Professional Documents
Culture Documents
8.27 Defining Jazz PDF
8.27 Defining Jazz PDF
8.27 Defining Jazz PDF
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Musical
Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
Three Approaches to Defining Jazz
MARKGRIDLEY,ROBERT MAXHAM,ANDROBERT HOFF
WAEthem
will examine three approaches to defining jazz. None of
is entirely satisfactory, but each has virtues that the
others lack. All specify somewhat different, though overlapping,
bodies of music that can be called jazz. Too few speakers and far
too few authors take the time or thought to explain what they
mean by jazz. When they assume that listeners and readers share
their frame of reference, endless problems result. The term 'jazz"
has always been particularly problematic. Even its origins are in
dispute, and it has been used in widely disparate ways. This has
caused endless controversy, much of which is probably needless.
Numerous books on the subject do not even offer a definition of
the term.' When a definition has been attempted, the results have
often been confusing. Compare, for example, the following
definitions that have been offered by various journalists and
teachers:
' Recent
examples include Jazz: America'sClassicalMusic by Grover Sales, Prentice-Hall,
1984, Jazz: A Listener's Guide by James McCalla, Prentice-Hall, 1982, and The Origin and
DevelopmentofJazzby Otto Werner, Kendall-Hunt, 1984.
2
"JazzIs Not Music," TheForum(Aug., 1928).
513
514 The Musical Quarterly
Henry Osgood: "It is the spirit of the music, not the mechanics of
its frame or the characteristics of the superstructure built upon
that frame, that determines whether or not it is jazz.'"4
doesn't become jazz until it is improvised on, and there you have
the real core of all jazz: improvisation."8
Harvard Dictionary of Music (2nd Edition): "Akind of indigenous
American music of the 20th century, originally identified with social
dancing, featuring rhythmic patterns peculiar to the 'jazz beat."'9
Joachim Berendt: 'Jazz differs from European music in three basic
elements: 1. a special relationship to time, defined as 'swing' 2. a
spontaneity and vitality of musical production in which impro-
visation plays a role 3. a sonority and manner of phrasing which
mirror the individuality of the performing jazz musician. These
three basic characteristics create a novel climate of tension, in which
the emphasis no longer is on great arcs of tension, as in European
music, but on a wealth of tension-creating elements, which contin-
uously rise and fall. The various styles and stages of development
through which jazz has passed since its origin around the turn of the
century are largely characterized by the fact that the three basic
elements of jazz temporarily achieve varying degrees of importance,
and that the relationship between them is constantly changing."10
Henry Martin: ". . . jazz is a twentieth century music originated in
America by black Americans and characterized by improvisation
and a strong projection of rhythm.""
Max Harrison: "Attempts at a concise-even a coherent definition
of jazz have invariably failed. Initial efforts to separate it from
related forms of music resulted in a false primacy of certain aspects
such as improvisation, which is neither unique nor essential to jazz
or swing (the quality of rhythmic momentum resulting from small
departures from the regular pulse), which is absent from much
jazz, early and late.""12
Lay uses of the term have been so confused and inconsistent
that the following popular issues remain unresolved, pending a
clear and consistently applied definition for jazz: Is jazz art music?
How can we answer this question unless we have clear definitions of
jazz and of art music? And what definition of jazz would apply to the
music of AlJolson from his 1927 film 'The Jazz Singer" or the music
8 "The World ofJazz" from CBS Omnibus series, telecast Oct. 16, 1955.
9 Cambridge, Mass., 1972, p. 317.
,o TheStoryOfJazz(Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1978), p. 7.
" EnjoyingJazz(New York, 1986), p. 4.
12 TheNew GroveDictionaryof Music and Musicians,Vol. 9 (London, 1980), p. 561.
516 The Musical Quarterly
of Peter, Paul, and Mary, that won first place in the vocal division of
'jazz"popularity polls run by Playboyin 1964, 1965, and 1966?
Was jazz popular during any given era of twentieth-century
music? Can the highly arranged music of certain best-selling
records of the 1930s and 1970s be called jazz if it lacks
improvisations or if improvisations are so brief that they do not
contribute significantly to the overall result?
How should we interpret discographer Brian Rust's statement
about Glenn Miller: ". . . the majority of the Bluebird and Victor
sides are of little or no jazz interest..."?
To attack these questions and dilemmas, we will look at three
different kinds of definitions and test their fit on styles that have
proved especially difficult to classify. We will examine first a strict
definition that requires improvisation and swing feeling. A second
and different approach ties styles together only by family
resemblances. The third is an "essence approach" in which the
relative presence of certain components determines the relative
"jazzness"of a performance.
Framing a Strict Definition
Let us first evaluate a strict definition that requires a perfor-
mance to be improvised and to swing in the jazz sense.14 For the sake
of the preliminary parts of this discussion we shall say that "to impro-
vise" is to compose and perform simultaneously; "to swing"is to pro-
ject rhythmic qualities that elicit from the listener the perception of a
lilting, buoyant feeling peculiar to jazz. (Such circularity in this
characterizationis unavoidable here.) Traditionally,swing feeling and
improvisationhave been considered essential to jazz. In fact, these two
traits are prominently featured in all fifteen texts that are currently
used in the United States as introductions to jazz or jazz history.15
'3JazzRecords,Vol. 2 (Chigwell, England, 1970), p. 1125.
"4Asopposed to swinging in a general sense, a quality ascribed to any successful
performance of music that has steady tempo and lively execution; see Mark C. Gridley'sJazz
Styles(1978), pp. 14-16.
5 Leroy Ostransky, UnderstandingJazz(1977); Frank Tirro, Jazz: A History (1977); Jerry
Coker, Listening toJazz (1978); James Lincoln Collier, The Making ofJazz (1978);Charles
Nanry, TheJazz Text (1979); Joachim Berendt, TheJazz Book (1982); Donald Megill and
Richard Demory, IntroductiontoJazz History(1984); Paul Tanner and Maurice Gerow, A Study
ofJazz, 6th Edition (1988); James McCalla, Jazz: A Listener'sGuide (1982); Henry Martin,
EnjoyingJazz (1986); Grover Sales, Jazz: America's Classical Music (1984); Nathan Davis,
Writingsin Jazz (1978); Otto Werner, The Origin and DevelopmentofJazz (1984); Joseph Levey,
TheJazz Experience:A Guide to Appreciation(1983); and Mark Gridley, Jazz Styles:History and
Analysis,3rd Edition (1988).
Three Approaches to DefiningJazz 517
23 Charlie Parker occasionally reused some of the phrases first recorded by him on
"Now's the Time" Nov. 26, 1945, for Savoy; Miles Davis has frequently quoted his own
phrases originally recorded by him April 22, 1959, available on Kind of Blue (Columbia CL
1355). These are not exceptions. They constitute accepted practice. In fact, many jazz
musicians can be identified by the astute listener who detects the player's favorite phrases in
a new recording. Jazz musicians frequently quote each other's favorite phrases, sometimes
an entire chorus being recreated. Gridley once attended a night club performance in which
Sonny Stitt inserted note-for-note Lester Young solos into his tenor sax solos and note-for-note
Charlie Parker solos into his alto sax solos. Jon Faddis has crafted ajazz trumpet style by quot-
ing Dizzy Gillespie phrases, and Wynton Marsalishas done similarly with Miles Davis phrases.
520 The Musical Quarterly
useful enough to exclude music like Rhapsodyin Blue that does not
swing, though this definition also excludes some music that most
listeners would call '"jazz":many of Cecil Taylor's post-1960 works,
because they do not swing; "Come Sunday" from Duke Ellington's
Black, Brown & Beige, because it is neither swinging nor largely
improvised; Manhattan Transfer's vocal recreations of instrumental
jazz, because Manhattan Transfer is not improvising, and so on.
A "FamilyResemblances" Approach
Practical application of the strict definition requires an
impossible-to-attain degree of precision in specifying swing feeling
and a considerable loosening in the way many of us ordinarilydefine
improvisation; even with such loosening, it still excludes many styles
that have traditionally been accorded the jazz designation. So
perhaps we should try an entirely different approach. This would not
seek common elements in all the styles that have ever been called jazz
but instead look for ways in which some styles resemble and differ
from others, and in which those others resemble and differ from still
others. Instead of searching for a single fiber that continues
throughout the entire thread of jazz history, we would satisfy
ourselves with finding links between adjacent styles and thereby
appeal to Ludwig Wittgenstein's metaphor that "the strength of the
thread does not reside in the fact that some one fibre runs through
its whole length, but in the overlapping of many fibres.'"32
Wittgenstein believed that, for many words, the use of the word
was its meaning. He suggested that some words simply resist strict
definition and we must content ourselves with observing their use
instead of trying to frame definitions. It would be inconsistent with
Wittgenstein's approach to force a change in the way a speaker
uses the word '"jazz."To the person who is using the word, jazz is
whatever he thinks it is, whatever he is using it to describe.
Acceptance of the above perspective leads us to consider that
perhaps some music is called jazz simply because it has similarities
with some of the musical events that were previously called jazz. We
know, for instance, that during the 1920s almost any lively popular
music could be called jazz. The title of the Al Jolson movie about a
Jewish vaudeville singer was TheJazz Singer.According to former
Lombardo trombonist George West, when Guy Lombardo first
"1Philosophical Investigations (1953), p. 32a. In other words there may be no hidden
unity in the diverse forms called '"jazz."
Three Approaches to DefiningJazz 525
came to America, he felt that the music he played was jazz. From
all the elements that have ever been felt to help qualify a sound as
jazz-syncopation, improvisation, saxophones, drums, blue notes,
etc.-at least one must be present for any performance to be called
jazz, but no one particular element must always be present; i.e., no
single element is necessary and no single element is sufficient. By
adopting such a stand, we would be able to include any style that
has ever been called jazz, thereby placating everyone who would be
outraged at the suggestion that certain works of Cecil Taylor,
certain movements of Duke Ellington's Black, Brown & Beige, or
some of Glenn Miller's biggest hits are not jazz. We could even
include most of the lively popular instrumental music of the 1920s,
much of which is routinely excluded by jazz scholars on the
grounds that it is not improvised, though it is included by most
laymen because it is lively and stems from what F. Scott Fitzgerald
dubbed "TheJazz Age." We could include RhapsodyIn Blue because
it is bluesy and syncopated, even though it is not improvised or
swinging. And we could include Manhattan Transfer's vocal
recreations of jazz instrumentals because the recreations
sometimes swing, even though they lack improvisation.
If you feel that a definition requiring jazz performances to be
improvised and to be perceived as swinging excludes too much to
be useful, then you probably agree with Wittgenstein's suggestion
that some terms cannot be subjected to quasi-mathematical
treatment. The things to be defined are just too varied-like
members of a family. No single trait is necessarily common to each
and every one of them. Applied to the term 'Jazz,"Wittgenstein's
suggestion would allow a large number of styles to be sheltered
under a very comprehensive umbrella. It would not require that all
the styles exhibit even one common defining characteristic. Two
entirely dissimilar styles, such as Guy Lombardo's and Woody
Herman's, might be linked by a third style, such as big band music
in general-or even by a chain of styles in which each pair of
adjacent links would share a common feature but in which no
single feature would characterize every style. For instance, the
music of the Modern Jazz Quartet does not resemble that of Guy
Lombardo, but because of the MJQ's use of improvisation and
swing feeling, its work does resemble that of the Woody Herman
band, which, in turn, resembles the work of Guy Lombardo because
both Lombardo and Herman have similar instrumentation.
526 The Musical Quarterly