Comrade Benny, the Swing Era and the Far Left

[Ian Thumwood]

I wondered if anyone has read the book "Swingin' the dream: Big Band Jazz and the American Rebirth of Culture" by Lewis Erenberg ? I saw a review on Amazon and was quite intrigued by it's premise that it was the burgeoning influence of the American Communist party in the 1930s and left wing writers such as John Hammond who brought about the integration of black and white musicians which radically facilitated social changes within American culture. This is not a book I have read but the reviews seem to corroborate the impression I have had about particular musicians. The book alleges that many well known jazz musicians were communist activists.

John Hammond's left wing credentials were impeccable but it does make me wonder too about his brother-in-law Benny Goodman. I suppose the popular notion about band leaders of that era was that they were pretty authoritarian and perhaps none more so than Goodman. However, the association with Hammond and the ultimate racial integration fervently advocated by Goodman makes me wonder if he was one of the musicians alluded to by Erenberg. I suppose that this would not be too surprising for the off-spring of Jewish refugees and Goodman's subsequent tour of Russia in the 50's seems only to reinforce an understanding of Left wing politics. Other aspects of Goodman's behaviour and associations would probably mark him out a "liberal" by today's standards and the book also acknowledges Goodman being a "strong partisan of the People's Front" in an extract from the Daily Worker. Given his humble background, I have always thought of Goodman as someone whose politics would have been very left wing. This book seems to vindicate that perception.

What is interesting is that the clips of the book also ropes in characters like Count Basie who similarly was associated with radicals like Paul Robeson and left-leaning promotions. When you start to think of some bandleaders, it does get more obvious with the likes of Andy Kirk and James Reece Europe involved in trade unions and Jimmy Lunceford's partner being the daughter of WEB Du Bois, the civil rights activist. I know that some big bands like Casa Loma were also collectives with no leader but am not sure if this was politically motivated or for other reasons. I think Bob Crosby's first band was a similar collective too.



The whole premise of the book is quite interesting and somewhat turns the perception of big band leaders on it's head. Granted that there were leaders like Stan Kenton whose political leanings were dubious and others like Lionel Hampton who were active in the Republican Party, but this idea of big band leaders / musicians with close ties to communism is quite perplexing to say the least. I knew that there were musicians like Frankie Newton who were politically active in the 1930s yet it is surprising to also see this amongst the bandleaders as well as star soloists.

[Alyn_Shipton]

Interesting that that is what you take from the review of this book Ian, but I suggest reading it might be quite rewarding. IMHO it is a very acute analysis of why swing chimed with American youth to create a "youth culture" in the US, and it is as much about the way this spread and was exploited - Goodman may have had his left wing credentials promoted by Hammond, but he was nonetheless grossing $58,000 a week after the Palomar. That is an astronomical sum in the mid-30s, and Ehrenberg focuses on the economics of swing in a very focused way. There's a long section on Ehrenberg and his book, and comparable research in my New History of Jazz 2nd ed p238ff.

[Serial_Apologist]

Interesting that that is what you take from the review of this book Ian, but I suggest reading it might be quite rewarding. IMHO it is a very acute analysis of why swing chimed with American youth to create a "youth culture" in the US, and it is as much about the way this spread and was exploited - Goodman may have had his left wing credentials promoted by Hammond, but he was nonetheless grossing $58,000 a week after the Palomar. That is an astronomical sum in the mid-30s, and Ehrenberg focuses on the economics of swing in a very focused way. There's a long section on Ehrenberg and his book, and comparable research in my New History of Jazz 2nd ed p238ff.

My guessing is that Ian speed reads, much like he speed posts!

[Ian Thumwood]

SA

One review of the book is critical of the left wing bias of the author and the fact that there is a tendency of ascribe the epithet of "activist" to a number of well known musicians. I am interested in this book and , with a huge pile of historic / archaeology books to get through at the moment, is one I might like to return to later.

I think with jazz writing any political component largely falls around three areas , namely Black Activism , anti-apartheid / South African jazz and, to a latter extent, musicians from the former Soviet block. As I said, I have not read this book but I cannot recall reading too much about white musicians being involved in Far Left politics and especially in the context of pre-Modern Jazz. In the past, I have read about Hammond and Norman Granz who similarly had associations with the American Communism Party in the 1930s. most reference to leftish politics in this era tends to call around mention of the Café Society which I believe was frequented by more left-wing cliental. I have never encountered anything about white band leaders involved in this context although I think most jazz musicians on that era had sympathy with Black civil rights. Goodman's political leanings had not been made explicit in anything I had read but you could guess what they might have been by his associations.

The whole issue is more perplexing in the light of Goodman's income which is staggering for 80 years ago. I am not an expert in inflation but this seems well in excess of some of today's star footballers. Hammond was similarly well-heeled and came from a wealthy background. He would have been what we might now call a "champagne socialist" but it is interesting to conject how left wing musicians struggling to survive in the Depression would have been, especially those from an impoverished, immigrant, European background. I had always seen big bands as being more commercial and maybe market-orientated than at any other time in the history of jazz until Jazz-rock in the 1970 so therefore Erenberg's comments seem extremely interesting. The book seems to offer some quite interesting premises from the extracts available on line and it does make you wonder where the likes of Shaw, Barnet, Miller and the Dorseys might have stood in the political spectrum.

[Serial_Apologist]

SA

One review of the book is critical of the left wing bias of the author and the fact that there is a tendency of ascribe the epithet of "activist" to a number of well known musicians. I am interested in this book and , with a huge pile of historic / archaeology books to get through at the moment, is one I might like to return to later.

I think with jazz writing any political component largely falls around three areas , namely Black Activism , anti-apartheid / South African jazz and, to a latter extent, musicians from the former Soviet block. As I said, I have not read this book but I cannot recall reading too much about white musicians being involved in Far Left politics and especially in the context of pre-Modern Jazz. In the past, I have read about Hammond and Norman Granz who similarly had associations with the American Communism Party in the 1930s. most reference to leftish politics in this era tends to call around mention of the Café Society which I believe was frequented by more left-wing cliental. I have never encountered anything about white band leaders involved in this context although I think most jazz musicians on that era had sympathy with Black civil rights. Goodman's political leanings had not been made explicit in anything I had read but you could guess what they might have been by his associations.

The whole issue is more perplexing in the light of Goodman's income which is staggering for 80 years ago. I am not an expert in inflation but this seems well in excess of some of today's star footballers. Hammond was similarly well-heeled and came from a wealthy background. He would have been what we might now call a "champagne socialist" but it is interesting to conject how left wing musicians struggling to survive in the Depression would have been, especially those from an impoverished, immigrant, European background. I had always seen big bands as being more commercial and maybe market-orientated than at any other time in the history of jazz until Jazz-rock in the 1970 so therefore Erenberg's comments seem extremely interesting. The book seems to offer some quite interesting premises from the extracts available on line and it does make you wonder where the likes of Shaw, Barnet, Miller and the Dorseys might have stood in the political spectrum.

Whatever political bearings were around they don't seem to have had noticeable impact on the music until the advent of bebop.

[Ian Thumwood]

Whatever political bearings were around they don't seem to have had noticeable impact on the music until the advent of bebop.

I would have thought the opposite. Be-bop was more about musical theory and largely disconnected jazz from it's popular audience. From a social point of view, the jazz produced Pre-Parker made a far greater social commentary in the 20s and 30's than until the 60's, especially from the Civil Rights movement. Tunes like "What did I do to be so black and blue" prove that even really accessible artists like Fats Waller were savvy to this. You can also find people like Bennie Moten recoding tracks such as "The Jones Law Stomp" which suggests a degree of political awareness. From a Black perspective I don't think that you can overlook something like the Black Swan label which was wrapped up in the whole Harlem Renaissance movement. I don't see how you can argue that this wasn't political.

Of course, in a wider musical context the influence of politics can be felt quite strongly in the free-for-all of pre-Depression era recordings outside the realms of jazz with a multitude of enterprises such as the Klu Klux Klan making discs. There was very little censorship in the early days of recordings and this mirrors the internet today. I doubt if there is anything quite as political as the country blues recordings made in the 20s and 30s which are a veritable social history record. I don't think that music was ever as "political" as it was in the 1920s until the 1960's. The advent of radio curtailed things in the 30's when record sales also crashed in the economic recession . Commercial factors then seemed to creep in which muted social commentary in the rest of the decade as record production became dominated by larger labels and the smaller, more niche independents vanished. If you are looking for a more "politicised" element in music in the 20's and 30's, the Blues remains the first call yet looking through tune titles you can often be surprised such as this absolute classic recording :-

My point centred around the fact that you rarely read about the politicisation of white jazz musicians as early as the 1930's.

[Serial_Apologist]

Your last point is true. But the point about changes to the music I was making was that, with the laudable example of Duke Ellington, I would argue that pre-bop, the actual idiom of the music did not itself change, whatever was the subject matter of titles or lyrics, so there was a mismatch, and this was not overcome until the more complex harmonic and rhythmic aspects of bebop put black jazz musicians in the position it did for them to put to bed not only any implications that jazz was by its intrinsic nature a "poor man's art music", but that, unlike in classical music, where the virtuoso was given time in which to mug up on a technically difficult work by, say, Paganini, this new jazz you had to play in all its complexity and dexterity on the spot and justify to your community. A pre-echo of street dub and the eventuality of hip hop techniques of rap and scratching, and nearly as bedevilled by drugs and personality issues. By being intrinsic - a new format of expression to give voice to radical perspectives for change - bebop expressed anti-establishment aspirations more effectively than words set in already familiar frameworks. Now, of course, this can be presented as radical, ironically disjunctive of the relation between meaning and setting. Like the free jazz then still to come, on the contrary, bebop was in your face, and far beyond being a mere theory, as 12-tone serialism was seen as even to a Jewish composer such as Schoenberg! Subsequent advances blind us to how shocking this was in the mid-40s, including to older musicians thought up to then advanced. Sure, musicians of the likes of Armstrong, Lester and Tatum had been heading that way, but they were as virtuosos head and shoulders over most of the contemporaries they played with. Forming an integrated idiom one was expected to "master" to play properly was part and parcel of a response to how blacks were being treated in Europe and elsewhere fighting the racist creeds of Nazism and fascism that was political in a collective sense, as opposed to this or that individual in an otherwise unacknowledged or underacknowledged situation committing a brave stepping stone to history.

[Ian Thumwood]

SA

I don't agree with this argument at all. It is pretty apparent that the pioneering musicians of the 1910's and 20's were not exactly "establishment" either and the kind of stuff put out by Louis Armstrong in the 20's would have sounded as radical as Charlie Parker 20 years later. I don't think that Armstrong was any less "in your face" than Charlie Parker and to make the case for Be-bop being the first time jazz was expressing "anti-establishment aspirations" is a bit far -fetched. For me, Be-bop is more a matter of musical problem solving albeit one which had a pretty impressive sub-culture. Any "counter-culture" aspect with jazz was pretty much there from the off and nothing new or unique to Be-bop. I think that, upon reflection, jazz was never quite as conservative as it was immediately after Be-bop and it is fascinating just how quickly Bob got absorbed in to the mainstream. For me, there is a lot of continuity in the jazz of the 1930s and Be-bop and from the perspective of 2017, it doesn't seem so radially different.


Your argument centres entirely around racial issues. It would appear that Erenberg might be looking beyond these kinds of issues. Of course, Socialism is far broader than this and my conjecture is more along the lines of how did this manifest itself for a generation of musicians who came out of the Depression. The whole point of the post for me was that I found the suggestion of the influence of Communism amongst jazz musicians in the1930s to be a really fascinating topic that is probably under-explored. Setting aside the issue of race, I would be intrigued to find out how a generation of musicians who would have come through the Depression in the early 1930's would have been affected politically. As I have said previously, I have never read anything about the political sympathies of white jazz musicians in this decade nor indeed probably prior to the 1960's. How serious was Goodman's flirtation with the Left and how typical was he of his generation ? As far as aware, this is an area of jazz history which has never been explored prior to Erenberg's book. When my copy of the book arrives and I have read it, I will let you know what Erenberg has to say on this matter.

[Serial_Apologist]

SA

I don't agree with this argument at all. It is pretty apparent that the pioneering musicians of the 1910's and 20's were not exactly "establishment" either and the kind of stuff put out by Louis Armstrong in the 20's would have sounded as radical as Charlie Parker 20 years later. I don't think that Armstrong was any less "in your face" than Charlie Parker and to make the case for Be-bop being the first time jazz was expressing "anti-establishment aspirations" is a bit far -fetched. For me, Be-bop is more a matter of musical problem solving albeit one which had a pretty impressive sub-culture. Any "counter-culture" aspect with jazz was pretty much there from the off and nothing new or unique to Be-bop. I think that, upon reflection, jazz was never quite as conservative as it was immediately after Be-bop and it is fascinating just how quickly Bob got absorbed in to the mainstream. For me, there is a lot of continuity in the jazz of the 1930s and Be-bop and from the perspective of 2017, it doesn't seem so radially different.


Your argument centres entirely around racial issues. It would appear that Erenberg might be looking beyond these kinds of issues. Of course, Socialism is far broader than this and my conjecture is more along the lines of how did this manifest itself for a generation of musicians who came out of the Depression. The whole point of the post for me was that I found the suggestion of the influence of Communism amongst jazz musicians in the1930s to be a really fascinating topic that is probably under-explored. Setting aside the issue of race, I would be intrigued to find out how a generation of musicians who would have come through the Depression in the early 1930's would have been affected politically. As I have said previously, I have never read anything about the political sympathies of white jazz musicians in this decade nor indeed probably prior to the 1960's. How serious was Goodman's flirtation with the Left and how typical was he of his generation ? As far as aware, this is an area of jazz history which has never been explored prior to Erenberg's book. When my copy of the book arrives and I have read it, I will let you know what Erenberg has to say on this matter.

Ian, there is much to what you say. Radicalism, in the arts or elsewhere, didn't necessarily of course have to go through parties established on the left, and I still think you underestimate the significance of bebop as an integrated response. At a time when American society, coming out of WW2 and utterly failing to deal with its race issues, was about turn drastically to the right politically, the black working class constituted the vanguard of that class, (it arguably still does), and as a proclamation of equality bebop constituted the most coherent response then on offer in American music. For a time this went as far as not wishing to represent the blues other than as manfested in its renewal by way of bop - the old blues as disseminated in classic jazz, city blues and commercially aspiring rhythm and blues, being thought by Diz and others too redolent of bygone times preferably not to be dwelt upon.

Undoubtedly the American CP was less tainted by Stalinism than its European equivalents, but as a lapsed Trot retaining lingering loyalties I admit I feel less disposed to enquiring into the pro-Soviet sympathies of those doing rather well out of Swing - because at the end of the day that was what being a Communist in the 1930s came down to - than in those subsequently forging new directions. But, let us know how you get on with Erenberg!

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Ian, there is much to what you say. Radicalism, in the arts or elsewhere, didn't necessarily of course have to go through parties established on the left, and I still think you underestimate the significance of bebop as an integrated response. At a time when American society, coming out of WW2 and utterly failing to deal with its race issues, was about turn drastically to the right politically, the black working class constituted the vanguard of that class, (it arguably still does), and as a proclamation of equality bebop constituted the most coherent response then on offer in American music. For a time this went as far as not wishing to represent the blues other than as manfested in its renewal by way of bop - the old blues as disseminated in classic jazz, city blues and commercially aspiring rhythm and blues, being thought by Diz and others too redolent of bygone times preferably not to be dwelt upon.

Undoubtedly the American CP was less tainted by Stalinism than its European equivalents, but as a lapsed Trot retaining lingering loyalties I admit I feel less disposed to enquiring into the pro-Soviet sympathies of those doing rather well out of Swing - because at the end of the day that was what being a Communist in the 1930s came down to - than in those subsequently forging new directions. But, let us know how you get on with Erenberg!

If you want a fictional account of American Communist Party's reach and work, warts and all, in the black community, read Ralf Ellison's classic "Invisible Man". Ellison had his very own axe to grind and ended up as a "rightist" supporter of the Vietnam War, and as self interested myopic gatekeeper against the new radical black movements (and indeed Bebop), But it's quite a gripping book and you get a flavour of the times. I've not much (any?) time for the CP, but it's perhaps a mistake to confuse their totally corrupt & cynical leadership with *some* useful work at a rank and file level.

And there's always that joke about the CP that their largest membership component was in fact made up of the FBI! (An easy gig for an operative).

[Ian Thumwood]

This tune is alleged to actually be about radical non-participation. I didn't realise this but Carmichael was also a pretty Right Wing Republican. There isn't a great deal about this on line but interestingly I have found something about his friendship with Humphrey Bogart who was celebrated for his left wing views. The weird thing about Carmichael is that Ian Fleming described his James Bond character as looking like the songwriter.

[Ian Thumwood]

SA

This is an article which might interest you although it does seem more to emphasise the position I was arguing. Unfortunately, the article seems to conflate politics as a whole with Black Civils Rights but it does make reference to the fact that writers like Hobsbawm saw earlier styles of jazz having more genuine radical aspirations. Not quite sure that I agree with his rather dated opinions but this article reinforces what I was saying that jazz was perhaps far more "Radical" in it's politics prior to the advent to Bebop and, if anything, it lost it's more political edge with the advent of players like Parker. This is the opposite of what you had been arguing but if you are not interested in jazz from 2o's / 30's, you might have overlooked the fact that jazz was politicised well before the advent of musicians like Charlie Mingus.

Shame that no one seems to have looked at radicalism from the perspective of white musicians - albeit this article hints at Goodman's largess towards Left Wing causes.

http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/culture/jazz_left.htm

[Serial_Apologist]

SA

This is an article which might interest you although it does seem more to emphasise the position I was arguing. Unfortunately, the article seems to conflate politics as a whole with Black Civils Rights but it does make reference to the fact that writers like Hobsbawm saw earlier styles of jazz having more genuine radical aspirations. Not quite sure that I agree with his rather dated opinions but this article reinforces what I was saying that jazz was perhaps far more "Radical" in it's politics prior to the advent to Bebop and, if anything, it lost it's more political edge with the advent of players like Parker. This is the opposite of what you had been arguing but if you are not interested in jazz from 2o's / 30's, you might have overlooked the fact that jazz was politicised well before the advent of musicians like Charlie Mingus.

Shame that no one seems to have looked at radicalism from the perspective of white musicians - albeit this article hints at Goodman's largess towards Left Wing causes.

http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs.../jazz_left.htm

Thanks Ian - I'll read that topmorrow. Been outside "entertaining" other flatowners in the block with my keyboard "renditions" of standards, having a lot of fun with the five children of between 2 and 6 getting them to improvise on one while I "made sense" of what they were doing on the other! There's so much paranoia about paedophilia abroad these days that I've been loath to get too friendly with them for fear of alarming the parents into worrying their little uns might get into the habit of going up to any friendly adult and think him safe. A barbecue was proceeding without prior notice, and unfortunately I'm a vegetarian!

[Ian Thumwood]

The Ernberg book has arrived in the post and I have just had a cursory look through it. The book appears to be more of a social history and there seems to be a lot about an organisation called The People's Front. Looking at the relevant chapter, there are some quite intriguing stories. A good number of bandleaders are mentioned, especially in relation to civil rights and the integration of musicians including white musicians playing for black bands which is something that is totally over-looked.

There is a lot about Goodman and John Hammond as well as mention that Goodman's sister was a Communist. Just scanning through the leaves you get an impression that this is a side of the Swing Era that has not really be explored before. The Harlem branch of the Communist Party seems to have been particularly active and arranged concerts that included the likes of Cab Calloway. The improvement of racial integration features heavily in the relevant chapter as expected but the militancy of people like Teddy Wilson comes across as a surprise to me. I was not aware that he had vociferously rejected the call to arms in WWII because he was sceptical of the role of Black people in American society.


A lesser known element is the support within the jazz community for the Republican movement in the Spanish Civil War within and how this was also associated with civil liberties. This garnered support from the likes of Teddy Wilson, Claude Hopkins, Duke Ellington, Basie , Waller and Calloway. In addition, musicians such as Teddy Wilson and Luckey Roberts supported the bid by black Communist Ben Davis to become the councilman for Harlem as late as 1943. A year later, Wilson starred in a celebration to mark the 25th Anniversary of the Communist movement in the US.

A number of pages are given over to the Café Society Club including mention of Goodman's largesse. I think the story of this club is pretty well known but less familiar if the FBI's concerns regarding Russian-born pianist Art Hodes. Other pages deal with Goodman's later visit to Russia.


Flicking through the book, I have to say that it does look fascinating. It is not a true "history" of the Swing Era tracing the evolution of the music but it certainly tackles the music from a social perspective that I hadn't really considered and the various quotes that abound offer an insight as to how the music was conveyed at the time. This seems to be radically different from how this music is all considered now albeit it surprisingly appears to point towards the same arguments were are having today about commerciality and the merits or not of various musical styles. There is a chunk of the book which deals with Glenn Miller's band which is quite intriguing as it chimes in with my perception as to just how different this band was from so many of the Swing Era bands. Erenberg cites Miller's desire to reflect a different perception of American society and approach to integration although not of Black musicians which was deemed to be too much of a commercial risk. You can understand the appeal of this band from Erenberg's comments and he should be congratulated for bringing the complexities of this era to life including the prejudices that were both social and musical. It looks like a fascinating read which knocks the idea of political radicalism within jazz starting in the 60's firmly on the head. If anything, the musicians of the 30's were more radical as a consequence of their experience in the Depression. This is a book that I think will be fascinating.

I will post more fully when I have read the book but thought that I would update the thread as it might make a few people on the board take notice of this era of jazz a little more differently than in the past.

[Ian Thumwood]

I have been working my way through Lewis Erenberg's book this week and have found the content to be absolutely riveting, not least because it recasts the Swing Era under a very Left Wing light. The first quarter of the book effectively deals with why the big bands and swing suddenly took off and addresses the impact of the music from both a social and economic perspective. Much is made within the book of the shock Benny Goodman's success at the Palomar Ballroom in 1935 and the factors which made it in inevitable of which the end of the Prohibition and the New Deal were paramount. What I like about Erenberg's book is the fact that there is a fresh approach in to looking at popular music and the realisation that Goodman's "arrival" as the "King of Swing" was no less significant than the emergence of Charlie Parker / Be-bop. I think it is common knowledge that levels of unemployment were incredible but Erenberg, to his credit, analyses the scene between 1930-5 to reveal that this was almost a period of crisis for jazz. He squares the appeal of Jazz in the 1920s to a decadent culture amongst the white clientele whilst reminding you just how much Swing offered jazz to a more proletariat audience who were far more musically savvy that you might have suggested.


I had no idea of the commercial forces which strongly mitigated against jazz in the 1930s with music publishers and record companies having no interest in the music so that any following for big bands stemmed , to the large extent, through the radio. Most jazz musicians found employment in "sweet bands" and I never appreciated just how much these orchestras and singers like Crosby and Etting appealed to an audience. There was no appetite for jazz in this period and improvisation was frowned upon by most white bandleaders. The flat bearers for jazz in this era were largely black big bands with blues sales dropping through the floor. The popularity of jig bands was largely driven for economic as opposed to altruistic reasons - they were cheap to record as the musicians were paid less than Union fees.

I am about a 1/3rd of the way through the book and have been reading about the audience for the music and how the dance styles derived from black culture inspired their white counterparts. There was far more cross pollination between both white and black audiences as well as amongst musicians. Bands like Lunceford and Basie had dedicated followers from white communities and it was perhaps the first time when black culture in the form of Swing (including the music, dress sense, dancing and vocabulary) entered in to the cultural mainstream. This had never happened in the 1920s to this extent. Less too were inter-racial marriages such as that of ace drummer Dave Tough.

At the moment I am reading about the role of Goodman in the music and how his music was received and why the reaction was so positive. There are quite from magazines including letters' pages where he once popular "sweet " bands were derided and the merits of particular bands, arrangers and soloists were praised. In fact, the book is careful to emphasize the significance of soloists both from the positive perception of the musicians themselves and the recognition amongst audiences of how significant the improvising soloist was to this music.

As I said, I am only about 1/ 3rd the way through but there is plenty in the discussion to digest and mull over. In the introduction, the author is keen to express the error of looking at Swing in a negative fashion when thinking retrospectively back from be-bop and the music that followed. This is not how the fans of the music would have approached the music and they would have emphasised the developments in the music from 1935 when jazz escaped from an almost "Ground Zero" scenario here there was no appetite for this music in the Depression.