dkdikeSeptember 19, 2006 21:22 EST

Thanks to Alexander Gelfand for his brilliant article "Life After the Death of Jazz". He reminds us that the heart of jazz is innovation and exploration and that anyone attempting to define jazz is asking to turn jazz into a fossil when it deserves to be alive, breathing and ever-changing. Clearly, the future of jazz doesn't include " Jazz police" mumbling "that's not jazz". E.W.

NeilJanuary 15, 2008 10:55 EST

What a great article. Gelfand touches on many great points. He recognizes that, like many issues, the "decline of jazz" has many contributing factors.

One other aspect that has effected all musics/musicians is technology and live music in general. The entire music industry has gone through rapid and extensive changes in the past 30 years. Speaking as someone that used to make half my living playing, many of the big band jobs, wedding band gigs, theater jobs and recording jobs available to musicians have decreased (and in many cases fees and pay rates have stagnated). Look at old movies (circa 1930'S and '40's) and you will witness live bands in clubs. If people wanted to hear music 80 years ago, someone had to make it on the spot. Ask yourself when the last time was that you saw a BAND at a wedding.

The music union saw this coming over 60 years ago and the musicians' union strike in the 1940's tried to stem the tide. But I don't know if anyone could have foreseen the current state of the music business.

It seems as though John Q Public will not go out to see live music unless it is in a 50,000 seat house to see the Stones, Bruce Springsteen or Bill Joel. Even young rock musicians and their bands that are starting out now have to play for the door or even PAY to play at a club. It isn't only jazz musicians; symphonies and classical musicians are feeling it as well. Recently a local, professional chamber orchestra (the Lehigh Valley Chamber Orchestra) went defunct because of lack of support and diminished ticket sales.

I believe that we need to look at is the reason people in general no longer support the live arts. And with the prevalence of portable players (iPods, etc.), it will take a strong grass-roots effort of all artists to begin to cultivate listeners/consumers.

Jazz was once 'popular music' and had a share of the music industry pie. The traditional cash cows of the music industry are fading (club scene, recording labels, etc.). The irony is that people still buy music; there is still a music industry and it will take some innovators and forward thinking artists/musicians to begin to effectively use current technologies and begin to build a listener/support base.

Neil

Leslie GildartJune 05, 2008 18:26 EST

Twp words: Jim Hobbs.

There are artists who are making original music that is both coherent and astonishing, but they are mining the long tail for recognition and support. Nobody promotes them. Nobody writes about them. And the only people who listen to them are people who already know who they are.

Timo Shanko, Django Carranza, jazz is still very much alive. You just have to really look for it.