Ronnie’s - BBC4

[CGR]

I watched the documentary up until the last 15 minutes. I was really surprised that this offered very little new other than the revelation regarding Scott's depression although it was an interesting watch otherwise.

The main problem with me with the documentary was that you could have watched the programme and come away with the impression that nothing much happened in the club after 1970. It is funny seeing some of the clips from T shows of the 70s and 80s which similarly cemented the club's position in the history of the programme and also realising that nearly everyone of the voices discussing the music had been dead for about twenty years with the exception of John Fordham and Michael Parkinson. The British musicians who were a mainstay of the club never really got much of a mention with the likes of Stan Tracey and Tubby Hayes appearing in photographs but never name-checked. Unless it was mentioned at the end, there seemed little reference to the club developing the careers of musicians from the 1980s onwards with the documentary makers more interested in the relationship between Scott and King. I think than many musicians emerging in the 1980s would have been very thankful to Scott's largesse.

It is quite interesting to look back at these programmes as reflect that although the club was instrumental in bringing over the first truly great American Modern jazz musicians, the era that is celebrated seems pretty conservative in comparison with a lot of what was happening in jazz at the time. I think this is symptomatic of the fact that musicians such as Buddy Rich and Sarah Vaughan would have been known outside of jazz circles. The two other things that struck me was the amount of smoking going on. Scott rarely seemed to be filmed without a cigarette on the go. The other was Scott's impossibly dreadful stand-up comedian routine. More than anything else, the programme seemed like a nostalgia trip with cine film of everyday life in Soho seemingly having more potency at producing a "vibe" than clips of the musicians playing. The music itself seemed like an adjunct.

I cannot recall the last time that I saw a programme for the groups playing at the club and therefore am unable to comment upon what it's policy is these days.

It struck me as being another one of those programmes about Jazz made by people who don't really like Jazz.

One can imagine the Controller of BBC Four saying "It's six months since we last did the Jazz programme. Better do another. We've got no real budget so just get the trainee editor to splice together some of the old clips again in a different order."

Scott's joke were ok. Many of course would be politically incorrect these days. One of his was something like "This next song uses the Dresden scale. Its called that because every note gets flattened."
And of course "We started with our first song, then came our second, now we'll do our third".

[gradus]

The abiding impression was of how one-dimensional his life seemed, not that he appeared to want any other dimensions.
I particularly liked the missing dog joke but wasn't it said that he told them to see if any new people were in that night.

[Serial_Apologist]

It struck me as being another one of those programmes about Jazz made by people who don't really like Jazz.

One can imagine the Controller of BBC Four saying "It's six months since we last did the Jazz programme. Better do another. We've got no real budget so just get the trainee editor to splice together some of the old clips again in a different order."

Scott's joke were ok. Many of course would be politically incorrect these days. One of his was something like "This next song uses the Dresden scale. Its called that because every note gets flattened."
And of course "We started with our first song, then came our second, now we'll do our third".

And "We do do requests, but only if people ask for them".

I must say I enjoyed the programme, albeit that it was more about the people than the music. It showed the various changes in decor fashions that have accompanied successive makeovers, until today the interior in staid buff 'n' beige with translucent table lamps more resembles yer bog-standard 4-star hotel lobby than its formerly inviting jazz ambience - all far from that initial buzz and informality that leaped out from the b&w 50s footage. I saw more of Ronnie in interview at different stages of his middle and later years than I had ever seen previously. Ronnie's last partner spoke very movingly about his depression. To answer Ian's comment about the final part of the programme, it brought the story up to date, sort-of, with glib glossness, and one of the management team saying words to the effect that criticisms of conceding to commercialism were justified since we were now living in a more commercial world

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

What matters immensely more than how many "dimensions" Ronnie Scott had (is there a meter, a calculator?), Is what he achieved. The substance. As he himself said, "it was often a master class here every night, why didn't more avail themselves of it." We live in an era where trite moralism rules. Politics and parties are judged, not by program or relevance, but by dredging Facebook and the Mail - take downs of what "kind" of people are involved. "Nice, unpleasant, rounded, kind to squirrels". It's infantile.

[gradus]

I don't know, it can be quite interesting to round out the portrait of the man, but I don't think the programme did that, nor perhaps was it intended to but it certainly paid full and due deference to his influence on Jazz in the UK.

[eighthobstruction]

What matters immensely more than how many "dimensions" Ronnie Scott had (is there a meter, a calculator?), Is what he achieved. The substance. As he himself said, "it was often a master class here every night, why didn't more avail themselves of it." We live in an era where trite moralism rules. Politics and parties are judged, not by program or relevance, but by dredging Facebook and the Mail - take downs of what "kind" of people are involved. "Nice, unpleasant, rounded, kind to squirrels". It's infantile.

[duncan]

It struck me as being another one of those programmes about Jazz made by people who don't really like Jazz.

Dammit. I was about to post 'it was the kind of programme aimed at people who like the idea of Jazz but don't like the sound it makes'.

[Ian Thumwood]

Just noticed this piece on YouTube from two days ago....tapes of Bill Evans with Eddie Gomez and Jack D'J at Ronnie Scotts 1968 have been found in the latters basement tape collection and are being released on vinyl and CD by Resonance on November 27 & December 4.(different formats). 20 tracks plus interviews. Yew lucky people...

http://youtu.be/sjCN8nMLEyY

This is the second Resonance CD of a Bill Evans trio at Ronnie Scott's. They have been issuing a number of Evans albums over the last few years.

I get the fact that Scott's club really kick-started but I felt that the documentary could have stressed this better. There was no real detail nor opinion from any British jazz musicians to cement the club's stature but this is territory which, frankly, has been done to death in previous documentaries and is well understood. The strange thing about the documentary was that it largely dealt with the period 1959-69 with early 80% of the time of the clubs existence receiving cursory attention. The club has operated for 24 years since Scott's untimely passing and it is difficult to imagine there is not a story there too.

I would have to say that I found some of content made me feel uncomfortable and reflected the different albeit unacceptable mores of the time. It did capture the awe of British jazz musicians towards their American counterparts and I think that the few clips chosen to demonstrate the artists performing there generally put British jazz in a good light even if I am no fan of Dame Cleo. The Dankworth band sounded really good and struck me as being a big band that was seriously under-valued at the time.

I wish I has seen the end of the documentary which outlined how the bookings had to change to reflect current tastes. For me, this has meant that the club is trading on false glories. The current programme on the website is probably distorted due to Covid but , setting aside some of the younger, British acts, it is noticeable just how many of the gigs pay tribute to other musicians. Unsurprisingly, there is an absence of big name musicians from the States.

Documentaries such as this do have a tendency to distort the history of jazz in this country and override the nascent jazz scene of the 20s and 30s as well as ignore that London was by no means unique with similar rich scenes in places like Paris and Copenhagen. As praise-worthy as Scott and King's achievement was, it is also fair to say that improvements in aviation and improvising relations between respective Musicians Unions also ensured that this was possible.

I would be in no doubt that 30 years hence, similar documentaries will look at the current revitalised Jazz scene in the UK and maybe comment on the creativity of the contemporary jazz scene. To my ears, the young players today are as encouraging as the same thing which happened in the 1980s and it is nice to see names like Camila George in the schedule as well as noting the likes of critic's favourite Laura Jurd. I feel that the club seems to be hedging it's bets with "commerical" artists like Curtis Stigers and also booking the likes of "Dinosaur" to cater for a younger crowd.

[Serial_Apologist]

Anyone wanting to see the documentary again might care to click on the link I provided on the "week's fare" thread; also that for Geoffrey Smith's series of talks, the first of which I just caught the end of: an interesting impression by an American on British fans' take on the music.

[cloughie]

Dammit. I was about to post 'it was the kind of programme aimed at people who like the idea of Jazz but don't like the sound it makes'.

Or less cynically maybe attract a few more viewers to jazz!

[Serial_Apologist]

Or less cynically maybe attract a few more viewers to jazz!

I seriously doubt if that would happen! It might - but only under conditions of a return to the kinds of puritanical attitudes that returned in the 1950s, and painted jazz to be a music of seedy backstreet clubs ruled by guys with greased back hair in black shirts and silver ties, when it will be an added attraction to the likes of what it was for me at the time, raised in that era of prim hypocisy. (Oh for that B movie glamour - the rain-swept streets at night, Diana Dors' reinforced bouffon and brassiere!) But all that is an unlikely scenario for a repeat performance, other than to be found on Talking Pictures, I would think.

[gradus]

I seriously doubt if that would happen! It might - but only under conditions of a return to the kinds of puritanical attitudes that returned in the 1950s, and painted jazz to be a music of seedy backstreet clubs ruled by guys with greased back hair in black shirts and silver ties, when it will be an added attraction to the likes of what it was for me at the time, raised in that era of prim hypocisy. (Oh for that B movie glamour - the rain-swept streets at night, Diana Dors' reinforced bouffon and brassiere!) But all that is an unlikely scenario for a repeat performance, other than to be found on Talking Pictures, I would think.

There doesn't seem to be much support for jazz amongst younger people around here. The two local jazz clubs I attend are/were predominantly attracting audiences of the middle-aged and upwards. Obviously there are some exceptions but like classical music, jazz appears likely to remain a minority interest with an audience that might not find replenishment from youf.

[Serial_Apologist]

There doesn't seem to be much support for jazz amongst younger people around here. The two local jazz clubs I attend are/were predominantly attracting audiences of the middle-aged and upwards. Obviously there are some exceptions but like classical music, jazz appears likely to remain a minority interest with an audience that might not find replenishment from youf.

That interest varies from place to place for a complex of reasons that are social and historical, dependent on why jazz can appeal at different times from being perceived as anti-"establishment" to presented as a creative alternative to pop or classical in propitious circumstances, ie when more popular musical forms adopting jazz elements point towards the "genuine article" or pathways to other musical careers get blocked. For the personal experience of living in Das Kapital I have in the past detected a roughly five mile perimeter surrounding the Trafalgar Square centre, within which there is a good multicultural backing for the newer forms of jazz being promulgated on J to Z, based on Afro dance rhythms and supported from within communities and ghettoes, beyond which - pre-Covid-19 at any rate - it has always been outer London and suburban hosting pubs where the roughly over 75 age demographic (a bit older than me) have supported the music, with sons, daughters, nieces and nephews brought along in tow... and this for visiting bands which however good tend to spend a large proportion of performances on standards guaranteeing standard nostalgic audience responses. The fact that one never ever gets invited into the homes of others for a listening sesh, as used to happen in the 1960s-70s, illustrates that the community only exists for the musical occasion and is not really an agency for communitarian binding. I don't know if this corresponds in large urban centres elsewhere having a line of delineation cutting off the suburbs and outer reaches from youth appeal; I imagine visits to rural towns must be a rare occasion, largely catering for out-of-towners who have cars.

Jazz has always brought the classes together, both among shared band personnels and audiences, though this has fluctuated proportionately over periods. As one whose appeal for the music has always stretched to encompass the experimental to the straight-ahead, as long as it was forward in conception, it has always been a surprise to discover how segmented the audience is, with attendees often motivated by extra-musical considerations such as the politics or gender issues as much or more than by the actual music, this in turn helping shape the actual character of the music. This is reflected here in the way posters comment on particular artists and recordings, or either ignore or concentrate on certain areas that thereby ineluctably become self-defining genres whether we (or the publicity machine!) like it or not.

[Ian Thumwood]

There doesn't seem to be much support for jazz amongst younger people around here. The two local jazz clubs I attend are/were predominantly attracting audiences of the middle-aged and upwards. Obviously there are some exceptions but like classical music, jazz appears likely to remain a minority interest with an audience that might not find replenishment from youf.

Gradus

I don't think that the music is the problem with attracting an audience but I do wonder whether the "image" jazz clubs have is a barrier. When I went to Vienne a few years back Robert Glasper had just released "Black Radio" and it was interesting that this record was instantly recognised when a car drove past a group of students I was chatting to and they immediately recognised what it was. There was a lot of approval about this disc which made me appreciate that it wasn't so much the youngsters were not listening to jazz but simply listening to a kind of jazz older people were not checking out. I had a similar conversation with some twenty-somethings from France a few years later when they were raving about a performance the next night by a French saxophonist and a DJ. I think younger people will listen to jazz if it is available in an open air venue / busking on the street and especially at festivals. It will always appeal to those who are music students anyway. The problem with jazz clubs is the kind of "Fast Show" image which acts as a barrier to the casual music fan. It is not an especially inviting atmosphere whereas somewhere that would allow you to dance to jazz would have a much greater appeal. This is clearly the case with the newer musicians emerging from the UK who have absolutely nailed this and reconnected jazz with it's social function which jazz clubs had actually alienated. I would add that I would want to listen to the music and not dance to it yet I would bet that most fans under the age of 30 will feel totally different to everyone posting on here.

The Concorde Club is about five miles away from where I live and this is the most famous jazz club in my area. I believe that it has been in existence for longer than Ronnie Scott's but the clientele is not the same as those attending gigs at the Turner Sims. It is ages since I have been there and these days there are more "tribute" acts booked to appear than genuine jazz acts. Back in the 70s and 80s it did attract some significant names albeit they had a policy of booking more conservative acts. In the past I have seen The Dirty Dozen, Scot Hamilton, Gene Harris, BBC Big Band, Howard Alden and Georgie Fame there. Most of the people who go here are retired and middle class. The cost prohibits younger people and I think the ambience of the club would be a challenge too. The biggest problem for me is that people chat throughout the gig. The fans tend to sit near the front whereas the people who have turned up for a meal site the other side of the stage.

By contrast, the Turner Sims is on the Southampton university complex and, as a consequence, has the potential to attract a younger audience. There are still older people attending but I once had a conversation with the manager who explained that he could never gauge which gigs would be popular. The example he made was of a piano trio from Luxembourg whose gig sold out whereas the following concert by Mike Gibb's big band was half empty. I just think that the audience for jazz is unpredictable and fickle. It might even be that there are , in fact, several audiences. However, I do feel that the idea of a traditional jazz club is off-putting for someone who is not an avid fan. In attention, the charges of drinks does make it an expensive evening. Of all the gigs I have been to, I would suggest that less than 10% have been in jazz clubs. There are not too many around and locally there are better options at concert venues. There is not real competition with the Concorde club losing it's reputation as a "serious" jazz venue and being more of a tourist venue complete with hotel. I concur with the sentiments of the benefits of a dedicated jazz club yet I don't think it is necessarily better than saw The Beresford, Stamshaw near Southsea where I have heard Will Bernard before.

[CGR]

There doesn't seem to be much support for jazz amongst younger people around here. The two local jazz clubs I attend are/were predominantly attracting audiences of the middle-aged and upwards. Obviously there are some exceptions but like classical music, jazz appears likely to remain a minority interest with an audience that might not find replenishment from youf.

There is an interest in young serious musicians attracted to the technical & harmonic ideas around improvisation and once they get drawn into playing standards they are usually hooked, but in general, we are up against the moronic mainstream media and the politically led dumbing-down agenda that has destroyed so much that was good in British society.