• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • About
  • Donate

The Arts Fuse

Boston's Online Arts Magazine: Dance, Film, Literature, Music, Theater, and more

  • Podcasts
  • Coming Attractions
  • Reviews
  • Short Fuses
  • Interviews
  • Commentary
  • The Arts
    • Performing Arts
      • Dance
      • Music
      • Theater
    • Other
      • Books
      • Film
      • Food
      • Television
      • Visual Arts
You are here: Home / Commentary / Jazz Commentary: Louis Armstrong as Negotiator

Jazz Commentary: Louis Armstrong as Negotiator

October 2, 2020 1 Comment

By Steve Provizer

Throughout much of his career, Louis Armstrong negotiated a balance between being a “popular” artist and a jazz artist.

Louis Armstrong and His Hot Five.

Michael Ullman’s review of Ricky Riccardi’s book Heart Full of Rhythm: The Big Band Years of Louis Armstrong left me thinking about the musician’s relationship with the “jazz audience” and “the general public,” which I see as a variation on the conflict between “commercialism” versus “art.” I haven’t read the book, so can’t speak to how Riccardi handles the question, but it’s easy to see why Armstrong’s place in this duality has long been ambiguous and hard to decode.

In the ’20s, Armstrong created the kind of creative vortex that anyone aspiring to play jazz had to reckon with. This impact was largely due to the trumpeter’s Hot Five and Seven recordings and his work with pianist Earl Hines, which was both a summation and a looking forward. They were technical and creative landmarks. But by the late ’20s, Armstrong’s career began to shift. At this point he was being promoted and recorded pretty much equally, as both a vocalist and trumpet player. For the rest of his life, he negotiated this balance between being a “popular” artist and a jazz artist.

Part of this negotiation entailed codifying — fine tuning  — his solos. In jazz, codification was far more widespread than people acknowledge. The rise of bebop initiated a new priority among musicians — improvisation above all else. Codification began to be seen as being a debasement, a dependence on the tried-and-true. This was part of the “war” of the ’40s that broke out between champions of bop and of traditional jazz (nicknamed “moldy figs”), during which Armstrong famously called bop “Chinese music.” No matter which side you take in that fracas, Armstrong’s position was a manifestation of his ongoing negotiation of the entertainer/jazz musician duality.

To the cohort growing up from the ’60s on, Armstrong was known as a popular entertainer, whose style of playing and stagecraft were, to put it in neutral terms, “old-school.” Armstrong’s playing was rooted in Traditional and Early Swing Jazz and his hits Hello Dolly, Cabaret, and What A Wonderful World were not going to get the blood pumping in a young jazz fan.

In time, I and probably most of that younger generation of jazz fans looked back and discovered the revolutionary ’20s Armstrong recordings. Naturally, that caused a reevaluation of his role in the music and has affected the way he was seen. What might have been perceived as “Uncle Tomming” or stage behavior potentially embarrassing from a racial standpoint was reassessed, eventually subsumed under a larger, longer view of Armstrong’s contribution. Learning of his sometimes ferociously expressed views on racial equality reinforced that reevaluation. I wouldn’t be surprised if this cycle of critique — patronization followed by rediscovery —  is one that subsequent generations of jazz fans will go through.

The jazz audience and the general audience each listen for different things. Armstrong is one of the few musicians gifted with a constellation of performance skills — and musical creativity capable of satisfying listenerships across the board. But every musician has to resolve his or her relationship to this thorny question. When tradition and familiarity dominate, an art form can become brittle, losing its flexibility, its ability to respond to fresh ideas. If “newness” and innovation become the sole motivators, invaluable historical ballast is lost. Knowing that this struggle has long bedeviled the music can help young musicians see their own battles as part of a continuum. If the music of past jazz masters provides inspiration to aspirants, so does knowing they faced many of the same problems. This is a continuum that is not just musical but very human.


Steve Provizer writes on a range of subjects, most often the arts. He is a musician and blogs about jazz here.

Share
Tweet
Pin
Share

By: Steve Provizer Filed Under: Commentary, Featured, Jazz, Music Tagged: Louis Armstong, Steve Provizer

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. john donald crocken says

    October 9, 2020 at 3:41 pm

    Steve: any comment on Louis is welcome–because it starts the conversation!–After this start any one who delves into Louis’ life will come to the best conclusion of his value to music’s growth. When I first heard “West End Blues” (which I came to late in my music career) I was completely knocked out.

    Thanks for your article.

    Red Beans and Ricely yours, John Crocken

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Search

Popular Posts

  • Film Commentary: “Everything Everywhere All at Once” — The Most Serene Movie in Years This movie reminds us that -- if there is any meaning t... posted on May 7, 2022
  • Concert Review: Joe Jackson at the Shubert Theatre — A Restlessly Creative Artist at the Peak of his Powers Trampling on the expectations of his fans, of course, i... posted on May 22, 2022
  • Classical Album Review: Violinist Lea Birringer plays Sinding and Mendelssohn Violinist Lea Birringer's performance of the Christian... posted on May 14, 2022
  • Book Review: Thomas Mann in America In the US, Thomas Mann tacitly proposed himself as an a... posted on May 5, 2022
  • Jazz Album Review: Guitarist John Scofield — A Solo Album, Finally Now that he’s 70, it’s only right that guitarist John... posted on May 3, 2022

Social

Follow us:

Follow the Conversation

  • Mia Lieberman May 23, 2022 at 12:38 pm on Opera Review: “Champion: An Opera in Jazz” — Fought to a DrawI saw it yesterday - even with the semistaging, it was a powerful production and one of the best productions...
  • Jon Goldberg May 23, 2022 at 8:22 am on Opera Review: “Champion: An Opera in Jazz” — Fought to a DrawThis is an impressive dramaturgical essay on the opera, but an actual review of the performance would have been appreciated....
  • David Kurtz May 22, 2022 at 5:52 pm on Concert Review: Joe Jackson at the Shubert Theatre — A Restlessly Creative Artist at the Peak of his PowersJoe has remained a mainstay in my library of musical collection . His musicianship and particularly his voice fit like...
  • Ray Cooper May 22, 2022 at 5:21 pm on Book Review: “Free” — A Communist ChildhoodBreaking out of the family faith is not easy. It certainly helps to know that the blind faith was not...
  • Strange Attractor May 22, 2022 at 12:21 am on Film Commentary: “Everything Everywhere All at Once” — The Most Serene Movie in YearsThen don't give it more press...

Footer

  • About Us
  • Advertising/Underwriting
  • Syndication
  • Media Resources
  • Editors and Contributors

We Are

Boston’s online arts magazine since 2007. Powered by 70+ experts and writers.

Follow Us

Monthly Archives

Categories

"Use the point of your pen, not the feather." -- Jonathan Swift

Copyright © 2022 · The Arts Fuse - All Rights Reserved · Website by Stephanie Franz