Klarinet Archive - Posting 000254.txt from 1996/07

From: "Gregory T. Wright" <103147.1471@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: Terminology
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 00:51:07 -0400

Lucy and Klarinet,
"Legit" has been a jazz player's term for "classical" music for a very
long time (I first heard it as a student in 1980, and I'd say it is very
unlikely it was new then). Actually, it may be BETTER to use "legit" than
"classical".
If I am truly an exclusively "classical" musician, I never play the
music of Monteverdi, Bach, Wagner, Stravinsky, John Cage... Monteverdi was not
"classical", he was "renaissance"; Bach was "baroque", Wagner was "Romantic",
Stravinsky (for MOST of his life) & Cage were "modern", or "20th Century"
composers. Mozart & his buddies lived in the "classical" period.
In a sense, jazz *is* the _illegitimate_ offspring of Western harmony &
tonality, plus African rhythmic organization. Drums were not allowed to the
slaves in the bad old days, because slave... uh... "owners" (sorry!) were afraid
that they would be used to send coded messages. Stringed intruments & singing
were considered OK, so the slaves used what they *had* TO SEND CODED MESSAGES
ABOUT THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, etc., etc
When you are oppressed and musically able, you will very likely use musi
c
to assist you in dealing with the oppression. So started "The Blues."

Does "legit" mean that jazz is not worthy? Not at all (IMHO). "Legit"
music is written in fairly strict accordance with whatever rules are followed at
the time, as an intellectual pursuit which also stimulates the emotions.
Jazz is written according to the composer's idea of rules, as an
emotional pursuit which also stimulates the intellect. (This description
courtesy of Detroit jazz trumpeter/flugelhornist and musicologist Marcus
Belgrave.)

I play both jazz & "legit" music, and I enjoy playing & listening to
either. I truly do not consider "legit" to be derogatory towards jazz.

-Gregory T. Wright
103147.1471@-----.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/GTWright/