can't fight the man

_{There's been a lot of news this week about money bequeathed to SFJazz for a new building. My first notion is always to bemoan the further institutionalization of jazz but frankly, I really like the SF Jazz Collective. Even the inclusion of Joe Lovano and Stephan Harris didn't ruin it for me. I saw them when they played in KC and thought it was great. You can't go wrong with a larger group filled with top players playing at least half orginal music. Nobody seems to be able afford to pay a band with more than five players and it's really interesting to hear what these musicians write for the group that size. And the current group of players is pretty exciting.}  

_{(In all fairness, I don't dislike Lovano but I like Josh Redman more. As far as Stephan Harris is concerned, as a general rule I'm just not a huge vibes fan and he plays the shit out of the vibes way too much- every song.)
 
I think it's fair to say that the survival of jazz (since the 1960's) and surival of individual jazz musicians has been and will grow ever more reliant on institutions. People look to them to tell them what and who is good. Think of the differences in the careers of Josh Redman and Mark Turner. Josh is one of the biggest names in jazz and Mark remains a players' player. The difference is that Josh won the Monk competition and got the institutional stamp of approval. Nobody gave a shit about Ken Vandermark until he got the genius grant. Kansas City's own Diverse got their train rolling by winning a jazz competition in Boise. Of course I have to mention that the BHIC is only made possible through the benevolence of the Charlotte Street Foundation.
 
The truth of the matter is that when dealing with something as abstract and difficult as instrumental jazz, people like an outside authority to validate their musical choices. It also seems that it helps if that authority is in a different geographical location. It amuses me that a group as cool as Diverse needed to go to Idaho to get more recognition in Kansas City. I don't think this practice is necessarily a bad thing since much jazz media is presented with such a geographical bias: Kansas City is a great example of that. Are you really going to take JAM Magazine's word about a Kansas City-based musician?}

Comments

[the lemming]

I thought JAM was THE authority on everything worth knowing about in the KC scene. Because everything in this town begins and ends with Angela Hagenbach and the folks at the Folly.

[jazzfan175]

Cute. Instead of denigrating JAM - why not join KCJA and contribute to JAM? A non-profit org dedicated to promoting kc jazz is a good thing IMO.

[Russell Thorpe]

Its too bad I have to pay rent and bills every month, and feed myself, oh and find time to practice and write fresh music (what a selfish thing to do). If I could somehow manage all that and still have money left over at the end of the month then I would love to help out JAM and KCJA. Would they reciprocate?

So I guess its too bad I want to be relevant to my peers, and not people who wish we were still in the 1930s. In the end though, your opinion matters to me only as much as I let it. So if you want to support KC Jazz, come out to our show on Friday and see what the Black House Improviser's Collective has to offer.

If you dont like it oh well, at least you didn't have to pay for it, and I can still be grateful to Charlotte Street for THEIR support in allowing me to grow as a musician without the stress of trying to be commercially viable, which is the downfall of so many talented musicians and composers. Gots to sell the booze and food or you wont get invited back.

[Black House Collective]

Yikes. Well I certainly think that any musician that wants to make a living needs to grapple with the commercial interests that pay for everything. And it's certainly not unreasonable for a club owner to need performers to attract customers. BHIC is not a money making organization, it's a tool for musicians, so it's not really fair to compare it with the realities of the marketplace. I would actually argue that if someone wanted to really support KC jazz they're better off going to Jardine's or the Blue Room because BHIC is set up so that it does not depend on any audience whatsoever. It's for the musicians.

It was probably a little unfair to only pick on JAM. Most every single outlet of jazz media (Downbeat, Jazztimes, Allaboutjazz.com) is guilty of the same. And yes a non profit organization that promotes Kansas City jazz is a good thing. But a publication that tells me that everything jazz in Kansas City is good, doesn't have much credibility to me as a consumer.

[Russell Thorpe]

Point taken

Maybe it is unfair to compare BHIC with working musicians. But aren't we trying to support KC jazz by encouraging people to work together who normally wouldn't, encouraging them to take those risks they normally wouldn't?

I understand the need for club owners to make a living, especially after my recent adventures at the Czar Bar (where by the way I was treated with a wonderful amount of respect), but its freaking hard to be your own publicist, arranger, booking agent, composer, and player.

So its my own failings as a player and person and ego that prompted the rant. I can't play standards but I can hear dom7s and dim7s and whole tone scales just fine, its a trade off I wish I had the time to fix.

You have made me extremely spoiled with BHIC, so perhaps the brattiness comes from the luxury of not having to worry about attracting an audience like you said.

And again, if i could afford to I would love to support KCJA. But then again, if i had the money I'd like to take weekly lessons with Otto and Aladeen. Dont we all want to eat our cake?