Latitude problems? Just smile and Graviton

[Ian Thumwood]

That's right. Not that I saw the extended series of Burns's documentaries about America, but the impressions I've been given by others who have are of a timely exoneration of American culture to fit in with its growing collective self-doubts, hingeing in part on the fact that America (even more than Britain) is just not ready for multiculturalism. That's my take on Burns, fwiw. Even though encrypted into the politics capitalism has globalised to its own ends, finding the right people for the cheapest jobs, its relativism raises too many awkward questions, insecurities leading to the assumption of absolutist positions invoking ideas of purity, and so on. Jazz is not thereafter seen as a universalising activity for anyone to take on and be enriched by, arising in spite of and as a critique of its national cultural backdrop, but ascribing in some almost mystical though actually deconstructible way to The American Dream. And for that to happen it has to conform in certain unchangeable and immediately recognisable traits and practices, the gestural "signifiers" of its belongingness we can then all agree it as being jazz and not some foreign imitation, and be part of the nation's life-affirming spirit of competition.

I found the reaction to the Burn's documentary series baffling. There were negatives insofar that it did not seem interested in jazz beyond Free Jazz and almost totally ignored the then contemporary scene. This was rectified in the book that accompanied the series but most critics seem to have totally missed the point that it was a social history and not a history of the music. There was plenty in the series about the attraction of jazz for dancers and how fans came to the music from recollection. As a social history, it was terrific and the reason that the avant garde was missed was pretty obvious as it was irrelevant for the general music listening public. Most people do not know who Charlie Parker was so they are not going to care about Ornette or Henry Threadgill, for example. In the round, as far as the general public is concerned, no one was listening to free jazz and post mid-sixties, jazz had started to become very niche and no longer of significance as a popular music. As a social history, the series centres on jazz in the teens through to the fifties when it had relevance to popular culture. I cannot see why it could be criticised as a televised social history because it clearly fulfilled that function. One of my interests outside of jazz is history and therefore I was looking at it from another perspective. On this criteria, it worked.

I quite enjoyed the Ms Maurice set which reminded me a but of Hubbard. Nice to hear something new which is not ashamed to sound like jazz but I am disappointed by the lack of comment from some on this board. I would have thought that the resemblance to Hubbard's music might have seen a thumbs down for lack or originality as opposed to just enjoying the set for what it was worth. Much preferable to a lot of the more recent British jazz I have heard. I hope that those people who enjoyed this set might not be so dismissive of the current crop of British jazz musicians that I flagged up on the "Woke" thread. The broadcast was yet another example of why this jazz must be lauded.

FWIW, the Seed Ensemble record gets better with every listen and also includes some great trumpet by SMG. Sorry to say, I think her playing has everything about it that is missing from other players like Laura Jurd. I much prefer this more human approach to jazz. Respect to Sheila and her pals - really doing the business for British jazz.