Challenge Question - Response to Andy

Andy's Post

I think you chose a good set of jazz players and outlined their contributions to the genre. I meant to direct my question more toward Nettl’s approach, though – that is, I wanted to consider the figure(s) with less attention to their actual achievements (e.g., bringing about a new style) and more toward the current perception of the figures and what this reflects.

To some degree you did this in identifying “Improvisational creativity, compositional innovation and technical virtuosity” as three top values. But I want to go a step further. Nettl, for example, presents a Mozart-Beethoven continuum, with Mozart representing divine inspiration and Beethoven endless mortal toil. Are there any oppositions like this between the values you mentioned? I don’t know much about jazz, so it’s hard for me to answer my own question, but one possibility strikes me. Improvisational and compositional creativity might be seen to come from different places – the former takes place during performance, the latter most likely in a more private setting. Obviously it’s possible to succeed at both, but are there players particularly renowned for one but not the other, or a pair of players often compared to present two sides of the spectrum? Nettl also mentions the Beethoven-Schubert split: complexity, masculinity, culture versus simplicity, femininity, nature. You contrasted Charlie Parker’s dense playing with the sparseness of Miles Davis, perhaps a similar opposition.

Also, how are the lives of these players perceived? You briefly mentioned Parker’s drug addiction and early death. Are his self-destructive and creative tendencies ever linked? I know that he and Miles Davis played together. Are there any myths surrounding their personal relationship?

I realize that some of these questions might not be relevant – I think I’m trying too hard to make a model that conforms to Nettl’s ideas. The jazz world is obviously younger and less governed by rules of particular organizations than the classical conservatory scene he describes. But I imagine there are still views of players that become more entrenched the more they are repeated. Will these three still be at the top of the jazz pantheon in 100 years?