It sounds odd, but it's true. When it comes to music, many
of the self-styled political "progressives" are the most
reactionary people! Progressive music, which in the jazz
field means the music of such men as Dizzy Gillespie, Boyd
Raeburn, Stan Kenton, Tadd Dameron and the great, young
people who are trying to advance, has had little or no
support from the left-wing press, On the other hand,
reactionary music, which to the young jazz men means the
crude primitive work of old musicians of the New Orleans
and Dixieland schools, has had constant support form the
supposedly progressive press.
The New Masses recently
sponsored a session called "Duels in Jazz," yet both teams
of musicians represented styles that are twenty years out
of date. PV itself, attracted by such slick slogans as
"people's music," "hootenanny," "folksay" and "worker's
songs," had often tooted the horn for reactionary
music.
One musician I know, who joined the Communist
party, is becoming disgusted with what she now calls "a
bunch of [illegible] cultists" who, failing to understand
her progressive musical attitude, are constantly roping her
in on benefits alongside of some of the world's worst
musicians.
Even PM has a shocking record. For example,
it once devoted a big Sunday spread to a
sixty-seven-year-old trumpet player who is admired by the
cultists but not by other musicians: on the other hand, PM
has never run a story on Dizzy Gillespie or any of the
young progressives of jazz.
Duke Ellington made this
point clear when PM extended itself by running an interview
with him two weeks ago. The interviewer asked a leading
question: Don't most jazz "purists" today consider the
abandoned or "improvised" playing of the 20's the only
authentic jazz?
Said Duke: "If that's the thing they
like, they're entitled to it...Dixieland is period music.
And they're very important... But I don't think you can set
it up as the standard for today. Hell, you've got to keep
moving. "This is 1947 and you have all these wonderful
musical minds like bandleaders Dizzy Gillespie and Boyd
Raeburn to represent this period; young minds, progressive
minds, active minds that have to be respected...why should
music stand still?... you look at a 1913 car and then look
at a 1947 car. It's the same thing with music."
That's
the way Duke and every progressive musician feels; yet most
of the critics, and both the liberal and Communist press,
are lined up against his attitude. As Mike Levin recently
wrote in Down Beat, by championing reactionary music they
"also implicitly foster a canard...:Jazz is a primitive
music. Only Negroes can make it, Therefore insofar as
Negroes continue to play good jazz, they prove that they
can never be anything but a primitive people."
Yet this
canard has, unwittingly, been fostered by people who think
they are helping interracial understanding! The extreme
left-wingers are confused in their music thinking, It's
about time for them to wake up!