• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Why aren't there any degree programs for the Blues?

Yep. Whenever I hear someone say "_______ stole _______'s music." I go, "Hmmm...I'm hearing lots of traditional diatonic harmony and V-I cadences. Where'dya appropiate that from?" :D
Well, lots of R&B was cleaned up and presented to new audiences by... um... somewhat more palatable artists for the masses. Read into that what you will. You're probably right.

I'm a big fan of R&B and I think it's important to honor its roots, but there are real homages to the spirit of that music and then there are the cheap imitators who wanted to cash in. It's hard to sort out the differences sometimes. In the end, musical influence is a big melting pot and it's one of the few areas of life where we can find many different cultures working in harmony to transcend differences in order to create something that's both beautiful and powerful. That is what I choose to take away from some of this history, but it's never really that simple.
 
When I lived in Ann Arbor, MI, there was a private rock music school that had adult blues band classes. Each class was a full blues band: bass, drums, guitar(s), singer and maybe keyboard, sax, harp, etc. The teacher/leader (Dave Sharp) would fill in where needed. They met once a week and put on a band show every few months on a Saturday at whatever local bar Dave Sharp could get into. Each band played 20-30 minutes. It was usually an early show that did not interfere with the bars paid evening band.

Dave Sharp had a retired bass student who suggested he do something like this. It went on for several years, I do not know if it is still going.
 
The problem with taking the blues to academia, is how it might set hard, fast rules as to how it should be played - which is the antithesis of the blues. The blues is a place of informal 'rules' - not hard and fast rules.
 
Because you are the only person in the history of mankind who ever showed even the slightest interest in a masters degree in blues.

Take the money you would have spent on a degree and TRAVEL to Memphis, Chicago, Lousiana, and any number of destinations up and down the Mississippi River. That will be equally as educational and a LOT more fun. Write a book about your journey (that includes a TON of pics of food...ala @BassCliff gig reports). I'll buy the first copy!

+ many
I can only add to try and avoid the tourist joints. Do some research and get out into the neighborhoods wherever you go for the real down home experience.
 
I can envision a semester-long class on B.B. King and derivatives; a semester exploring Albert King, Otis Rush, and the left-handed slingers; a wide-ranging study of the early country blues from Charlie Patton through Robert Johnson, Skip James, etc; one on the Chess artists; Jump blues; harmonica blues; the smooth singers like Bobby Bland and Junior Parker; zydeco; Texas blues --- I could go on and on. They've got classes for everything else, why not the blues. That said, a person could graduate with a master's degree and still not be able to play authentic blues (like a lot of these guys who like to say the blues is so simple).
 
Tell that to all the blues, jazz and early rock artists who got thier music stolen by.......
Clearly you didn't see my second post on this. I never said it was a good thing. It's actually a nuanced thing. But yes, many originators never saw a dime, and were treated horribly. I didn't want to get too far into that because it gets into some territory that the moderators probably wouldn't appreciate.
 
The problem with taking the blues to academia, is how it might set hard, fast rules as to how it should be played - which is the antithesis of the blues. The blues is a place of informal 'rules' - not hard and fast rules.
That might be true for something like civil engineering, but fortunately it hasn't happened to jazz and classical music yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the rocket
A lot of people (too many to quote) are commenting that the best way to get better at the blues is to get out and play it. That's definitely true, and good advice. But it's also true of almost every field I can think of, and it doesn't mean that school wouldn't help. Doctors learn a ton by actually practicing medicine, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't go to med school.

Studying the blues in an academic setting could be very valuable. From a music theory perspective, there wouldn't be a ton to do. But you could study individual styles of different players, transcribing their lines to see what makes them unique. You could also learn the history of the blues, the conditions under which it developed, its place in society, the stylistic developments, the important contributors, the commercialization of it, etc. There would, of course, have to be a heavy component of playing music with good blues players. But there's more to studying music than just learning how to play your instrument.

I also disagree with the argument that, because the blues is an oral tradition, or simple, or "something you just have to feel," that you aren't able to study it in an academic setting. You can study any kind of culture or art, regardless of how primitive or sophisticated it is. People study cave paintings. People study folk art. People study rock music. Why would it be unreasonable to study the blues?

Getting a degree in the blues wouldn't automatically make you a great blues musician. But if it's something you're interested in, there's absolutely no reason to shy away from studying it.