This article was written to appear on the web site, Bird Lives, and, with the permission and encouragement of that site's web master, it is reprinted here. Because my feelings about this music, Jazz, are so strong and my distress at what has taken place within the music and the community is so deep, I have decided to make it the single focus of this issue of cadenzas. It is an in-depth article and is rather long, but it spells out rather clearly my feelings on the issues involved. Subsequent commentary by some of those who have read this article is posted in the area, In Response. If any of you wish to express your feelings about what I have written, please feel free to do so. 
- M. S.

There has been a lot of angry talk by a lot of angry people about the many changes that have taken place in Jazz and in the Jazz community in recent years. Though this phenomenon began 15+ years ago, its ramifications are still very much in evidence today. These changes have had profound effects on the music and on the lives of present-day Jazz musicians. Many musicians are angry or frustrated because they feel the changes have negatively impacted employment and recording opportunities and created divisiveness between the various ethnic groups of this community. The thing I deplore above all else is the destruction of a long era of "community" and "togetherness" in Jazz that has allowed people from different backgrounds, who delight in playing this music, to contribute so much to the art form. I saddens me to see these changes and the consequences of a business that seems alienated from, yet takes advantage of, the deep emotions that drive those of us who have chosen to express ourselves through this music. It is so much about money and so little about the music. The anger and the divisiveness in the community are unhealthy and counterproductive, and these elements do not belong here. It is time to end the bitterness, resolve the issues equitably and try to bring all the groups - Blacks, Whites, Latinos, everyone - together again. 

I was very fortunate to have come up through a period in the music when, though it may have been an anomaly, "togetherness" and "community" seemed pretty much to be the order of the day. What I, as a young musician, saw in Jazz magazines and on the back of record jackets were musicians of various backgrounds who were playing, touring and recording together. That was the image I had of this music and its practitioners, an image I carry with me still. It was wonderful and exemplified everything I felt the music represented, and I believe I experienced some of the best of that period. Many of the people I encountered were great musicians and most of them were also great human beings. Besides the pleasure playing together many of them had great love for each other, regardless of race or ethnic roots! This is the way it is supposed to be and what I wish were true for every one of us today. Whether this is realistic or not, it is certainly something we all should strive for. 

My own personal experiences growing up within the music illustrate to a great degree the "community" and "togetherness" of which I speak. Because my parents insisted that my first responsibility as a young person be to my studies, I did not truly become a part the Jazz community until I attended the Univ. of North Texas. Besides playing in the Lab Band, I spent a great deal of time in Dallas and Fort Worth playing with many of the fine musicians from all backgrounds who lived in the area. These included James Clay, Willie T. Albert, James Hardee, Louis Spears and other musicians from the Black community. These musicians could hold their own on the bandstand with anyone, anywhere! They could really play! There was a lot of musical activity, and musicians from both Black and White communities mixed and played together quite freely at the time. Young and inexperienced as I was, these players encouraged me and invited me to come back to play. I was quite proud when in my last year at North Texas I became a regular member of James Clay's quintet. 

When I arrived in NYC in 1966, the clubs, recording sessions and Broadway show pits all were mixed. Most of the players in the Jazz or studio community drew no racial lines. Though there were some within the community who harbored "attitudes" or bitterness about one thing or another, I found these negative feelings to be the exception rather than the rule. Almost all the musicians with whom I came in contact had a deep respect and cared a great deal for one another. Many were old and dear friends who socialized both at work and with their families, and if one was sick or in trouble, others would be there to help in any way they could.

Over the years I have played with or have known a great number of the Jazz musicians working in NYC, and the list includes players from all ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Among them are Duke Pearson, Bernie Glow, Snooky Young, Ernie Royal, Thad Jones, Clark Terry, Mel Lewis, Mickey Roker, Eddie Daniels, Garnett Brown, Victor Paz, Bob Cranshaw, Joe Farrell, Bob Brookmeyer, Joe Newman, Ray Barretto, Zoot Sims, Quincy Jones, Dizzy Gillespie, Oliver Nelson, Al Cohn, Chico O'Farrill and Jerome Richardson. I don't believe I have ever felt that anyone judged me on anything other than my musical abilities and my dealings with them as fellow human beings. I continue to maintain and treasure friendships with those who are still with us. 

Upon reading interviews with pioneers of the modern era of jazz such as Clark Terry, Milt Hinton, and Dizzy among others - and examining other writings of that period, I find my view of a more closely-knit Jazz community is confirmed. In a recent, filmed interview for a documentary about composer Gary McFarland, the interviewer remarked that Bob Brookmeyer had made the same observation of musicians during that earlier period.

What is different now and why? What has happened in Jazz that changed feelings of togetherness and instead brought out anger and divisiveness, racism, ageism, suspicion and distrust? I see several factors: 1.) A new approach to Jazz recordings by the recording industry that has impacted the music business in general 2.) Untoward remarks by extremely visible members of the Jazz community that have been highly publicized, creating a schism - primarily between Black and White members of the community 3.) "Ageism," i.e. discrimination based on age. It would be relatively easy in an article like this to simply express anger and point fingers. Instead, I would prefer to list a few pertinent and relevant instances in the hope that we can learn from them and attempt to resolve the problems and improve the situation for everyone. 

With the phenomenal success enjoyed by Columbia Records thanks to the combination of Wynton Marsalis‚ talent and popularity and that company's extensive PR capabilities, other companies felt that they too had found the key to commercial success in the jazz record arena and wanted to follow suit. They believed a trend had been set in motion, and that by following Columbia's lead, they also would be able to jump on the bandwagon. 

This concept of success was based upon producing or manufacturing artist/"stars" cast in Wynton's image. In most cases, this meant that the artist should be young and, preferably, Black. This marketing approach, together with overt remarks by some writers and critics who sought to exploit the controversy for their own gain, have gone a long way to effect the myth that only Black musicians can really play this music, resulting in the schism I have described. The negative effects of this myth, and of trends emphasizing stereotypes based on age and race, involve more than just marketing recordings; the obvious effect has been to encourage ageism and racism. This is not what this music is about. Instead of bringing people together, it separates them. I must firmly stress here that this was not an act of racism perpetrated by Black musicians, but rather of marketing practices by record company executives and PR people (I venture to guess predominantly White) who wished to capitalize on the image they believe accounted for Wynton‚s success. Even they, I feel certain had no idea of the consequences of their actions on the community or the collateral damage that would ensue. Then again, I am not sure they would have cared.

The effects of this new marketing approach quickly became apparent in the Jazz community. Statements supporting this theory continued to be made and publicized in both the print and broadcast media. This served to exacerbate the situation and divide the community along color lines. To my knowledge and in my experience, this is the first time racism of this magnitude had been initiated from within the industry and directed toward other members of the community.

It should be evident to anyone that throughout the history of Jazz, many of the groups that have earned our deepest respect were racially mixed. Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington and Count Basie all had White musicians in their ensembles as did Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie Parker, Miles Davis and Quincy Jones, Thad Jones and Mel Lewis, Clark Terry, Duke Pearson, Gerald Wilson, Charles Mingus. Are we going to question whether these and all the other great Jazz Masters who had mixed groups knew the difference between those who could or could not swing or play this music?

Those who are very much in the public eye must be aware of the influence they hold over impressionable individuals and must understand that some will interpret their words as gospel. It is important to understand how easy it is to divide a group as fragile as the Jazz community. In regard to racism, we have only to look at our own history to know how wrong it is and how people have suffered. To remain silent and allow this evil to be perpetuated, whether by action or innuendo, is unconscionable. Maybe, if some of the elder statesmen and stateswomen of this music held in such high regard by the newcomers had spoken out verbally and in print about these issues, setting the record straight, perhaps many of the falsehoods and much of the harm could have been avoided. 

This did not happen, and, many young musicians believed the myth. Some may have wanted to believe it because it created an environment and feeling that "this is our time" and that, now, "we are in control." Can one blame them, after hearing words supporting the truth of the myth coming from some of their heroes, and especially when those ideas were not refuted by the respected elder "giants" whom they could never have ignored? Could anyone expect a young person with a dream to say "No!" to an opportunity that might hold the promise of making him or her a star?

Ageism, as practiced by certain segments of the industry was clearly revealed in one well-known instance by the issuance of a letter that was circulated among members of the Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra, in which all those players over 30 were relieved of their positions. If not for threats of legal action spearheaded by saxophonist Bill Easley, the letter might have stood. Though someone in the administration of Jazz at Lincoln Center took complete responsibility for this "mistake," it demonstrated the policy of "ageism" in an institution that the public, then and now, perceives to be at the highest level of Jazz presentation.

In the ways mentioned above, many musicians of different ethnic backgrounds and ages who didn‚t fit the image proscribed by the recording companies were disenfranchised. Artists of all races who had spent years developing their voices and refining their music found a lifetime of effort deemed invalid. A great number, including many Black musicians, found fewer opportunities not just to record, but also to work! In my mind, the most devastating result was that these forms of discrimination seemed to have been institutionally sanctioned. Though elements of racism have always existed in some form, we have been pretty fortunate that little of it had permeated the world of Jazz. Nevertheless, it definitely became part of the "scene", dividing the community and driving a wedge between those who were "acceptable" and those who were not. To some extent, we have been contending with racism AND ageism and their effects ever since!

With the implementation of this new process of determining whom the companies would record, another element crucial to the development of a Jazz musician was lost. A "generation gap" arose between the young and those mid-30's and older, and, sadly, this age barrier has affected the tradition of mentoring that has always been such a vital part of the music from its earliest beginnings. Though the evolving situation might have appeared to be a real opportunity for those now designated the "young lions" I feel it hasn't really benefited these talented young artists. Instead, I feel it created several situations extremely detrimental to both these artists and the music. 

We were all "young lions" at some point in our lives and were recognized as burgeoning talents. That said, we were given the opportunity to grow infinitely as players and as people when we were able to play along side the older, more experienced musicians who imparted their musical wisdom to us, allowing us to become part of their music. Our musical proximity to more experienced players over a period of time helped us mature and develop our own voices. This invaluable process helped fan the flames of our intense desire to learn more from our mentors and peers and fueled our hopes of one-day being accepted by them as equals. It stimulated and motivated us to work harder in order to feel that we belonged on the bandstand with our elders. Nothing can ever replace these experiences. But what 22 year-old signatory to a big recording contract would ask prominent musicians with established reputations - whose maturity might make evident his or her own shortcomings - to join his or her group? Instead, these young musicians called upon young people their own age or younger and, in doing so, deprived themselves of an opportunity afforded generations of Jazz musicians before them. This is not to deny the fact that these young people are talented or that they play well, but how much can they learn from others just as inexperienced, compared to the opportunity of being in the musical company of those who have spent years finding their voices and refining their art? Artists strive to attain knowledge and skills above and beyond those they possess in the present ˆ this is what produces growth and maturity in a musician. 

The reasons for making a record or CD also has been altered and/or obscured. The main purpose of a recording in the life of any artist should be to document his or her creative efforts at that point in time. Of course, it also is to allow the public to hear and become familiar with an artist, in hope that a demand to hear them perform "live" will be created. Now, the concept for the record companies is to invest their resources in a perceived trend, to support a marketable artist fitting the "star" image and, by utilizing the "star's" marketing power, to yield a "hit" in the process. The CD has come to signify stardom to these young artists, and they put all their hopes and dreams in one basket. The recording companies‚ expectations are that these young people will "produce" in order to justify the monies the companies spend marketing and creating these "stars."

Musicians of my period seemed to know instinctively that Jazz was about our spending a lifetime seeking to find our own voice with which to express our deepest inner emotions and not about "hit" records, a term applied mostly to pop groups. In the past, most recording labels seemed to have understood the concept of a long-term investment and that developing an artist in any area of music takes time and resources. They were once willing to do that. It seems now that companies are not interested in developing artists, but rather in creating "stars" in order to make money quickly. Many of us have observed these companies dropping the young artists if they don't produce "hits", if they don't become the next "Wynton." When this happens, many of these new young artists are devastated because they don't understand the realities of a recording industry now patterned after the "pop" music business. They don't understand that the driving force is money and that the music in most cases is far down on the list of priorities, just as in the "pop" arena. 

A number of smaller American and European labels have never wholly subscribed to the racial or age premise, but neither have they been a counter-balance to the "majors." The large companies in the industry were - and still are - fixated on the practices I have described and show little inclination toward change. Now, however, they are paying a price because much of the music they are producing hasn't stood the test of time, and the Jazz audience is rejecting it. One hears constant complaints about the state of the business at industry conferences such as the recently defunct Jazz Times Convention. Many companies say that the "re-issue" - of music played by those who grew musically within the mentoring process - is their financial savior. If companies continue to produce Jazz music based on the marketing strategies of "pop" music rather than on music with substance and content and on the true validity of the artist's work, then they will continue to lose their audience. 

The saving grace for many of us wanting to document our music is that technology allows us to produce quality recordings inexpensively. Many musicians are doing this and "co-oping" with other players in order to make it even more affordable. By selling the CDs on the Web, as well as at public appearances, we are able to generate a much better financial return for ourselves than by having our music released by a label. Except for those few players signed to "majors" who employ extremely intense marketing efforts, I have heard of very few musicians who have received ANY return from having their music released by a label. As I read in a letter posted on a web site by another musician, "We will soon have our revenge on the record companies, who take everything and give nothing in return."

To conclude, let me be clear about some things: This treatise was not meant to "point fingers." It was meant to show cause-and-effect and to illustrate a number of destructive practices affecting both our music and the corresponding business. I offer these observations in the hope that we might become more vigilant and aware of what is at risk when we lose sight of what is truly valuable and essential to our art. 

Fortunately, it seems that some of the tensions and negative feelings have moderated during the last four or five years. There seems to be less uneasiness and more warmth among a good number of the musicians in the community. Perhaps this more temperate stance can be credited to musicians discovering through experience that players of other racial and ethnic backgrounds can really play this music and the resulting respect that this realization has generated. Regardless of the cause, things do seem to be changing. The pendulum in the community seems to be swinging back toward the middle. But let's not be deluded. Unfortunately, racism has always existed to some degree among all people, and, if we who know better don't speak out against it in any and every forum and attempt to implement change, it will continue to haunt our communities and our lives. 

I have experienced a great career through the years, and I continue to be busy and productive. For this, I must give great credit to those who, through their efforts and caring, taught me and helped me learn and grow. All of them, throughout the last 40 years, regardless of race or ethnic origin, have been responsible to an enormous degree for making me the musician I am today. They taught me that this music is supposed to be about "we" not "me." They taught me about knowing the difference between those experiences that produce the best in people, bringing them closer together within the beautiful world of music, and those experiences that humiliate people and produce the opposite effect. The world I have experienced most of my musical life has been the former, and, idealistic as it may sound, I think everyone deserves that. 

Many elements today are working against our culture and the music. During the hard times, especially, we should come together as artists who share so much that is rich and good. If we can do that, I truly feel we can energize both the community and the music, and that energy will flow outward to create more interest and love of the music, bringing us still closer. We must understand that discrimination in any form, no matter who it is directed against, is wrong and makes a mockery of our humanity. If we let ourselves be driven by purely selfish motives fed by those who couldn't care less about the music or the musicians, then both the future of the music and we will be the losers. And if we artists are petty as to allow things such as skin color, age or nationality divide us, then we deserve the consequences.