A sad case of tribalism within the UK jazz scene with an underlying race-based agenda has just come to my attention.
A facebook page and website have been created, heralding the return of the Jazz Warriors:
"It is now established in 2011 in order to respond to the recognised bias, discrimination and bigotry experienced by Black UK Jazz musicians in the UK"
I am afraid that this race-based ranting will serve no purpose other than to undermine unity in a community which desperately needs cohesion, not more tribal dividing lines.
Yes, there are shamefully few opportunities for black jazz musicians. However, it is not because of the colour of their skin, it is because of the genre of music they choose to play.
Jazz in the UK is underfunded to the point of crisis. Our greatest musicians regularly play door money gigs, and as I have continually stated on this blog, we suffer from the lack of organisational support that sustains the classical music community. This new movement seems to be symptomatic of that feeling of crisis, but we all need to refrain from the knee-jerk reaction of blaming people within the jazz community.
Various posters on the facebook page have urged the boycotting of the Vortex, the 606 and Ronnies, accused the promoters at Manchester's Band on the Wall of racist discrimination, and indeed of Manchester's jazz scene of being racially discriminatory. This anger should not be being directed at the UK's jazz promoters. Our community's ire should be focussed on the fact that we are so badly underfunded.
The Jazz Warriors state the means by which they intend to achieve their mission:
- "Utilising the expertise and experience within its leadership and steering group with some of the UK's highly respected Black UK Jazz musicians and experts in the field of UK Jazz
- Challenging and holding to account the policy and decision makers who can have a direct influence in supporting the company's vision and mission.
- Research and showcasing the extensive heritage of Black UK Jazz
- Developing a Centre of Excellence for the study and archiving of the rich heritage of Black UK Jazz music and artists
- Utilising jazz as an educational tool to encourage youth to embrace UK Jazz's rich history
- Increasing awareness by broadening the jazz audience
- Establishing 'Creative Idea Hubs' where the views of the Black UK Jazz environment can contribute to the delivery of the vision of the company
- Introduction of Black UK Jazz into areas and situations that would not usually be considered for expressions of Jazz"
I would argue that all of these are things that the whole of British Jazz needs - we do not need to divide our small community further on race grounds. How can we have a Black British Jazz Centre of Excellence when no British Jazz Centre of Excellence exists?
The Open University is midway through a research project into Black British Jazz, costing £495,643 over two years. This money comes from the AHRC, which in turn receives its budget from the Department of Business Innovation and Skills. There is no comparable research project into jazz with no race remit, none covering British jazz as a whole.
Last year, all of British jazz received just £1.17m from the Arts Council.
The scene suffers from a lack of financial support, and this is reflected in the difficulty faced by musicians trying to secure gig dates. I spend much of my time working as a promoter (for no money), and am currently trying to book tour dates for my own bands. I have seen both sides of the coin, and there is no issue of discrimination here, certainly not on race grounds. Many promoters, such as myself, operate on a volunteer basis, and as such, do not have the time to dedicate the hours the musicians and music deserve. This is reflected in various negative ways, but perhaps the most unfortunate is the difficulty in securing a gig if the promoter does not know you. This is something faced by musicians of every race, and is nothing to do with discrimination against black musicians.
Shabaka Hutchings has posted a new blog here where he mentions the creation of a new venue(s) which seeks to draw in new black and working-class audiences. This sounds like a great idea, and every new venue in the UK scene is a welcome addition.
Cleveland Watkiss, one of the group's leaders, posted this quote from Dr. Claude Anderson:
"Racism is a competitive relationship between groups of people that are competing for the ownership and the control of wealth and resources and power.That's what racism is.A group phenomenon.Racism is a team sport.You can not participate in racism if you don't play as a team."
I am sad that Cleveland seems to be stirring up such tribalism. Surely this page and this website serve only to divide the community into two of these "teams".
I can only hope we come together, and realise we are in the same boat, and facing the same problems. Only by coming together can the British Jazz community hope to attain the funding and support it deserves.
Completely agree with everything you've said, Jack. We all know how hard it is to make and break it in the jazz industry, on all levels. It's difficult for EVERYONE, and I've seen little evidence of black jazzers being shafted in favour of white musicians. As some have pointed out, perhaps there is a smaller proportion of black jazzers, and so even if they were ALL mega talented, there'd be an imbalance. As Shabaka has pointed out, getting jazz to the working class is one way of boosting the future of jazz for EVERYONE, not any particular race for god sake.
ReplyDeleteThe talk in that facebook group is pathetic, inflammatory and I'm afraid tinged with bitter racism that our current (and future) generations simply do not need. If there is a fight to establish jazz more in this country as an artform then it is a fight for all of us and is being fought as one by this talented, positive generation. Some of the current talk is archaic, hateful and vengeful; some of the supposed older and wiser heads amongst them should get out there and take a look at just how many talented, blaze-trailing black AND white musicians there are performing week-in week-out!
Nobody could disagree with the need to expand the total jazz audience and the number of jazz venues, and we all know how badly jazz is underfunded. So I agree with all of that, and I fully support what Shabaka is doing.
ReplyDeleteAnd there is no doubt an issue of style here, and I have no problem with most of what goes on at places like the Vortex, where it is predominantly a style of music with a very strong European influence. However, when we see some venues putting on basic American style jazz week in and week out, and its all played by middle aged white men; and when we see Ronnie's mounting tributes to Miles Davis, Oscar Peterson and Oscar Brown junior without a black face to be seen on the stage, you can surely understand why some people want to change things.
I agree that both the facebook page and the Warriors mission contain some inflammatory language, and I'd prefered to see it focus on the positive.
The mission statement does say: "The Jazz Warriors is committed to ensuring the fair and equitable representation of the Black UK Jazz presence in the areas of: National Heritage, the Arts, Education and Training, Promotion and Performances."
Maybe we can all agree that's a worthwhile thing to do!
As some may know, I have been developing a Google map of lost London jazz venues, and now have around 200. Recently, as part of the research I have been looking at old Melody Makers. In 1970, Dudu Pukwana was interviewed by Valerie Wilmer, complaining about lack of opportunities to play for all UK musicians. He felt that the lack of income/gigs was a major reason why Dave Holland and John McLaughlin had gone to New York.
ReplyDeleteThe following week, Ronnie Scott replied, explaining that keeping open The Old Place in Gerrard Street for a year had led to substantial losses, which had continued when they tried to continue with gigs by the likes of Dudu, Chris McGregor and others Upstairs. His solution was that Dudu look for a jazz-loving philanthropic millionaire! (Ronnie complained that he was still looking...)
As ever, we have too many good musicians in a world with too few gigs (and opportunities to release recordings too).
We can only hope that the initiatives being taken by many of the musicians now help highlight the inadequacies and lack of support for day-to-day venues. Without regular funding to help keep venues running (i.e. not just for capital spending), it is difficult for clubs and similar to take the risks required to book young bands and keep a proper balance of styles/musicians etc.
I think it's very, very sad that individuals see it necessary to post on this forum using false profiles to mask their identities. Please forgive the irony of this post being anonymous, but when profiles such as 'Ruud E Mentry' and (the allegedly fictional) Dave Monk start attacking a figure such as Django Bates - who aught to have done enough to earn the respect of anyone who is a creative musician - under the auspices of anonymity, it leads me to suspect that they are people who would probably be known to musicians who don't dare vent their spleen in person. Unfortunately much of this seems to confirm that there are already real divisions in our community.
ReplyDeleteI think the most balanced views on this I've seen anywhere have come from people like Shabaka Hutchins and Alan Weekes, aside from some of the hateful and abusive polemic also there. My personal take on it, as a white musician, is that yes, the 'industry' is starved of attention and funding, and this has forced the enterprising musician into a realm of PR and other things not directly associated with his craft. Those who do well at this, or have somebody to do it for them are - regardless of race - the most 'successful' names, but I can still think of barely any instances when their success is not also merited by real talent and content.
The severe racial imbalance in musical institutions is shocking and must change, but that has socio-economic roots quite a lot bigger than anything to do with booking gigs in this country! Regarding the rest of it, I assumed it was a given that all good musicians in this country who care about the art and moving it forward need to work together to find viable alternatives to an organisation like Serious, surely? How else are we to survive? One final thing - this whole thing seemed to be triggered by an experience Cleveland had in Ronnies - fair enough, it sounds deeply disrespectful, but I struggle to believe it had anything to do with his skin colour; anyone who hangs at Ronnies knows that the staff there can be c**ts to punters, musicians, anyone they please, and I've seen it happen frequently enough, and indiscriminately enough to believe that race has nothing to do with it.
"Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI think it's very, very sad that individuals see it necessary to post on this forum using false profiles to mask their identities."
Anyone see the irony there?
What, you mean the irony that the anonymous poster alluded to and apologised for in the following sentence? I doubt it escaped anyone who actually read it...
ReplyDeleteHa! Oh yeah, totally missed that somehow, whoops.
ReplyDeleteIn that case, maybe I should have said that I don't forgive that irony, it does undermine several key points of this post, whether it's been acknowledged or not. Although I do agree that Shabaka Hutchins has been one of if not the most eloquent posters on that group.
I am aware I look a bit silly now...
Fair point, Anton, but I will make two further points...
ReplyDeleteFirstly, that you can't have it both ways - ie. dismissing these comments but accepting or subscribing wholesale to the comments of anonymous or false-avartarred members / antagonists on 'the group'. Not that I'm saying that you would, of course...
Secondly, that I'd love to not hide behind an 'anonymous' tag, but the reason I have (and the reason I haven't become involved in any way in the discussions on that page) is because - as Django stated - it is an intimidating group. I've seen a good handful of young White musicians try to take issue with some of the more radicalised rhetoric in the 'discussions' and been met not only with scorn but also accusations of racism and even abusive private messages. I don't see how that can do anything but devalue the cause of the group, especially when these antagonists are using false names or aren't part of the scene itself.
I like the fact we seem to concur on the more cogent / constructive posters on there, although I find it telling that Shabakah has now left...
Totally respect your point about the anonymity thing though, I just wanted to clarify why, and I wish it wasn't the case. Tell you what, I'll post under my real identity when Dave Monk does, eh? :)