View Single Post
  #202  
Old 03-29-2010, 05:22 AM
MikeM's Avatar
MikeM MikeM is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,665
Default Re: Pat Metheny on Kenny G and other Jazz greats

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deltadrummer View Post
Jay, you are wrong, too. :)

The idea is that it is misguided to call Kenny G's music jazz. To call it jazz is wrong, just like calling a Cellica a Cadillac is wrong. You may prefer to drive a Cellica; but that still does not make it a Cadillac. It's that simple.

As far as Kenny's success the question really has nothing to do with it. But honestly Jay. do you really think that calling Kenny G's music jazz made a heap of difference for the jazz market. Did he sell more Kind of Blue records. maybe. But it seems what it does is give anyone who defends Kenny G ample ground to call anyone who doesn't a jazz snob.:)

Pat alludes to the greater implication of Kenny playing with the Louie film. It would be interesting to see what people believe some of those greater implications were, especially now that ten years have passed. In those ten years, you had the establishment of JALC, so now everyone has Wynton to hate. :)
You know, the more you go on about this, the more I am of the opinion that you are wrong.

I fully "get" the idea your putting forth here. And of course, you're fully entitled to your opinion. But it really feels more like you're defending a religion.

It isn't a case of calling a Toyota a Cadillac. That's a bad example because those are objective items.

There are no universally accepted objective boundaries that contain all that is jazz. The genre has been around too long and fragmented into too many sub-genres, each operating on it's own set of "rules", that to try and say that there is a single set of criteria that makes it so just doesn't hold water. Especially since so many sub-genres include so much cross-over from other genres. The whole affair of trying to define it becomes this slippery mess.

It seems to me that the whole point of trying to define it to begin with is just so that you can exclude certain unpopular players. Any notion of "true jazz" just rings hollow because really, what is that?

When I listen to Count Basie (esp early '50s) I hear rock and roll. The songs all have catchy hooks with melodies that stick on the brain for days, and are cleverly arranged much like a modern pop song. The main difference seems to be that the rhythm swings and horns and piano are the dominant instruments.

Then there's the way out there stuff like Miles and Coltrane that was very different. And later came smooth jazz.

I really don't see how you're going to be able to devise a set of rules that includes these forms of jazz that can necessarily exclude Kenny G.

How come we can't be happy with two forms of music: the good and the bad and everyone gets to define them for themselves

Last edited by MikeM; 03-29-2010 at 05:42 AM.
Reply With Quote