[Tradjazz] Condon & Jazz

[Steve Barbone]

"Bill Barnes" <cleanhead77 at earthlink.net>

> Hi Steve:
> No, I was not shooting at you, but at Condon and whoever else agreed
> with those idiotic statements. I've already written here and elsewhere about
> what I think of Condon. Suffice to say that as a jazzman he wasn't fit to
> carry Goodman's jock. Of course not all the music in Benny Goodman's '38
> Carnegie Hall concert was jazz in the strict sense of that style, but some
> of it sure was. Who can say those great solos on "Sing Sing Sing" were not
> jazz at its' very finest.
> Now let's talk about big bands and their "slick" arrangements. Many
> big band arrangements, such as Henderson's "King Porter Stomp" or Nestico's
> "Flight to Nassau", just for a small example, are actually improvised jazz,
> not so much by the performers, AS BY THE ARRANGER. Just as you might listen
> to a jazz record, which is the same every time you play it, so is an
> arrangement that way as well.The arranger creates from his mind on paper the
> same way a performer may create on his horn.
> Also, how is that really different from Condon's band playing "That's
> A'Plenty", "High Society",or "Blue Again" as I heard many times, the same
> way every time except for solos between the ensemble parts?Does that mean
> just because the "arrangement " is memorized that it's not hot jazz ? How
> about Condon's "arrangement" of "LIZA"?Not jazz?
> I am NOT trying to say that all this isn't jazz. It's great jazz and I
> love it. It's just not the only jazz, as some limited tenor guitar (read
> large ukulele) player with a big mouth would have it.
> Bill Barnes

No disagreement from me. Condon was a journeyman banjo/guitarist, not a
great jazz player at all.

His genius was putting the musicians together and promoting the music. For
that one needs a big mouth and he was blessed in that regard. And his bands
almost always out swung everyone else in my ears.

Composers/arrangers may well be improvisers but once the piece is played, it
is no longer improv. Much the same as a record as I see it. Once you hear it
played, it is no longer fresh art, but still something to be enjoyed and
analyzed by listeners.

I like Thelonious Monk's view, that the best jazz is created the first time
you play a number. Because that's when you are at your most creative. He
almost always asked his bands to learn his tunes by ear, rather than give
them the music. You can hear that on his records as new band mates hunt
around for the tune and timing. By the same token, when asked why then, did
he always play (for 40 years or so) the same 60 or so numbers in concert, or
for recording, he would say: "Why to develop an audience for them, of
course." He was no fool. His estate today, basks in very healthy residuals,
because he did just that.

And Condon was no fool. Once he found a format that worked, he stuck with it
till the day he died. To be sure, he hated playing those old war horses over
and over, but that is what the audience demanded. He said many times that he
would have preferred to adapt current tunes to jazz, but then the blue hairs
would have said; "What is that? That is not Jazz." And they would have
deserted him en masse.

So they played That's A Plenty and others till they bled to death. :-) VBG.

But it was still wonderful music, and like or dislike Condon, he was
responsible for it.

Cheers,
Steve

Cheers,
Steve