Panel Discussion at Berklee: Jazz Musicians and Journalists in Dialogue

As both a musician and reviewer of jazz, I’ve been keenly interested in the discourse (and sometimes lack of discourse) between the players and the press. At a panel discussion at the IAJE convention a few years ago, I heard Charlie Haden talk about how devastated he was when the jazz writers first panned Ornette Coleman’s experiments at The Five Spot, mainly because they lacked a frame of reference. "I was a young kid and we were just trying to make some beautiful music," lamented Haden who was Coleman’s bassist at the time.

Other musicians on the panel and in the IAJE audience echoed Haden’s sentiments, adding that they were in awe of the power (real or imagined) that writers have to make or break careers. Of course, in the case of Ornette Coleman, the writers ultimately began to change their tune and the rest is history. I’ve personally had the experience of meeting someone for whom I’d written a complimentary review, and being treated like royalty, when in fact it was I who was awed by the level of musicianship displayed.

With the goal of improving this dialogue between players and writers, the recently formed Boston/New England chapter of the Jazz Journalists Association hosted a panel discussion with prominent Boston area journalists and a group of professional jazz players at the Berklee College of Music. The group that met on May 5, 2003 at Berklee consisted of writers: Bob Blumenthal, Michael Ullman, Bob Young, and John Garelick. The musician contingent comprised pianist Danilo Perez, saxophonist Bill Pierce, vibraphonist Gary Burton, and vocalist Kevin Mahogany.

Moderator Bob Blumenthal kicked off the discussion by asking for a "job description" for the jazz journalist. John Garelick, coming from the editor’s perspective said, " I’m looking for someone with the ability to describe music, who has writing skills and authority in the subject matter." Gary Burton added that the writing skills needed to be inclusive of a general audience. Kevin Mahogany sparked a sub-topic about what the job should be called, with several suggestions from the panel that included "reviewer", "jazz writer", "jazz journalist".

It was generally agreed that "critic" is a term that most are uncomfortable with, seeing the role more as champion of the music with a responsibility to educate and enlighten rather than to "criticize", although criticism does help maintain high standards in the art form. Kevin Mahogany added that he thought reviewers should present the music in a way that makes people want to hear it, and also that the reviewer should possess a good sense of the history of the music. He bemoaned the fact that it is possible to write and publish without necessarily possessing any credentials and without bothering to find out what a player is trying to do. Mahogany cited some reviews he had gotten on his Motown influenced Pride and Joy CD, from reviewers who had him type cast in the Joe Williams mold and were unhappy with the changes he has made.

Getting back to the question of credentials, Gary Burton added that writers about jazz who do not possess a music background tend toward descriptive language that is more subjective, but sometimes misses the mark entirely. He further stated that even a complimentary review that is inaccurate rings hollow for the player whose work is being discussed. Danilo Perez suggested that the writer needs to do what the players do, that is to be creative, passionate and articulate with words. Bob Young cited the importance of getting across to the mass audience in non-technical terms. He sees his position at the Herald as a real opportunity to champion the music, to tell people who might otherwise not know much about jazz at all.

Another topic for discussion, this one for the musicians was, "How accessible do you make yourself to the press?" Kevin Mahogany indicated that he is very open to granting interviews, provided that they happen at a reasonable time (before the show, not after), and also provided that the interviewer does some homework so that the interview doesn’t bog down in foolish or irrelevant questions. John Garelick suggested that the musician should be open to offering something that goes beyond the press release material when granting an interview. People want to read something that is more of a human interest story than what is generally available in a press release.

This was the kickoff event for this regional chapter of the Jazz Journalists. I think it was a successful endeavor and I believe it’s important that the dialogue continue. It left me with much to think about in my role as a writer of jazz reviews and features. Like many others who contributed to this discussion, I see myself as having a responsibility to put this music across with love, respect, historical accuracy, and hopefully in a way that conveys the importance of this art form.

- Richard Mayer  May 26, 2003 

Return to  Mayer Archives

This site and all its content is
Copyright © 2007 Espresso Jazz Network
All Rights Reserved Worldwide