During last class, the wrap up discussion of our attempts at improvisation
at Choga surprised, and frankly, slightly disturbed me. In a class that I am taking with
an amazing ethnographer, we are pushed to "get even MORE curious"
about situations and worldviews that we encounter which differ vastly from our
own. Within these spaces for exchange, a true opportunity for
verstehen
(understanding) resides.
With my own quest for
verstehen in mind, I want to interrogate our
notions of labels:
Expanded Music through Improvisation: Does this require us to treat all of our improvisations in this class as
Avant Garde? I don't believe that playing angular, jagged lines makes me any more insightful or profound. I worked deliberately toward constructing coherence in the improvisational piece with my colleagues, and I valued the experience greatly. I was experiencing a constellation of very different approaches to feel, comping styles, and how individuals lay on the beat than what I'm used to within a strict genre. This was very instructive, and I stand by my choices to gravitate toward coherence. Keith Jarrette is a very cohesive improviser. His stuff straddles and blurs all kinds of boundaries between jazz and classical, but it still coheres. I admire his playing greatly.
Saxophone: Does the presence of a saxophone imply a certain expectation that what is being played is
jazz? To me, the presence of some sort of groove-based improvisation does not make it default to being jazz. Jazz improvisation (often) follows a very clearly delineated (and often complex) chord structure. Are saxophones expected to always function as a melodic instrument, loud and commanding? I am primarily a classical player (not that anyone accepts that label from a saxophonist, either), and do not aspire to sound like John Zorn or Ornette Coleman. I know I was concerned about playing too intensely for the size of the room in Choga.
Smooth Jazz: This label has many implications, some of which are perceived as derogatory in certain circles. Smooth jazz is characterized by funky, slap basslines, wah-wah guitar, and commercial-sounding melodies largely restricted to a pentatonic or blues scale from bright, loud horn lines (typically trumpet or saxophone). I wonder what experiences have led one of my classmates to categorize our efforts as "smooth jazz"?
Process versus Product in Improvisation: Christopher Small notes a stark difference between Western and Eastern musics. Western music is often intensely goal-oriented and dependent upon some sort of positionality in time. For example, if it's a Mozart piece, we can track the beginning, development, and the end, which is often marked by a lot of V-I movement. In music from Bali and other Eastern cultures, the music conspires to prolong and accentuate the present state. It doesn't try to build momentum to a defined end. Westerners' obsession with time is a social construction. (This is especially difficult to navigate in my household sometimes! My husband's family [from India] takes a much more laissez-faire approach to time than my family does).
Based upon the critique of my group's improvisation, I came away feeling
subjected to a specific paradigm of boundaries or expectations that had been
imposed after the fact. This felt really arbitrary to me. These had not, to my knowledge, been previously
expressed as parameters toward the improvisation exercise that we should have
been aspiring to. I am especially concerned for my colleagues who already don't feel comfortable improvising in any way, and believe that we should be mindful of different views on labels in how we frame our critiques.