Why Americans Don't Like Jazz

[White Lightning]

This is an interesting, thought provoling article.

(Sorry if it was mentioned on an earlier thread)

Why Americans Don't Like Jazz

By Dyske Suematsu

The current market share of Jazz in America is mere 3 percent. That includes all the great ones like John Coltrane and the terrible ones like Kenny G (OK, this is just my own opinion). There are many organizations and individuals like Wynton Marsalis who are tirelessly trying to revive the genre, but it does not seem to be working. Why is this? Is there some sort of bad chemistry between the American culture and Jazz? As ironic as it may be, I happen to believe so.

One day, I was talking to my wife about the TV commercial for eBay where a chubby lady sings and dances to an appropriated version of “My Way” by Frank Sinatra. The lyrics were entirely re-written, and “my way” was transformed into “eBay”. I told her that they did a good job in adapting the original song. Then she said: “Ah, that’s why I like it so much!” She actually did not realize that it was adapted from Sinatra’s song.

My wife and I have always known how differently we listen to music. I tend to entirely ignore lyrics, while she tends to entirely ignore music. We are the two opposite ends of the spectrum in this sense, and it appears that my wife’s side is more common. Many of my friends think that I have a peculiar, or plain bad, taste for music. Whenever I say I like this song or that song, they look at me like I am crazy. Then they go on to explain why it is bad, and I realize that they are referring to the lyrics, not to the music. I then pay attention to the lyrics for the first time, and realize that they are right. The opposite happens often too where many of my friends love a particular song, and I can’t understand what’s good about it until I pay attention to the lyrics.

The eBay example is an extreme case where my wife could not recognize the original once the lyrics were swapped. To her, if you change the lyrics, it is an entirely different song. It is the other way around for me; in most cases, I would not notice any change in the lyrics. The eBay song was an exception; I only noticed it because it is a famous song used for a TV commercial.

I believe my wife’s way of listening to music is typically American, and my way of listening to music, typically Japanese. If you don’t speak English, any songs written in English are instrumental music. Singers turn into just another musical instrument. These days, no matter where you live, you cannot get away from the dominance of the American music. This means that most non-English speakers grow up listening to a lot of instrumental music. In Japan, I would say, it constitutes about half of what people listen to. When they are listening to Madonna, Michael Jackson, or Britney Spears, they have very little understanding of what their songs are about. In this sense, their ears are trained to listen to and enjoy instrumental music, which explains why Jazz is still so popular in Japan.

To be able to enjoy instrumental music, you must be able to appreciate abstract art, and that requires a certain amount of effort. Just mindlessly drinking wine, for instance, would not make you a wine connoisseur. Mindlessly looking at colors (which we all do every day) would not make you a color expert either. Great art demands much more from the audience than the popular art does.

In this sense, the American ears are getting lazier and lazier. It wasn’t so long ago that most people knew how to play a musical instrument or two. Now the vast majority of Americans couldn’t tell the difference between a saxophone and a trumpet. Thanks partially to music videos, music is now a form of visual art. The American culture is so visually dominant that a piece of music without visuals cannot command full attention of the audience. For Americans, music is a background element, a mere side dish to be served with the main course. If they are forced to listen to a piece of instrumental music without any visuals, they don’t know what to do with their eyes, much like the way a nervous speaker standing in front of a large audience struggles to figure out what to do with his hands. Eventually something visual that has nothing to do with the music grabs their attention and the music is push to the background.

If you have written your own music, you have probably experienced this before: You play it for your friends to get their opinions. For about 10 seconds, everyone is silent. After 20 seconds, their eyes start to wander around. After 30 seconds, someone says something, which triggers everyone else to speak up. After 40 seconds, no one is actually listening to your music. I grew up sitting in front of the stereo with my father, closing our eyes, listening only to what came out of the speakers. This would go on for an hour or two as if we were watching a movie. It wasn’t just me; many of my friends did the same. Who does that anymore? In today’s living rooms, stereos are treated as accessories to television sets.

Visual dominancy isn’t the only problem. The bigger problem is the dominance of our thought. Most Americans do not know what to do with abstraction in general. To be able to fully appreciate abstraction, you must be able to turn off your thought, or at least be able to put your thought into the background. This is not as easy as it might seem. In modern art museums, most people’s minds are dominated by thoughts like: “Even I could do this.” Or, “Why is this in a museum?” Or, “This looks like my bed sheet.” Etc.. They are unable to let the abstraction affect their emotions directly; their experience must be filtered through interpretations. In a way, this is a defense mechanism. It is a way to deal with fears like, “If I admit that I don’t understand this, I’ll look unsophisticated.” This type of fear fills their minds with noise, and they become unable to see, hear, or taste.

This is why songs with lyrics in your own language and paintings with recognizable objects are easier for most people to appreciate. They give their minds something to do. It is like holding a pen in your hand when you are speaking in front of a large audience; you become less nervous because your hands have something to do.

Aesthetically, the paintings of Mark Rothko and those of Monet are quite similar, but the former is utterly unacceptable for many people even though they consider the latter to be a master. The difference is that in Monet’s paintings, you can still see things represented in them: rivers, trees, mountains, houses, and so forth. The audience interprets these objects, and projects their own beautiful memories onto the paintings, which makes the whole process much easier. In Mark Rothko’s paintings, there is nothing they can mentally grab on to. What you see is what you get; there is nothing to interpret. So, the audience is left without a pen to hold on to.

The same happens to instrumental music. If there are no lyrics, that is, if there is nothing for the minds to interpret, projecting of any emotional values becomes rather difficult. As soon as the lyrics speak of love, sex, racism, evil corporations, loneliness, cops, etc., all sorts of emotions swell up. Jazz to most people is like a color on a wall; unless you hung something on it, they don’t even notice it.

This rather unfortunate trend in the American culture seems to be irreversible. The popularity of Rap music seems to be a clear sign of this trend. I can appreciate Rap music for what it is, and I see nothing wrong with it, but it does not promote the full development of musical ears. If the song has any musical substance, it can be played on a piano alone (without a singer or any other instruments), and we would still enjoy it. The lack of musical substance becomes clearly visible if you would take many of today’s popular songs, and play them on a piano alone. Many of them would utilize hardly more than a few keys. Perhaps this trend would promote the appreciation of poetry, but it certainly would not promote the appreciation of music as an abstract form of art.

If we were to reverse this trend, we would need to make a conscious effort in promoting the abstract aspect of music. For instance, play more instrumental music in schools or teach how to play an instrument instead of how to sing. We could go as far as to teach kids in school instrumental music only, because their musical exposure outside of school would be dominated by non-instrumental music anyway. It would be a good way to balance things out.

This problem extends far beyond the American disinterest for Jazz; it is a problem for music in general. The dominance of words and visuals in the American culture has lead people to believe that listening to Rap or watching music videos is the full extent of what music has to offer. If this goes on, they’ll be missing a huge chunk of what life has to offer.

http://www.dyske.com/index.php?view_id=778

[Chas]

This paragraph appeared in an earlier draft and was edited out :

On top of all these problems, Jazz has its own problems. The form of Jazz no longer has anything compelling to offer. If you push the form too far, what you get is Cecil Taylor. Although I love his music, I'm not sure if I would call it Jazz. Other than the symbolic similarity of instruments and the fact that it is improvisational, his music has nothing in common with the stylistic structure of Jazz. (Also the fact that he is Black is another superficial resemblance.) To call something Jazz just because it uses the instruments commonly used in Jazz, and because it is improvised, would broaden the definition of the term so much to the point that it would lose its meaning. Jazz, in this sense, did not die. What died is not the musical spirit of Jazz, but the word "Jazz", and nothing else. The word "Jazz" should be dead, because we have already moved on. Those who insist on playing "Jazz" in the traditional stylistic sense of the word are equivalent to those who reenact Civil War as a recreation. There is nothing wrong with having a little fun, but don't expect to make any compelling artistic statement through it. Playing "Jazz" is not playing music; it's playing musicology.

[Big Beat Steve]

A lot of what he says would also be true for Europe (even if English isn't the mother language of most Europeans). Everybody seems to focus on lyrics all over, no matter how inane or repetitive they are, and even if they don't know or speak any decent English at all. Concentrating on or consciously listening to INSTRUMENTAL music (jazz or not) is becoming a lost art. Instrumental music seems to be relegated to background elevator music in the minds of most people.

That thing about testing the substance of a song by playing it on a piano only is a nice one ...

As for that deleted caption, there is some truth in this too. Stylistically speaking, jazz by now has become such a wide field that you cannot even expect the majority of jazz fans to embrace all styles of jazz alike. One man's jazz is another's ... well, I don't know what, but possibly not jazz. And calling any sort of musical utterance "jazz" if it does not fit any other category (as has been done quite often in the 70s, 80s and 90s) doesn't help either, least of all in helping those outside the jazz world understand what the "core" of jazz actually sounds like.

Edited March 15, 2007 by Big Beat Steve

[Teasing the Korean]

I don't think that most "Americans" - I'm sure the writer means US residents - actively dislike jazz; I think they are largely indifferent to it. And I don't think music in general is as important to most people as it may have been a generation ago.

[Noj]

Most people like singing and pay little attention to instrumental music. My friends who don't like jazz all hate the "old" music with "no words" I would play for them. Most people just want songs they can learn the words to and sing along with, preferably with someone pretty to look at doing the singing. Look at the success of American Idol, it's glorified karaoke. I would bet jazz could be more successful trying to promote Peggy Lee-type lady singers, with its instrumentalists finding a way to implement their craft behind a sexy voice.

[J Larsen]

Most people I meet actively dislike jazz. The majority of the remainder are indifferent. I think most people these days don't like music that demands their attention. Hence the pro-tools cutting and pasting of chorus parts to make sure each repeat sounds exactly the same. Just my theory.

[Jim Alfredson]

The guy contradicts himself a lot in that article, especially with the deleted paragraph.

Why Americans don't like jazz: Most Americans are not musicians. Jazz basically turned into music for musicians, not music for the people. Couple that with the fact that people are not musically educated hardly at all these days (or educated in the arts in general) and you get a public that doesn't care.

I also believe the fact that people are constantly inundated with music has something to do with it as well. But education is the primary culprit. In a country where a hack like Donna Dewberry can sell millions of copies of her atrocious "One Stroke Painting" book, and have her own TV show, what do you expect? Taste is quickly becoming passe.

[DukeCity]

Most people I meet actively dislike jazz. The majority of the remainder are indifferent.

There's a non-music-related discussion forum I visit occasionally, and on a thread called "What kind of music do you listen to?" there were a lot of answers like "...just about anything except jazz."

[ejp626]

Why Americans don't like jazz: Most Americans are not musicians. Jazz basically turned into music for musicians, not music for the people. Couple that with the fact that people are not musically educated hardly at all these days (or educated in the arts in general) and you get a public that doesn't care.

... Taste is quickly becoming passe.

Sadly, most Americans are simply not educated these days, despite near record levels of people going to college. But I do think we have to take these death of culture essays with a grain of salt. Adorno and others wrote long books about how horrible middlebrow and popular culture were, and this was in the late 1940s and 1950s, which is an era many of us consider to have produced some of the best movies and music of all times.

[bluesbro]

The current market share of Jazz in America is mere 3 percent. That includes all the great ones like John Coltrane and the terrible ones like Kenny G (OK, this is just my own opinion).

Anyone know the market share of Jazz in other parts of the world? I cant imagine it would be that different from 3%

Edited March 15, 2007 by bluesbro

[Neal Pomea]

Interesting theory, but I wonder how it takes into account the fact that people can appreciate some forms of instrumental music but not others. Jazz but not square dance. Opera but not mariachi (for the person who doesn't understand Italian or Spanish), etc. Shoot, in my own case, Cajun but not particularly Zydeco, though I understand the lyrics in both and they are thought of as related genres. And country music fans who don't like bluegrass....

Edited March 15, 2007 by It Should be You

[J Larsen]

The current market share of Jazz in America is mere 3 percent. That includes all the great ones like John Coltrane and the terrible ones like Kenny G (OK, this is just my own opinion).

Anyone know the market share of Jazz in other parts of the world? I cant imagine it would be that different from 3%

From personal observation, I'd wager that it is quite a bit higher in France.

[Teasing the Korean]

The 3% figure for US sales is fairly generous. I've heard it was less than that.

[jazzbo]

There's just not enough sexy jazz videos. Make a lot more sexy jazz videos, watch the sales figures rise. Americans might then "like" jazz!

----Tongue in cheek, I think.

[sheldonm]

Why Americans don't like jazz: Most Americans are not musicians. Jazz basically turned into music for musicians, not music for the people. Couple that with the fact that people are not musically educated hardly at all these days (or educated in the arts in general) and you get a public that doesn't care.

... Taste is quickly becoming passe.

Sadly, most Americans are simply not educated these days, despite near record levels of people going to college. But I do think we have to take these death of culture essays with a grain of salt. Adorno and others wrote long books about how horrible middlebrow and popular culture were, and this was in the late 1940s and 1950s, which is an era many of us consider to have produced some of the best movies and music of all times.

I think plenty of people are educated....just not culturally educated! I work with a ton of people that have many degrees and are very smart (some brilliant) that haven't set foot in a museum, listened to jazz or read books since college....seems strange to me but that's what I'm seeing.

Mark~

[Dan Gould]

I think plenty of people are educated....just not culturally educated! I work with a ton of people that have many degrees and are very smart (some brilliant) that haven't set foot in a museum, listened to jazz or read books since college....seems strange to me but that's what I'm seeing.

Mark~

I think a proper education leads people to visit museums and read books after college. Otherwise its just expensive vocational training.

[Jim Alfredson]

I think plenty of people are educated....just not culturally educated! I work with a ton of people that have many degrees and are very smart (some brilliant) that haven't set foot in a museum, listened to jazz or read books since college....seems strange to me but that's what I'm seeing.

Mark~

I think a proper education leads people to visit museums and read books after college. Otherwise its just expensive vocational training.

[Noj]

"You dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin’ education you coulda' got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the Public Library."

[WD45]

I find myself in the same camp of "listening not to the words."

That is why I enjoy vocal music in languages I don't understand.

[paul secor]

I don't think that most Americans have anything more than a surface interest in any kind of music.

[mikeweil]

The 3% figure for US sales is fairly generous. I've heard it was less than that.

I've been told that for Germany and Europe Jazz, Classical, and traditional non-European music together count in at less than 10%. The rest is all types of "popular" music.

[Rooster_Ties]

What kind of jazz is it that most 'regular' folks think of, when they think of the kind of music they associate with what they think is jazz?? -- thus resulting in their claim of not liking (or specifically "hating") jazz??

I guess I'm asking this: what is the most commonly or frequently perceived notion of what "jazz" is?? - to those who have little to no idea what it really is. Kenny G?? Wynton?? Fast bebop with horns?? Trane, circa 1965?? Pops?? KoB?? Big Band??

I know, the answer depends largely upon what generation the person being asked is from, among other factors. Let's limit ourselves to people under the age of 45 (which, like it or not, is the age of people driving popular "culture" in this country (I did put that word in quotes). So that would be people born in or after 1962 -- people who turned 18 in 1980 -- people for whom there (probably) was no gateway to even hearing jazz much ever, except in unique circumstances that probably only pertain to less than 15% of the population.

What do THOSE people think jazz is??

FWIW, before I met my wife (who turns 40 this year), she pretty much thought jazz was all noisy, noodly horns -- so probably "Bird & Diz"-type bebop, and other 50's and 60's horn-based small-combo stuff (or stuff that sounds like that). "Noisy" and "busy" would be the most frequent words she would have used to describe what she thought most jazz was.

Edited March 15, 2007 by Rooster_Ties

[RDK]

Why Americans don't like jazz: Most Americans are not musicians. Jazz basically turned into music for musicians, not music for the people. Couple that with the fact that people are not musically educated hardly at all these days (or educated in the arts in general) and you get a public that doesn't care.

... Taste is quickly becoming passe.

Sadly, most Americans are simply not educated these days, despite near record levels of people going to college. But I do think we have to take these death of culture essays with a grain of salt. Adorno and others wrote long books about how horrible middlebrow and popular culture were, and this was in the late 1940s and 1950s, which is an era many of us consider to have produced some of the best movies and music of all times.

I think plenty of people are educated....just not culturally educated! I work with a ton of people that have many degrees and are very smart (some brilliant) that haven't set foot in a museum, listened to jazz or read books since college....seems strange to me but that's what I'm seeing.

Mark~

What bothers me about some of these sentiments (and others) is the suggestion that one needs to be "educated" to like and appreciate jazz. That sort of elitist attitude toward the music is one of the reasons it's been ghettoized and become increasingly unpopular over the years. I think Jim comes closest to hitting the mark in his statement that jazz has turned into music for musicians, not music for the people.

It's really no big deal to me that jazz is so relatively unpopular. It's simply not a "pop" music genre. I mean, I don't like much country music (especially modern country) or opera, and there are vast types of Classical that I can take or leave. It has nothing to do with education, whether general or musical.

[BruceH]

The whole thing about most people prefering singing and lyrics to instrumental music has a lot to it, but things haven't changed much: Even in the "Swing Era" of the late 30's/early 40's most jazz bands made most of their money from vocal hits. We tend to forget this looking back, but even when jazz was at its most popular, 90% of the biggest-selling 78's had vocalists. Singing and lyrics have always been more popular than "mere" instrumental music. That's normal.

[Kalo]

I don't think that most Americans have anything more than a surface interest in any kind of music.

Bingo!

Most Americans don't like anything challenging or different, whether its music, literature, films, art, food, beer, wine...

Land of the bland.