Equinox
March 08, 2018, by Peter
As discussed in our last class, I as a millennial, or simply as a young person suppose have trouble wrapping my mind around jazz. What truly makes Ornette Coleman or John Coltrane better than any other jazz musician can be kind of elusive. I’m sure there are many unheard of experimental or cutting edge jazz artists that wend unheard of, so why are these two so widely known and respective? I wonder if their personalities and backstories have nay weight to this.
The “Equinox” chapter from Nisenson’s book describes Coltrane through the years in comparison to Coleman. Much of the description describes styles and personal history of John Coltrane’s life, his relationship to his band, racial tensions in the era of Jim Crowe, his own personal reflections on Ornette Coleman, and so on. Very little is said about actual music theory or composition. Take a line like “Ornette’s particular methods, compositions, sidemen, and so on, were clearly too far from Coltrane’s particular conception, but his gusto in playing in this atmosphere is a strong clue to the musical places he was going.”
So the question remains as to why we think of jazz as highfalutin, and “smart” music for the most educated. The discourse here is more reflective of the way I might talk about a pop or rock musician’s larger-than-life persona. Perhaps the disconnect is just the difficulty in acquiring some of this entry-level knowledge which has become more obscure over the decades. I’m sure that to someone who grew up during the height of jazz can more easily tell the difference between different musicians, but may not be able to decipher different hip hop or punk artists the way I can.