The Durability of The Jazz Book

by Stu Vandermark
In my September 2010 Scheduled Highlights comments about the Aardvark Jazz Orchestra
(available at that time at http://bostonjazzscene.blogspot.com/) I mentioned a reference to the band
in the most recent edition of The Jazz Book by Berendt and Huesmann. Scanning the new version
of the book caused me to inspect my older edition of the same publication printed in 1975 with a
range of copyright dates from 1953 through 1973 (when Joachim Berendt was the sole author of the
book). Several thoughts come to mind as I compare the contents of both editions. Most obvious is
the fact that--except for the updating of historical developments--the book remains essentially
unchanged. Unlike some jazz histories that have been published as “new editions” (as in the case of
Winthrop Sargeant’s histories), the authors here have maintained a consistent position over several
decades regarding the meaning of jazz. Their perspectives on the development of jazz and the
meaning of that development remain consistent. When you are correct, you do not have to change
your perspective. Some examples may be useful. Because it would be very difficult for readers to
pick up a copy of the 1975 English translation of the book, I quote from that edition here where
appropriate (primarily from pages 3 through 6). The latest edition is readily available in libraries
and book stores for comparison. Before I offer evidence of the author’s insights in the 1975
printing of the book, I should mention one problem with the latest edition. Although the book in
general does an outstanding job of including major improvisors from around the world, in the
discussion of trombonists there is only a single sentence--and somewhat dismissive at that--about
the superb Jeb Bishop. To make the light coverage of Jeb more ironic, among the three people
responsible for the translation of the latest edition into English is none other than Jeb Bishop. But
now let us take a look at the 1973 copyright (1975 printing) edition to see some of the light it still
shines on the music.

First, even before Wynton, Crouch, and their buddies started waving the retro-jazz banner, Joachim
Berendt anticipated the nonsense and dismissed it years before any of the Marsalis boys cut their
first LP. Berendt points out that the jazz continuum is a sequence of important styles, none of
which is uniquely valid. “The evolution of jazz,” Berendt claims, “shows the continuity, logic,
unity, and inner necessity which characterize all true art. This development constitutes a whole--
and those who single out one phase and view it as either uniquely valid or as an aberration, destroy
this wholeness of conception. They distort that unity of large-scale evolution without which one
can speak of fashions, but not of styles.” He points out that what later would be known as retro-jazz
is a confused phenomenon. “[M]any jazz musicians,” he states, “have viewed attempts at
reconstructing past jazz styles with skepticism.” Then he tells the story of a record producer in the
1950s who wanted to put together a Basie reunion recording in which the musicians would recreate
the 1930s material for the new album. Berendt quotes Lester Young as responding, “I can’t do it. I
don’t play that way any more. I play different; I live different. This is later. That was then. We
change, move on.”

Wynton and his buddies were big influences on the Ken Burns production, Jazz. Again Berendt in
1973 anticipates the confusion offered in the Burns series. He is clear in his distinction between the
importance of the New Orleans style of jazz and the birthplace of jazz. Unlike Burns and his
advisors, Berendt knows that jazz was not born in New Orleans. Berendt says, “It is true that New
Orleans was the most important city in the genesis of jazz. It is false that it was the only one. Jazz-
-the music of a continent, a century, a civilization--was too much in the air to be reducible to the
patented product of a single city.” Finally, I’ll point out one more Burns production
misrepresentation that Berendt anticipates in 1973, namely the “popularity” of jazz throughout the
twentieth century. Jazz never was a popular music, and Berendt knows it. He begins the book by
saying, “Jazz has always been the concern of a minority--always. Even in the twenties and thirties,
the jazz of creative black musicians was--except for very few recordings--recognized by only a
few.”

Anyone who examines the latest edition of The Jazz Book will discover that some words have been
changed or added (as in the case of replacing “Even in the twenties and thirties” with “Even in the
age of swing, the thirties”), but the meaning remains. The valid insights remain.
Copyright 2010 Stu Vandermark