'l'lu' Corrlrndit'! iott ol l)trlccl itttt itr luz::

tool, and this rejection can then lead to a valuable focus on process, as wehave seen. But this should not lead to a complete rejectiqn of product inthe broader sense because the improviser, as a performer, is creating a

non-material product, the music of a performance. Regardless of how it iscreated, the product ol a jazz ensemble is the music it creates, whetherthat music is notated, recorded, made tangible in any form, or not.

THE TOPIC OF THE STUDY OF MUSIC IS MUSIC

Formalism focuses on the musical product, conventionally conceived as

the score. Formalist scholars have analyzed jazzby transcribing improvi-sations and analyzing the resulting score, as if a composer had composedit. This tradition of jazz analysis has come under attack by critical theoryscholars of jazz. One encyclopedia summarizes several "putative errors ofthe lformalistl tradition, by the lights of the new theory. . . . The essential-ist is also typically an internalist [formalist], that is, a theorist who mis-takenly fixates on formal features of the music at the expense of externals.By contrast, the critical theory of iazz holds that we can only get at theheart of jazz by placing the music within its cultural context."l Lee Browncalls the critical theory position "externalist," in contrast with an internal-ist or formalist approach. He has characterized critical theory that doesnot incorporate formalism as "close to incoherent":

Consider the explanation of Howard McGhee, the trumpet player, that whenhis generation of African-American players came out of the army after WorldWar II, feeling that their music had been stolen by the white music system,they cultivated music that sounded "wrong," thereby frustrating white play-ers who tried to join in and play. With such remarks, we might initiate an ex-

ternalist account of the beginnings of modernist bebop jazz.

Howevet if the account remained merely externalist, it would not tell usanything about the music itself. After all, what is of interest to the ear is thatthe music sounded hostile, by comparison with classic swing's generallyfriendly demeanor. A purely externalist account would not hook up with themusic's mechanics, and would therefore give us no idea why music of thatsort has that message in it.2

One can argue that the cultural context of jazz should be studied, but it istogically demonstrable that, no matter how illuminating its cultural con-text, the study of music must ultimately, at some point, return to the mu-sic itself. Stated as a tautology, the topic of the study of music is music.Even if the cultural context illuminated the music so well that our ideasabout the music were revolutionized, note that what is getting illumi-nated is the music itself.

I rJ3

77

The Contradiction ofPerfection inlazz

When you come to a fork in the road, take it.

-Yogi Berra

Th" connection between existentialism and jazz is based on the condi-I tions and process of lazz improvisation. As important as this is for our

appreciation of jazz, it does not mean that formalism and product need becompletely rejected. Rather, process and product can coexist as opposites,and viewing them in this manner will lead to a humanistic and existentialapproach to formalism and structural complexity in jazz.

MATERIAL AND PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS

First, we may distinguish two different types of product: material andnon-material. The product created when a composer composes is a com-position, which is embodied materially as a musical score. But a broaderconception of product is possible. A performer's product, so to speak, ismusic, performed and audible. A product need not necessarily be a phys-ical thing, like a score or a recording, but is, most broadly, merely the re-sult of some action or behavior. The improviser is a performel, so the im-proviser produces an audible musical product. But the improviser is alsoacting as a composer, too, determining not only notes and rhythms, butnearly all other aspects of music as well. We may correctly reject the ma-terial product of the composer's score as irrelevant for the jazz improviserbecause scores are not characteristically used in jazz as a compositional

"182

il!184 Clnpltr 17

While any jazz scholar may legitimately restrict research to a more orless narrow or limited topic, jazz scholarship as a whole must return ulti-mately to the musical object, whether in the material form of a score or arecording, or in the immaterial form of a live performance, unless we pro-pose never to hear music; but that would make jazz scholarship an absurdenterprise. As Henry Martin says, "[W]e should never neglect whatbrought us to jazz itself: the music, and our emotional and aesthetic re-sponse to it."3 If the focus of thinking about music is music, then we mustultimately return to the music, even if we are enlightened for having tem-porarily abandoned treating the music as an isolated object. If music is au-dible, there must be a musical product, and the product in all music is,well, the music. So as long as we listen to actual music, we will be con-cerned with product, whether it is the material product of a composer'sscore or the immaterial product of the music of a performance.

]ohn Brownell has argued that product and the musical object is not anappropriate focus for the study of jazz improvisation, especially when an-alyzed through the written, material object of the score: "Improvisation isessentially a performance practice, and it is inappropriate to apply to itanalytical models developed in the context of the written record."4 "Theobject in the analysis of improvisation is itself a phantom, and rather thananaLyzing music, what ends up being analyzed is the frozen record of aprocess."s Brownell views Thomas Owens's study of Charlie Parker's im-provisations as one example of a processural analytic model that "revealsfundamental departures from previous analytic (product-oriented) ap-proaches. Rather than subject a small number of improvisations to de-tailed analysis in an effort to identify evidence of development and vari-ation, Owens examines a large number of Parker's solos with a view toidentifying statistical similarities. He compiles a catalog of sixty-fourmelodic devices and ranks them according to frequency./'6

But Owens's study is no less focused on the musical product than theanalytic models that Brownell surveyed. Owens analyzed transcriptionsof Parker's improvisations, using, no less, that hallmark of product in thestudy of music, music notation. Brownell's view of Owens's study as anexample of a processural analytic model is further flawed when Brownellcontrasts it wit\ the "notism" of Gunther Schuller's study of SonnyRollins:

[F]or Schuller, Rollins' "thematic" approach is aesthetically superior. Its su-periority, to Schuller, lies in its use of devices that are normally considered tobe indicators of quality in composed music. Development of themes, coher-ence, deliberation, and consideration of material employed (as opposed towhatever the player "happens to hit upon") are the hallmarks of well-craftedcompositions. I propose the term "notism" for this critical attitude. Notism

'l'ln C.ontrndit'lion ol'l'trli'clitttt itr ltzz ltts

springs from a fixation on the object of analysis rather than on the process

from which it springs.T

But analyzing the product of improvisation, even the notes and rhythms of

an improvisation, need not necessarily imply the standards of composi-

tional excellence. Brownell confuses an analytic approach with critical stan-

dards. The standards that Brownell says schuller and others bring fromcomposition into improvisation, such as development of themes or coher-

ence, it not the necessary result of looking at improvisation as product. One

could just as well analyze the processural aspects of improvisation by using

what is really just a convenient tool, the score (a transcription of the im-

provisation), just as Owens has done. The tool of notation is a shorthand forihe "real" (audible) thing, but one can effectively use the tool if its nature-its usefullnesss and its limitations-is kept in mind. The standards and the

tools of analysis can be separated from a focus on product or process.

Brownell says that, "Like Schuller with Sonny Rollins, Stewart finds ev-

idence in Clifford Brown's improvisations of structural development and

variation, the hallmarks of compositional quality."a Assuming that this is

a criticism, what are we then to do with development and variation, twoof the standard if not omnipresent techniques of iazz improvisation (as

well as composition)? Development and variation is essential to all butthe most static forms of music. They may be hallmarks of composition,but composition certainly does not have exclusive rights to them. Everyjazz improviser develops and varies musical material to some extent.e

The two processural models that Brownell outlines-formulaic improvi-sation, similar to that used in epic poetry and linguistic models-are fruit-ful analytic approaches. Whereas Brownell views the opposition between

processural models and analytic/product models as one of mutual exclu-

sion, they may be merely juxtaposed, each contributing a valid perspective.

It is indicative of the confusion surrounding process and product thatnowhere in Brownell's review of processural models for improvisationare there any critical standards, and Brownell confuses the standards withthe approach when he identifies the critical standards of notism but also

defines notism as being fixated on the object. He confuses the standardswith the analytic approaches that don't necessarily require those stan-

dards, and when he offers an alternative, the processural models, no men-

tion of critical standards is made.

CONTEXT AND PRODUCT CAN COEXIST

The larger context in which we view iazz, beyond formalism, contains

not only the social and cultural aspects of iazz on which critical theory

Fl186 L)hnptar 17

focuses, but the conditions and processes of improvisation ers weil. As wehave seen, consideration of this larger context can lead to some very im-portant ideas about jazz, such as the humanistic implications of jazz, orthe significance of an improviser pulling the fat out of the fire comparedto a composer doing so. This larger context does not change our under-standing of the musical object as an isolated thing. It is not so much thatour understanding or analysis of an isolated musical object changes, butthat the meaning and significance that we impart to the musical objectchanges.

But doing so does not mean that focus on product should disappearcompletely. To understand this, let's start with the following: ,,Improvisa-

tion, on the other hand, may . . . inspire novel approaches to music analy-sis that focus more attention on the human and cultural aspects of musicmaking than on the formal structure of the musical work.,,fr David Borgoaccurately identifies a topic for research that is distinct from formalisticanalysis. This topic is the social, cultural, historical, and human context ofjazz performance. But consider whether social, cultural, and historicarcontexts are used to further the understanding of the product, the musicitself, or not. If not, we have two very different research topics-a formal-ist approach to jazz that focuses on the musical object, andiocial/culturalstudies of jazz that do not refer back to the musical object. There is no sub-stantive connection between the two other than they are both studyingiazz. They are doing so in two separate arenas, and therefore there is noreason to suspect that they both are not valid, interesting, and useful intheir own right. It is an example of either/or thinking, of only being ableto see one type of opposition-mutual exclusion-to deny one researchagenda because another is valuable. Critical theory's valuable emphasison culture does not deny the value of formalism, and vice versa. In theother case, insofar as social, cultural, and historical contexts are used tounderstand the musical product of improvisation, their utility is then inservice of a more enlightened understanding of the music itself. Thesetwo cases mean that, however, one is left with either (1) a return to a fo-cus on the music itself, albeit from a position enlightened by social andcultural studies, or (2) two distinct research agendas that can not deny oneanother. Either way, jazz scholarship is allowed a focus on product andthe music itself, despite recent efforts to shift focus away from product.

Much of the recent acknowledgment of the importance of process iniazz improvisation, as well as critical theory's critique of formalism andproduci, is the result of assuming mutual exclusion Letween product andprocess, rather than conceiving their opposition in other terms. process aswell as social and cultural factors can change the context in which weview the musical product, and therefore the meaning and significance wegive it, which are also important concerns in the study of music. yet, we

'l'hL'Cttntrutlit:liLttr ttl l)t'rfcclittrt irt ltzz ltlT

may also understand music by understanding the music itself. These twogoals are not so much pointed directly at each other in mutual exclusionas they are pointed in opposite directions.

Critical theory might have a valid complaint against formalism if for-malism explicitly denied social or cultural concerns. This complaint, how-ever, should be balanced by its less frequently heard but no less validcounterpart, stated by Ted Gioia:

Many [free;'azz musicians] saw their music as inherently political. They sawthat they could, indeed must, choose between participating in the existingstructures-in society, in the entertainment industry, in the jazz world-orrebelling against them. . . . This overt linking of free jazz and sociopoliticalcriticism went so far that Ekkehard Jost, a historian of the movement,lamented that the "autonomous musical aspects of the evolution of freejazz-i.e., those aspects which escape a purely sociological analysis-oftenwere ignored." The music risked being relegated to a secondary utilitarianrole, valued for what it symbolized rather than for what it was.ll

These opposites can coexist, too. Music can be what it symbolizes as wellas what it is.

PERFECTION AND STRUCTURAL COMPLEXITY

If formalism and product can be a part of how we understand. jazz im-provisation, then perfection and structural complexity might be, too. Butwe have already seen how the conditions of jazz are not advantageous inthis regard. This contradiction will be illuminated by considering the per-former's interpretive role versus improvisation.

The role of a performer as an interpreter also supports product and for-malism as a part of jazz. Carol Gould and Kenneth Keaton have discussedthe many ways in which performers interpret a composition. They chal-lenge the view that the improviser is in a fundamentally different situa-tion than the performer because both determine many aspects of a com-position. They "submit that jazz and classical performances differ more indegree than in kind."l2 However, there is an important difference in kindthat reveals a legitimate role for product and formalism in jazz. Under-standing this difference depends on recognizing the function of the ele-ments of music that a performer may interpret.

Pitch and Rhythm Creates Structure

We have seen how composers and performers are responsible for determin-ing different elements of music (see "Creation in Improvisation" in chapter

188 Chnptcr 17

8). Traditionally, it is the discrete musical elements of pitch and rhythm thatare those elements of music under the strictest control by the composet areassumed to not be changed by the performeq, and create the relationshipsand structures that are the focus of formalism.l3 Recognition of musical rela-tionships and structures has an intellectual component to it, and this relieson the discrete character of pitch and rhythm. Perceiving and appreciatingrelationships and structures requires some intellectual recognition of same(although it does not rule out an emotional response as well). Part of the rea-son for this is because two elements in a relationship must be discrete ele-ments in order for that relationship to be formed, and some intellectual func-tion is required to make a connection between the separate elements. Onemust realize intellectually that two or more musical events are related in or-der for a relationship to be established and perceived. For instance, when thecomposed melody (the "head") returns iniazz after the improvisations, a re-lationship and structure is established between the initial head and the oneafter the solos, as a result of their identity. This structure is a common one injazz, and may well be accompanied by an emotional response of security, ofhaving returned home after a journey.

Interpreted Elements Are Immediately Appreciable

Alternately, it is the analog elements of music, such as dynamics or tonecolo1, that the composer traditionally does not determine completely, andthat the performer interprets, that strike us more immediately and viscer-ally, with no necessary relationship to another musical event, and whichtend to induce an emotional response (but do not prohibit an intellectualresponse). For instance, the brittle tone color of Miles Davis's Harmonmute or the thunder of McCoy Tyner's loud left-hand octaves are appre-ciable immediately and viscerally. Appreciating them is not dependent onrecognizing a connection between them and some other event or structurein the music. They hit us immediately. (An immediately appreciable mu-sical event that takes some amount of time to unfold is different fromforming a relationship between two musical events separated in time.)While it is possible that we may connect an analog event with some othermusical event or structure, we need not do so. One of the distinctivethings about the analog elements of music is that they can be appreciatedimmediately, without reference to any other musical structure.

Structure Is Not Privileged Over the Visceral

Our understanding of jazz may gain from the distinction between the com-poser's responsibility for pitches, rhythms, and the resulting relationshipsand strucfures, and the performer's interpretation of dynamics, articula-

'l'lrt'Cotttradictitttt of l)t'rli't:titttt itt luzz llJ9

tions, and the resulting visceral effects, while not privileging one over theother. The visceral in jazz and music is highly attractive to many, includingmyself. Rather than the relationship between the visceral and structure injazzberngmutual exclusion, they are juxtaposed. Because the jazz musicianis a performer as well as a composeq, the performer's analog realm of dy-namics, articulations, and tone color assume a great importance in jazz. Canone say unequivocally that Miles Davis's tone color is more or less impor-tant than his structural use of silence? That this is an impossible question toanswer indicates that the two realms are fused into an organic whole injazz.

The Improviser Creates Structure

The improviser does have a crucial difference of kind with the performer.By taking over the composer's task of determining pitches and rhythms,the improviser has the responsibility of creating musical relationships andstructure, a responsibility that the performer does not have to any greatdegree. This is significant: creating relationships is a distinct means of cre-ating musical value compared to using visceral effects. (Some might arguethat creating relationships is the primary means, although mistakenly, Ithink.) Entering into this significant aesthetic realm makes the differencebetween improvisers and performers a difference of kind as well as one ofdegree. It also provides one reason why complex musical structure can bea goal in jazz. The improviser must create those discrete elements of mu-sic, pitch, and rhythm, that are traditionally used to create relationshipsand structure because the composer is not creating them. The hallmark ofjazz is improvisation, and a fundamental duty of the improviser is takingresponsibility for creating pitches and rhythms, which are the primarymeans of creating musical relationships and structures.

Furthermore, given the responsibility for determining those elements ofmusic that traditionally create relationships and structure, there is no rea-son to exclude structural complexity from the aesthetics of jazz improvi-sation. We can not deny jazz the highest goal in areas-notes, rhythms,and the resulting relationships and structures-for which the improvisertakes responsibility. To do so would be to reject an opportunity that is in-herent in the conditions of jazz.

Dynamic Tension and Complex Structure

It is another measure of the dynamic tension in jazz that the conditions ofjazz encourage structural complexity, because the improviser is responsi-ble for pitches and rhythms, which composers use to create complex struc-ture, and yet also discourage structural complexity, because the improviserdoes not have the advantages that the composer does. Jazz improvisation

l

I

F1

Cltuplcr l7

can include the challenge of producing a perfect musical product eventhough the conditions of improvisation make it more difficult, just as

Lewis and Clark wanted the shortest and easiest route to the Pacific butunderstood that their circumstances would probably make their routelonger and more difficult. An explorer as well as an improviser acceptsthe dynamic tension of wanting to find the most perfect solution and un-derstanding that such may be less likely, just as, existentially, we want tomake the best decisions in our lives but understand that much of life is acrapshoot anyway and leading a perfect life is highly unlikely. The im-proviser has the following as potential goals: the creation of a perfect,complex musical structure and the creation of an improvisation that isalso highly expressive emotionally and grooves well, too. The improviser,however, understands that succeeding at all these goals might not happenfor every single performance because of inherent limitations. This is a dif-ferent aesthetic than that of composition, the conditions of which encour-age the idea that perfection and complexity are attainable. This condemnsneither improvisation nor composition. Even in the worst case, if we as-sume that perfection is not possible even for composition, it is nonethelessvaluable even as a wonderful fantasy, that we flawed humans may get aglimpse of perfection that inspires us to be less flawed.

IAZZ RESOURCES

Even though jazz has some disadvantages compared to composition increating structural complexity, it can still do fairly well in this regard, per-haps more so than might first be imagined. Even if jazz is held to formal-ist standards, some level of deficiency in creating complex structure doesnot necessarily mean insufficiency. The jazz improviser has several tech-niques that allow him or her to improve the chances that structural com-plexity can be produced, even in an improvisation.

Improvisers Improve

The sure way to get better at something is to practice. As an improviserpractices the craft of improvisation, both on stage and off, the ability toproduce complex musical structures can increase. This was made vivid tome when I heard alto saxophonist Phil Woods live, when he was middle-aged. My reaction to his playing was that it was like fine wine. Everythinghe did was so smooth and secure, in addition to being quite complex.Most likely, he achieved this high level of performance as a result of themany years of practice and thousands of hours of professional experiencethat honed his craft.

'I'ltc Contradit'liott ol l'rlt'ctitttt itt lnzz

Performing a Piece Many Times

One way to look at jazz improvisation is to view each time a musician im-

provisei on the same piece as one in a single series of improvisations that

gradually develops a superior approach to that piece. Throughout a ca-

i""., atr improviser might play common pieces hundreds of times. Duringeach one, the musician must solve a similar musical problem. By at-

tempting to work out a solution to such a problem hundreds of times, the

impioviier may gradually improve his or her approach. The danger, of.orr.re, is that the improviser will find what may seem to be an optimalsolution and then just keep performing it without trying to find new and

creative ways to solve the same problem.

Chorus Form Limits

One advantage the improviser has is the chorus form. The great majorityof mainstream jazz pieces have a chorus form, which is a chord Progres-sion, often thirty-two measures in length, that is repeated throughout the

entire performance and which forms the basis for the improvisation. This

foundition means that the improviser does not have to create all the mu-sic from scratch. In fitting an improvisation to the given chord progres-

sion and chorus form, the improviser is given a head start.

Motivic Development

Another area in which the conditions and process of jazz improvisationhelp create structural complexity is motivic development.lazz improvis-ers typically rely on previously worked out patterns, motifs, and theirvariation and development. This allows the improviser to create a com-

plex series of relationships among a motif and subsequent variationp.Wnit" a motif may not be repeated and varied many times in a row, it of-ten returns under similar circumstances, and a return occurrence of it willcreate a relationship, sometimes a quite complex one, between it and the

original occurrence of that motif.

Overall Shape

Just as classical music and other forms of music rely on a finite number ofstandard forms (sonata, theme and variations, and more) that do not in-hibit structural complexity, jazz relies on some standard methods of cre-

ating a broad, overall structure for an improvisation. The most obvious

and common one is that of a gradual increase in intensity, with a climaxnear the end, followed by a brief d6nouement. While other shapes for the

Ir)l190

192 Clnptt,r 17

overall intensity curve of an improvisation are possible, having thisstandard one helps the improviser achieve one element of structuralcomplexity-a broad, overall shape-underneath which are the complexdetails of how that shape is produced.

One Element Not Possible

The one area in which the jazz improviser is not likely to create a complexstructure is long-range harmony. The chorus structure defines the basicharmonies for an entire improvisation, removing this area from signifi-cant development by the jazz improviser. The improviser may introducesubstitute chords, and often does, but usually these are only local har-monic embellishments. while harmony is a very significant area in whichjazz improvisers create complexity, the chorus form prevents much cre-ativity in this area on a long-range basis.

MISTAKES

If product is an appropriate focus in jazz improvisation, and if perfectionis an acceptable challenge, then how do we view mistakes in jazz?

The Positives of Mistakes

Mistakes can have a positive function in jazz. R. Keith Sawyer says that"mistakes perform tlie valued function of interrupting the preariangedideas and forcing an innovative alternative."la A mistake can alert the im-proviser to opportunities and possibilities not normally considered. Amistake is unexpected, and so can shake the improviser out of the normalways of thinking and improvising and offer new ways of viewing theproblem at hand.

Aren't Mistakes Bad?

While a mistake may function positively, this does not necessarily removethe negative aspecf of a mistake. Both the positive and negative ispects ofa mistake can coexist. However, in his article on the mistakes of MilesDavis, Robert Walser does not acknowledge the obvious: mistakes arebad. That is, no one wants mistakes (certainly not Davis, as Walser indi-cates), they are to be avoided, and they detract from the success an im-provisation would otherwise enjoy.

We are quickly led to absurdities if we don't acknowledge the negativ-ity of mistakes. For instance, if we ignore the negativity of mistakes be-cause they are inevitable, and conclude thai we must accept them, we might

'l'|rc Cortlrudiclkttr ol l't:rfaclirttr irt lnzz 193

then ask, "How many mistakes can we tolerate?" Clearly, there must be a

limit on the number of mistakes that are acceptable. If any number of mis-takes were acceptable, then you could have an improvised solo full ofnothing but mistakes, which not even Walser, and very few listeners, mu-sicians, or scholars, I suspect, would find acceptable. Not even free jazz isall mistakes (although some might think it sounds that way). If there werenot a limit on mistakes, then we would be just as happy listening to incom-petent musicians, or anyone at all, marveling at how their failed attempts arean analogue for the mistakes that we make in our lives (although perhapsfew would want to be reminded of or live through such mistakes via suchmusic). Critical standards-any standards-would disappear.

But this means that some mistakes---<ertainly those beyond some limit-must be viewed as negatives and cannot simply be glossed over or ignored.Moreover, if those mistakes past that limit can be interpreted as negatives,then we might as well acknowledge any mistake as a negative, just as com-mon sense demands, evenif jazz improvisation is fated to include mistakes.Ultimately, a clear, unafraid estimation of mistakes as bad, at least partiallyand in some cases, is necessary nearly by definition. The necessity of mis-takes has been admitted by no less than Ornette Coleman: "From realizingthat I can make mistakes, I have come to realize that there is an order towhat I do."i5 In dialectic fashion, order and disorder (mistakes) coexist, justas the positive and negatives aspects of mistakes coexist, too.

Existentially Required

Mistakes need not doom jazz, yet still function as a negative,because jazzis an analog for the experiential and for life, in which mistakes figureprominently. And yet this does not mean that one is free to play any mis-take as if mistakes somehow don't count. It is exactly because mistakesstill do count as negatives that, contradictorily, they contribute positivelyto understanding jazz as a humanistic, existential practice.

One challenge for the jazz improviser is to create complex, perfect struc-tures under the conditions of imperfection. If a jazz musician improvised a

brilliant, complex maneuver, carrying the audience along for a thrillingride, and then, at the moment of tmth, at the highest climax of the solo, tooka misstep, or made a crucial mistake, we might respond on a naive levelwith disappointment and a lesser regard for the musician, especially as atechnician; but on a more enlightened level, understanding the risk takenand the conditions under which the improviser works, we might respondwith admiration and an honest respect for someone who has attemptedsomething great and far above what might be expected normally, as if theimproviser had the luxuries afforded the composet even as we understandthat the improviser ultimately fell short. Mistakes in jazz can be a noble fail-ure, and not just a careless or unprepared failure or a measure of inferiority

194 Clnpltr 17

compared to composition. The nobility of failure is a lesson for ourselvesand our lives, and that is the larger lesson we hear in jazz improvisation.Stated as a contradiction a long time ago by Saint Augustine, "This is thevery perfection of a man, to find out his own imperfections."l6 This stilldoes not permit mistakes in jazz at will. All it does is encourage jazzmusi-cians to take risks in the service of creating brilliant, complex structures.

Limits vs. Optimism

To admit the limitations of mistakes, imperfection, and the disadvantagesfor creating structural complexity in jazz goes against deep and powerfultraditions of perfection and boundless optimism that have long been partof the national culture in the United States, the birthplace of jazz. DonaldMcCullough, in a book dedicated to embracing the negatives inherent inlimitations, summarizes this:

[We areJ a determinedly optimistic culture that runs on a can-do confidencein every individual's ability-given a positive attitude and hard work-toovercome all obstacles on the way to success lperfection]. This spirit hasflourished, in part, because of geography: the seemingly boundless expanseof our continent promised new opportunities, and this promise energizedand focused our expectations. In the words of Parker Palmer, "We resist thevery ideas of limits, regarding limits of all sorts as temporary and regrettableimpositions on our lives. Our national myth is about the endless defiance oflimits: opening the western frontiet breaking the speed of sound, droppingpeople on the moon, discovering 'cyberspace' at the very moment when wehave filled old-fashioned space with so much junk that we can barely move.We refuse to take no for an answer."l7

To add one more example: football's Super Bowl, part of the Americanmyth if anything is, rarely if ever acknowledges anything less than per-fection; that is, the Super Bowl is winner-take-all. Only the team that winsthe Super Bowl is truly acknowledged. Only lip service is given to the ac-complishments and success of the loser of the Super Bowl, which team isactually the second greatest of all teams, has accomplished great things,and should be envied by all the other teams who didn't make it to the Su-per Bowl. But theif accomplishments are largely overlooked in our focuson the best, the number-one team.

CONTRADICTIONS INIAZZ AND LIFE

Obviously, perfection has its advantages. It is an example of either,/or think-ing, however, to deny any useful function for imperfection. Rathel perfec-

'l'ha Cottlrutliclion ol l't'rlctliorr itr luzz

tion and imperfection can be held in dynamic tension. Perfection is a laud-

able goal, and the improviser can achieve it more often than might be imag-ined, but the conditions of improvisation encourage imperfection, whichthen give the improviser the opportunity to mirror the experiential and, ul-timately, the conditions of our lives through improvisation; and, lastly, the

improviser can do both at the same time. By striving for perfection, perhaps

achieving it sometimes, and perhaps failing in some (hopefully) small way,

the improviser demonstrates both contradictory aspects of improvisation.Contradictionin jazz resides in the fact that great structural complexity

is a legitimate goal in iazz improvisation despite improvisers facing in-herent limitations in creating structural complexity, even as the same con-

ditions that create those limitations also create existential and humanisticvalues in jazz beyond structural complexity. Even though mistakes andlesser complexity are nearly inevitable in iazz improvisation at some

point, they are no reasons for improvisers to reject the goal of perfectionand complexity. Lee Brown says, "We find ourselves slipping back andforth between our hopes for the ultimate quality of the music and our fas-

cination with the activity by which it is generated-even when those ac-

tions appear to threaten the quality of the resulting music' The strain [dy-namic tension] contributes to the music's fascination rather thandetracting from it."18 While we can not blame Lewis and Clark for theirerrors or wanderings in reaching the Pacific, they still strove to take the

easiest, shortest route, and highly valued such a path.lazz musicians can

rightly strive to create structural complexity and to minimize mistakes at

the same time that its existential context and analogy with experience givejazz other meaning as well.

We may improve how we work through a situation or exPerience in life.Sometimes we do so skillfully, although gradually, with the help of pastexperiences; sometimes we do so with the help of others who have gone

before, although such advice or wisdom can only go so far; and some-

times (most of the time?) we do so by just muddling our way througheach new challenge as it is presented to us, sometimes brilliantly andsometimes, not despite of, but because of all the contradictions inherent inour situations and our lives-just like iazz improvisers.

NOTES

7. Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, s.v. "Jazz."2. Lee Brown, "PostmodernistJazz Theory: Afrocentrism, Old and New," lour-

nal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 57 , no. 2 (Spring 1999): 239 '

3 Henry Martin, "JazzTheory-An Overview," Annual Reaiew of lazz Studies 8

(f,996):4.

195

196 L'lttrlt!11 1/

4. John Brownell, "Analytical Modes of Jazz lmprovisation,,, Jazzl:orsclungflazz Research 26 (1994): 19.

5. Brownell, "Analytical Modes of Jazz Improvisation,,, 15.6. Brownell, "Analytical Modes of Jazz Improvisation,,, 18.7. Brownell, "Analytical Modes of Jazz Improvisation,,, 15.8. Brownell, "Analytical Modes of lazz Improvisation,,' 16.9. It is difficult if not impossible to imagine any music that does not develop

or vary musical material (except perhaps a single note sustained without varia-tion, but even then one could argue that the mere passage of time makes that samenote at, say, 5 minutes of duration different in some way than that note after, say,5 seconds of duration.

10. David Borgo, "Reverence for Uncertainty: Chaos, Order, and the Dynamicsof Musical Free Improvisation" (Ph. D. diss., University of California, Los Ange-les, 1999), 58.

11. Ted cioia, The History of lazz (New York: oxford university press, 1997),338-39.

12. Carol s. Gould and Kenneth Keaton, "The Essential Role of Improvisationin Musical Performance," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 5g, no.2 (Spring2000):746.

13. It is not impossible, however, to create relationships and structures withanalog elements.

14. R. Keith Sawyer, Group Creatiaity: Music, Theater, Collaboration (Mahwah,N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003),60.

15. ornette Coleman, The shape of lazz to Come (Atlantic sD 1377, 1959), linernotes.

16. Attributed to Saint Augustine, Augustine ot' Hippo euotes, http:/ /www.quotesplace.com / i /b / Augustine_of_Hippo (accessed December 13, 20b5).

17. Donald Mccullough, The Consolations of Impert'ection: Learning to AppreciateLife's Limitatio;rrs (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos press, 2004), 13-"14.

18. Lee Brown, "'Feeling My Way': Jazz Improvisation and Its Vicissitudes-APlea for Imperfection," lournal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 58, no. 2 (Spring 2000):72't-22.

Bibliography

PRINTED MATERIALS

Alperson, Philip. "On Musical Improvisation." lournnl of Aesthetics and Art Criti-cism 43, no. 1 (Fall 7984): 1719.

Augustine. Augustineof HippoQuotes.http:/,/www.quotespalace.com/Augustine-of-Hippo/index.html (accessed December 13, 2005).

Bailey, Derek.Improoisation: Its Nature and Practice in Music. New York: Da CapoPress,7992.

Balliett, Whitney. Improoising: Sixteen lazz Musicians nnd Their Arf. New York: Ox-ford University Press, 1,977 .

Becket Howard. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deaiance. New York: FreePress, 1963.

Becker, Judith. "Is Western Art Music Superior?" Musical Quarterly 72, no.3 (7985):

341-59.Belgrad, Daniel. The Culture of Spontaneity: Improoisation and the Arts in Postwar

America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.Berendt, Joachim E. The lazz Book: From Ragtime to Fusion and Beyond. Revised by

Giinther Huesmann, translated by H. and B. Bredigkeit with Dan Morgensternand Tim Nevill. New York: Lawrence Hill Books, 1992.

Berlin, Isaiah. Two Concepts of Liberty. London: Oxford University Press, 1958.Berliner, PauI. Thinking in lazz: The Infinite Art of Improoisatloir. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press, 1994.Borgo, David. "Negotiating Freedom: Values and Practices in Contemporary Im-

provised Music." Black Music Research lournal 22, no.2 (Fall 2002): 165-88.

-.

/Reverence for Uncertainty: Chaos, Ordet and the Dynamics of MusicalFree Improvisation." Ph.D. diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 1999.

t97