Duke Ellington and politics

[EKE BBB]

In the last few days, an interesting debate has risen (in the EKE mail list) about the political involvement of Duke Ellington, as compared with Louis Armstrong, in the defense of the rights of black population.

On the one hand, Louis Armstrong, though having publicly voiced his opinion on how blacks were being treated, was highly critiziced by his own race and tipified as an "Uncle Tom".

On the other, Duke Ellington never made public statements on politics. Notwithstanding, many of his compositions showed his view about the position of black people in America. To name a few, Jump for Joy, BB&B, Harlem, My people, Echoes of Harlem...

And Duke wasn´t typified as an "Uncle Tom", was he?

I can´t bring a personal opinion, as I don´t live in USA, in that era, and I can´t really understand the problem. But I think this is an interesting question!

Cheers,

Agustín

PD: I think this belongs here, but I´ll change it if you think it´s better placed in the Politics Forum

Edited October 15, 2004 by EKE BBB

[Dr. Rat]

In the last few days, an interesting debate has risen (in the EKE mail list) about the political involvement of Duke Ellington, as compared with Louis Armstrong, in the defense of the rights of black population.

On the one hand, Louis Armstrong, though having publicly voiced his opinion on how blacks were being treated, was highly critiziced by his own race and tipified as an "Uncle Tom".

On the other, Duke Ellington never made public statements on politics. Notwithstanding, many of his compositions showed his view about the position of black people in America. To name a few, Jump for Joy, BB&B, Harlem, My people, Echoes of Harlem...

And Duke wasn´t typified as an "Uncle Tom", was he?

I can´t bring a personal opinion, as I don´t live in USA, in that era, and I can´t really understand the problem. But I think this is an interesting question!

Cheers,

Agustín

PD: I think this belongs here, but I´ll change it if you think it´s better placed in the Politics Forum

This topic gets you into some complicated territory, because from a (largely white) historical perspective, the most important thing for twentieth-century blacks ought to have been overtly renogotiating the relationship between whites and blacks.

BUT, Ellington didn't live in the world of white historical perspective, he lived in a world where there were all kinds of other complicating issues: his ability to create art and get it accepted, the conflicts amongst working class and middle-class blacks (as well as between blacks of different hues), the not inconsiderable opportunities that existed for middle-class blacks, the question of on what terms the integration of white and black societies ought to take place.

I think Ellington might well come in for some criticism by students who carefully consider all of these factors and conflicts.

But usually what I see is people who just retrospactively (and rather arrogantly) criticize him for not being the socio-politcal leader they want him to have been, with precious little sense of the context.

I think the John Hammond/Duke Ellington conflict might be one good place to start looking at the issues.

--eric

[JSngry]

Duke didn't have to say anything to make his point.

Actions (and attitude, and "speaking between the lines", and godknowswhatelse) did his talking louder than any words could.

[ghost of miles]

Ellington's involvement with politics is a nuanced history. You might want to check out Michael Denning's THE CULTURAL FRONT, an excellent book about politics and the arts in the 1930s and 40s; there are several mentions of Ellington there. He played a few Communist Party benefits in the 1930s and signed petitions for a number of social justice causes. He himself wasn't a Communist, but this sort of support and peripheral involvement wasn't uncommon at all in the 1930s jazz world (and it's one of the reasons why there's still a tradition, alive today, of jazz's being intertwined with liberal and leftwing politics). In the late 1940s he issued a statement distancing himself from some of the things he'd signed (given the times and the political climate, it's understandable, if regrettable--a number of other artists were backpedaling fast, including alleged tough-guy Humphrey Bogart, from leftist causes that they'd previously backed). He also had some sort of run-in with the NAACP in the early 1950s, but my details on this are pretty fuzzy--had to do with a concert performance.

Denning's book also contains a long section on JUMP FOR JOY, Ellington's 1941 civil-rights musical, and one of the most overt statements he ever made about racial politics in the United States. (When a protestor challenged Ellington in the early 1960s with the question, "What have you done for the movement?" Ellington replied, "I did my civil-rights piece 20 years ago with JUMP FOR JOY.") Pardon the self-promotion here, but I did an hour-long documentary on this musical precisely because of the fascinating intersection it forged with politics, Hollywood glamour, racial justice, and the 1941 Blanton-Webster band. It's archived here.

Edited October 16, 2004 by ghost of miles

[ghost of miles]

The musical MY PEOPLE is another example of Ellington making a pretty strong statement about civil rights.

[jazzbo]

I totally agree David, and I think Black, Brown and Beige is both representative of Duke speaking with actions and his work, and its reception (and that of Jump for Joy) perhaps explains why this was not done as frequently as he may have earlier envisioned he would practice showing his political mind.

I agree with Jim that he didn't have to make outright spoken political statements (although he did read all those Treasury Department blurbs in that series, but really I hardly consider that his real voice and thoughts). He did convey a lot of belief in the validity and potency of his race's place in American history and culture through his musical work and his bearing and deeds.

[Shrdlu]

Above all, Duke's music is his great contribution, as Jim says. And bearing in mind Duke's gruelling itinerary, for many years, he would have had little time to do anything else but perform and compose music. Politics and related pursuits can take up a lot of time.

How could anyone that was reasonable not have respect for a man who produced so much music of such high quality? Surely even the old Nats in South Africa would have been impressed. By the way, I just heard that the S.A. Dutch Reformed Church decided that its race policy (in the apartheid years) was NOT biblical and that it has repented of its heretical teachings. If they had followed the Bible all along, and rightly divided the word of truth, that evil regime would never have been set up.