Reference List

Armstrong, L. (1928). Louis Armstrong and his hot 5 [CD]. [Performed by Louis Armstrong]. Chicago, IL: OKeh Records. Berliner, P.F. (2000), Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation (5th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Campbell, M. (2008), Popular music in America: And the beat goes on (3rd ed.). Detroit, MI: Cengage Learning. Caponi, G.D. (1999), Signifyin(g), sanctifyin and slam dunking. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts Press. Coleman, O. (1961). Free Jazz: a collective improvisation [CD], [Performed by Ornette Coleman]. New York, NY: Atlantic Records. Hardie, D. (2002), Exploring early jazz: The origins and evolution of the New Orleans style. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse. Konitz, L. (1955). Subconscious-lee [CD], [Performed by Lee Konitz]. New York, NY: Prestige Records. Martin, H., Walters, K. (2005), Jazz: The first 100 years (2nd ed.). Detroit, MI: Cengage Learning. Oliver, J. (1923). King Oliver and his creole band [CD], [Performed by Joe Oliver]. Richmond, IN: Gennett Recording Company. Ramshaw, S.L. (2006), Deconstructing Jazz Improvisation: Derrida and the Law of the Singular Event. Critical studies in improvisation, 2(1), 1- 16. Retrieved September 29, 2010, from Jazz Studies Online database. Rowan, D.C. (2004), Modes and Manifestations of Improvisation in Urban Planning, Design and Theory. Critical studies in improvisation, 1(1), 1-25. Retrieved September 29, 2010, from Jazz Studies Online database. Yemisi Jimoh, A. (2002), Spititual, blues and jazz people in African American fiction: Living in a paradox. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press.

The Evolution of Improvisation in Jazz: An analysis of collective improvisation, the emergence of the jazz soloist and their lasting impact on jazz today

By Andrew Saragossi S2702409 2301QCM word count: 2061

The Evolution of Improvisation in Jazz: An analysis of collective improvisation, the emergence of the jazz soloist and their lasting impact on jazz today

Improvisation sits on the edge in between the known and unknown and you have to keep pushing it towards the unknown otherwise it and you die Steve Lacy

How can you define the indefinable genre? The word Jazz has had this question surrounding it throughout its entire existence. Even one of the musics greatest sons, Louis Armstrong when asked this question answered, If you have to ask, youll never know. It is the pure feeling and history which possesses the music that eludes it from being pigeon-holed by the constraints of definition and language. Many have tried and failed. However the one thing that brings cohesion and consistency to the music is its improvisational nature. In fact, whichever way you look at it, the concept and evolution of improvisation has been the key to not only creating jazz, but extending and pushing its boundaries to new and exciting places. This article will explore the foundation and role of improvisation in jazz and the ways in which it has advanced and changed throughout its history; with a focus on collective improvisation during the New Orleans jazz period in the 1920s, the emergence of the jazz soloist in the decades which followed and investigating the progression and transformation of both of these styles of improvisation in modern jazz. For me, improvisation is the concept of creation without predisposition. Its role and importance in music however extends upon this description. Spontaneous and unbiased composition allows musicians to play and think in the moment whilst reacting to each other and the environment around them. This keeps the music fresh and exiting. The belief that every time you play, something new and never heard before will come out is the main reason jazz has evolved so drastically in its short history and is also its distinguishing feature from other styles of music. Soprano saxophonist Steve Lacy put it best when he said improvisation sits on the edge inbetween the known and unknown and you have to keep pushing it towards the unknown otherwise it and you die (cited from Ramshaw, 2006). It is this notion which makes improvisation so powerful and such an integral part of the jazz culture. Improvisation has always been a tradition in Jazz, going all the way back to the work songs that slaves would chant in the fields. This tradition carried its way forward to the New Orleans style jazz which flourished in the 1920s. New Orleans jazz has a very distinctive sound and is characterised by having bands with two separate sections with two different roles. Firstly the rhythm sections role in the music was to accompany, set the groove and lay down the basic harmony of the tunes. The usual line up consisted of Bass (which would play the basic harmony i.e. roots and fifths of the chords), Banjo (which would strum the chords either on every beat of the bar or on the second and fourth beats of the bar for a syncopated feel) and the drums which consisted of a variety of percussion instruments used in old marching bands (which would simply play the time) (Martin, Walters, 2005, p.49). The front line section

normally consisted of cornet (which carried the melody), trombone (which would play counter melodies or bass tones) and the clarinet (which also played counter melodies) (Martin, Walters, 2005, p.47-8). Their role in the group was to improvise lines collectively and simultaneously within the constraints of the harmony to create a very busy but exciting texture. Rudi Blush describes this playing as cooperative polyphony (cited in Hardie, 2002, p.146) because to make the music effective and stylistic everyone has to know not only his or her own role but the others role as well (Campbell, 2008, p.51). This characteristic sound is epitomized in the recording of Dippermouth Blues (1923) by New Orleans cornetist Joe King Oliver (1885-1938) and his Creole Band. Although the recording sounds hectic due to the many countermelodies fighting against Oliver, there is always a sense that the melody is the most important line whilst the others simply embellish. This is because all the members of the band listen to each other and try to create cohesive music in which each separate part fits together to create the whole. Berliner (2000) even likens group improvisation to a conversation that players carry on amongst themselves in the language of jazz (pg.348). Its this social nature and necessary team-work which defines collective improvisation and differentiates it from the jazz soloist. The emergence of the jazz soloist and solo improvisation was coming to fruition even in the New Orleans period of jazz. In fact even on Joe King Olivers Dippermouth Blues (1923), there are several full chorus solos which in the day, were nearly unheard of (only occasionally occurred when there were stops in the arrangement). In fact one of the soloists on that track was Olivers protg and perhaps the most famous jazz soloist of all time, trumpeter Louis Armstrong (1901-1971). The main driving factors in the change from collective improvisation to the jazz soloist are as follows; the emergence of swing music in the 1930s rendered collective improvisation moot as the big bands simply had too many players to cater to the style; Many jazz musicians wished to show off their brilliance and wanted to free themselves from the constraints of having to improvise within a structured format; and simply change is something which in itself defines jazz as a genre. Louis Armstrong after recording with his mentor, set out on becoming a band leader and developing his new style. After travelling to New York to play with pianist Fletcher Henderson (1897-1952), he came back to Chicago to start and lead his group called the Hot 5. On their recording of West End Blues (1928) the new soloist form of improvisation is clearly demonstrated. The tune begins with Armstrong playing a flourish of dazzling notes in such extravagant fashion all solo and when the band comes in it is clear that they are there to support the soloist and not to counter or play against them. The clarinet and trombone simply play long chord tones or in harmony with Armstrongs melody. This is then followed by whole chorus trombone clarinet and piano solos. It is clear that this new style of improvisation becomes a figure of liberation, risk, spontaneity and excitement (Rowan, 2004) in opposition to the predictability and business of early collective improvisation. Instead of worrying about where their part fits in the arrangement soloist were now free to express themselves with less constraint and connect with a listening audience on a new level. Yemisi Jimoh (2002) put it best when she stated improvisation allows reshaping of set forms the ability to represent song as a means of recording ones life experiences; and fragmentation and doubleness as artistic techniques (p.5). These values still remain in jazz today (especially when playing with singers or instrumentalists playing ballads).

Although the word improvisation hasnt changed in fundamental meaning in Jazz music, the values and beliefs surrounding it have evolved immensely in the modern jazz era. Collective improvisation has perhaps changed most radically. After solo improvisation dominated through the 1930s, 40s, and 50s in swing, bebop and cool jazz respectively, a group of serious and intellectual musicians created the free jazz movement and changed the way people would think and react to collective improvisation forever. These people, led by Ornette Coleman (1930-), John Coltrane (1926-67) and Cecil Taylor (1921-), were of the belief that one can not truly spontaneously create music when there are constraints and bias on what you play (whether it be harmonic, structural, form, rhythmic constraints etc.). They believed you had to be completely free of all of these limitations to create real music. Ornette Coleman recorded his seminal album entitled Free Jazz: A Collective Improvisation (1961) with the sole purpose of playing without restrictions and only reacting to the musicians and the environment they were playing in. In fact he even said to his musicians during the recording session lets try to play the music and not the background (cited Ramshaw, 2006). I believe this background he refers to is simply a word to describe everything that has happened before. When listening to the album the first thing you notice is how loud, harsh and dissonant sounding it is however it is very easy to understand how the music is operating and why it is operating such a way. It is due to the musicians reacting to one another. At any point in the recording it is easy to hear the musicians playing with and against each other trying to create new sounds. Although it sounds completely different to New Orleans style jazz, some aspects remains constant. The complete awareness of the individual in the group is perhaps the clearest of all. In New Orleans Jazz the individuals have to know what everyone is doing so they know how to make their part fit, whereas in free jazz, the individual has to be constantly listening and reacting to achieve the same result. The concept is the same however the values, thoughts and beliefs which encase it have evolved. This is also true in the case of solo improvisation. In the case of most singers, the same values of support and simplicity still apply to the upmost in modern jazz; however throughout the second half of the 20th century most serious, brutal and extremely intelligent jazz soloists began to change the views on the art of solo improvisation. In modern jazz, the idea of solo improvisation has evolved to a level where it could almost be considered a type of collective improvisation. Musicians like Lee Konitz (1927- ), Miles Davis (1926-1991) and Wayne Shorter (1933 - ) began to shy away from the basic idea that the soloist was the only thing that mattered in a performance. Although in many cases on recordings it might simply sound as though musicians are taking extended solos, the truth is that their approach allows for them to interact with their band to make cohesive music. Lee Konitz when asked about this style of playing stated he wants to relate to the bass player and the piano player and the drummer (cited Berliner, 2000, p.360). Although the soloist is the temporary leader in the group, they often rely on the rhythm section to provide substance and direction for the entire performance. Lee Konitz continues If I hear the piano play a figure, Ill stop for a moment and react to it. Ill do something as a result of what he did (cited Berliner, 2000, p.359). On Konitzs 1955 recording of Subconscious-Lee these values, thoughts and beliefs are quite clearly shown. The tune (written by Konitz) is a contrafact of the jazz standard What is this thing Called Love (Cole Porter) and all throughout his solo it is easy to hear Konitz interacting with his band. For example in one instance the pianist plays a tri tone substitution

over a dominant chord and after picking up on this Konitz plays a line to match this. Similarly, Konitz creates a strong rhythmic figure and the drummer and bass player hear and react accordingly. Although still considered Konitzs solo it is clear that the concept of the jazz soloist has evolved and too an extent fused with similar ideals to collective improvisation. We may never be able to define jazz. However, perhaps it is simply beyond the capabilities of language. When Armstrong said if you have to ask, youll never know, I think he refers to what jazz feels like. When I think about the music I think about spontaneity, beauty, discord, risk, known, unknown. I think about improvisation. From humble beginnings of conversational collective improvisation in New Orleans to the flash and glamour of the jazz soloists, the beauty of this music is that someone will always discover a new way to play something or a new way to write something. It is this very reason that jazz and improvisation have evolved and will keep evolving as long as people continue to play and experiment. The genius of our country is improvisation, and jazz reflects that. It's our great contribution to the arts. Ken Burns