Wynton's approach is promoting and films like Ken Burns' are saying : "this is Jazz" - and it perpetuates this fundamental error about the nature of Jazz!
Of course, one of Burns' other big odes to nostalgia and the-good-things-that-used-to-be is his Baseball series. And I see this fall he's doing an "extra innings" follow up in which there will be plenty of comment on steroids and (I presume) all the other evils that have brought the game down. My tongue's in my cheek when I say this, but I wonder if he's brewing up any parting shots directed at the last 50 years of jazz?
I think we should remember that Burns make this for the general public, not for musicians. Yes, it was the gospel according to Wynton which was a one sided view, some of which bugs me. But I have many non musical friends who learned a few things about jazz from it and they would like to learn more. I usually start by telling them about Bill Evans, who most of Wyntons family along with mister crotch dismisses. Dips****s.
But that's a big part of the annoyance - that many non-musical people learned that Jazz died in 1959 and was only ressurected by Wynton as suitable 'repertoire' .....for virtuosi to play!
But that's a big part of the annoyance - that many non-musical people learned that Jazz died in 1959 and was only ressurected by Wynton as suitable 'repertoire' .....for virtuosi to play!
I agree Bruce. So it's up to guys like us to help educate our friends, 1 at a time if we must.
The scuttle on the street is that Burns basically deferred to Wynton Marsalis about who to include in the documentary. If you ask me (and no one did or is likely to), any comprehensive survey of Jazz that leaves out Josef Zawinul is bogus.
JS
JS
It also seems pretty sinful to leave out Jaco Pastorious as well. But alas, too many cords on stage to be jazz... 
Well I think Weather Report would have to at least be mentioned, in any serious history of Jazz post-1960s..?
And maybe Chick Corea as well.
The claim that jazz somehow "died" when fusion came on the scene becomes a bit dubious when coupled with the strong implication that it took 30 years or so before Wynton and his buddies would become the saviors of jazz.
I remember a gig once where a guitarist friend farted into the the trumpet players mouthpiece while he wasn't looking. Classic reaction from the trumpeter. I bet that might break some of Wynton's insufferable "coolness".
I just love how jazz died when the electric bass showed up. Its like playing rock and roll in church...
The claim that jazz somehow "died" when fusion came on the scene becomes a bit dubious when coupled with the strong implication that it took 30 years or so before Wynton and his buddies would become the saviors of jazz.
I remember a gig once where a guitarist friend farted into the the trumpet players mouthpiece while he wasn't looking. Classic reaction from the trumpeter. I bet that might break some of Wynton's insufferable "coolness".
I just love how jazz died when the electric bass showed up. Its like playing rock and roll in church...
Chick was the biggest omission to me. I'm not hurt that none of the fusion bands were included since it's a miniseries about straight ahead jazz, but Chick is important to straight ahead too. Just out of curiosity, who do you folks think would have been a more appropriate spokesman than Wynton? Assuming that they were looking for someone that a casual viewer might have heard of and who's also knowledgeable about jazz from the roots onward. Billy Taylor is the only person I can think of. Or Branford Marsalis
There have to be dozens and dozens of people who could speak knowingly and authoritatively about aspects of jazz. The biggest historiographical flaw in Burns' series -- and he must know this, it's History 101 material -- is how much he let a single point of view dominate his presentation. No matter how good the series is -- and I think there's plenty good about it -- it will always have that fatal flaw. It's one-sided and incomplete, plain and simple.
Burns would probably argue that he had Gary Giddins in there too -- not just Marsalis and Crouch and Murray, whose point of view seems to have provided the entire framework for the series -- but nobody seems to remember Gary's contribution.
Burns would probably argue that he had Gary Giddins in there too -- not just Marsalis and Crouch and Murray, whose point of view seems to have provided the entire framework for the series -- but nobody seems to remember Gary's contribution.
WHY are we talking about something that was on television in 2002?
Theodore W. Rollins.
Elvin Jones.
Alice Coltrane -- student of Bud Powell, among other things.
Chick, as you note.
Billy Taylor? Can you name two Billy Taylor records? Does Billy Taylor convey the image of contemporary, vital jazz music?
No argument here.
The first name which came to mind is Herbert J. Hancock.
Theodore W. Rollins.
Elvin Jones.
Alice Coltrane -- student of Bud Powell, among other things.
Chick, as you note.
Billy Taylor? Can you name two Billy Taylor records? Does Billy Taylor convey the image of contemporary, vital jazz music?
How about Christian Mcbride? His playing is strongly based in traditional jazz while representing equally well on DB and BG.
Jake deVilliers
Commercial User
- May 24, 2006
- 6,349
- 607
- Disclosures
- Owner of The Bass Spa, String Repairman at Long & McQuade Vancouver
To my eyes both Christian McBride and Wynton Marsalis are far too young to have been guides for Burns' show.
Any of the people that Sam mentions above would have been far better qualified, or Hank Jones, say.
Someone who's lived through some of the changes in the music and can see both forwards and backwards.
Any of the people that Sam mentions above would have been far better qualified, or Hank Jones, say.
Someone who's lived through some of the changes in the music and can see both forwards and backwards.
