The frontiers of music were about to be broken in Glasgow.
So promised Abdullah Ibrahim as he opened the second half of his concert in the old tram sheds. Outside the auditorium stood George Wylie's remarkable and enormous Paper Boat - a political statement by the sculptor on the collapse of Glasgow's shipbuilding industry. Following the previous day's defiant non-payment demonstration in the city, many inside still wore Militant's "Don't Pay - Don't Collect" stickers or the "I'm No Paying the Poll Tax" badges of the Strathclyde Anti-Poll Tax Federation. Clydeside's politics provided the backdrop for this great pianist.
In the first half, Abdullah Ibrahim played a solo fifty minute improvisation, drawing together the lilting rhythms of the South African townships and North American jazz interwoven with the constructions of Scottish and English hymn music. No one listening to him failed to be moved by the references to South Africa, freedom and his great mentors, Duke Ellington, Thelonious Monk and Nelson Mandela.
Again he proved himself to be one of the most sensitive, yet dynamic, jazz musicians. And no one can doubt his political and musical courage. When, as Dollar Brand, he left South Africa in the early sixties, he was (as he remains) an outspoken opponent of apartheid. Later, in the jaded jazz circles of Europe and the USA he defended and promoted the work and influences of Ellington (his patron) and Monk when their own innovative powers were in decline.
But his second set in Glasgow left issues unresolved.
In addition to his usual drummer and sax player, he introduced Sigma, a string sextet of two violins, a viola, a cello and two double bass. The group, he said, was formed to break out of the accepted structures and forms.
Some "showcase" numbers were played - each musician playing competently but without any of the combustion expected from the inner tensions and musical contradictions of jazz. The string section's arrangements existed as though nothing had happened in twentieth century "serious" music. Bartok or Stravinsky might never have been born; the new frontiers largely consisted of pastiche. The jazz musicians did their bit; and the conservatoire musicians did theirs, with neither providing any counterpoint or tension.
Here was no conflict between European classicism, African rhythms, Indo-Arabic variation, or the tones of modern jazz. The blend emerged safe, tame and slightly dull with justice being done neither to jazz nor the classical tradition.
In "Monk In Harlem", a tribute to Thelonious Monk, the typical Monk harmonic progressions were used without any of the edgy, angular rhythms or dischords that he employed. The themes were repeated by the string section with little variation.
In a later dedication to tenor sax colossus John Coltrane, the descending chords of Trane's "Giant Steps" were nodded to, but without the original's rhythmic or harmonic intensity; instead, those grand chords were "prettified" by sub-baroque frilly bits.
One problem is that of transcription; normal musical notation does not sufficiently accommodate the nuances of timing and "bent notes" that a jazz musician uses. John Lewis of the Modern Jazz Quartet could not understand why one of his compositions lacked "edge" when played by classical musicians with perfect sight reading abilities. He then found that inserting formal rests of one sixteenth of a note into the score at least gave the impression of improvised effect. But no transcriptions of work by the great masters of jazz ever fully describe the subtlety of their art.
At one stage, Alex Dankworth on bass gave the impression of trying to spur on the string section, but to no avail; they just couldn't swing.
So why should any of this concern us?
Given the present political resurgence amongst youth (whether opposed to the Poll Tax or apartheid) and the general lack of direction and sterility of current popular music, someone like Abdullah Ibrahim has the musical integrity and political guts to take the music on and maybe open some ears in the process.
But as with other jazz musicians he wants to transcend the boundaries of that world. Some like George Benson were drawn to the pop milieu while others like Charlie Parker wanted to break out of early fifties bebop and turn to the order and lushness of Euro-American strings. In both cases the lure of financial security must (understandably) have been at least as great a reason as the development of new artistic challenges. However the results tend to bear out the view that neither move produced any musical progress whatsoever.
Other musicians have travelled a different and more difficult road; in the sixties John Coltrane looked more to Africa and India for fresh inspiration. Trumpeter Don Cherry has since gone much deeper into those roots and arguably has taken the music even further.
"WORLD MUSIC"
Current Western interest in "World Music" reflects developments in international communications as well as discontent with the dead end of contemporary US/European pop music. Commercial music rarely moves forward through its own impetus; rather, it has to dip into other art or folk forms or cultures, and then "purify" them for public presentation. Examples during the post war period include various strands of jazz and blues, other North American and Caribbean folk influences, the folk music of the British Isles, Indian forms and so on. Even the most memorable and dynamic pop forms such as rock and roll were clearly synthethised white editions of the product of earlier black musicians such as Louis Jordan.
Everyone remembers Presley and "Hound Dog" but who remembers the woman who wrote it and made it famous on the fifties "race record" market?
The process of "purification" and packaging is ultimately determined by the needs of big business. The back beat (on the second and/or fourth beat of the bar) provides much of the tension in jazz - the back beat and "blue" (flattened) notes of sixties funk was over exploited; the "New York" sound of the seventies rested on little else; and in the eighties has been distilled to its most sterile form in disco beat. That original challenge of the back beat to earlier Euro-American conventions in music has demonstrably been tamed and reduced to disco dance mechanicism. Commercial interests will drain every last ounce of inspiration and every last penny from whatever the earlier forms can generate. And then drop it and delve into some other form.
As the hipsters of the Western world become familiar and then blase with the music of other cultures, so opportunities for exploitation of these forms become more apparent. Already British audiences can provide big bucks to promoters of music from Mali, Algeria or Indonesia.
Highlife and other forms of township music from South Africa have been in the international ear for some time - largely made "acceptable" by Hugh Masekela's move into the commercial Western market and Paul Simon's controversial recordings.
Which brings us back to Abdullah Ibrahim. His musicianship reflects the dialectical conflicts not only of South African society but of the inner tensions of creative improvised jazz. (The latter being explored very clearly in Ian Carr's brilliant biography of Miles Davis). But the attempt to reconcile his music with the European conservatoire does not appear to have worked. Classically trained composers of the European mould seem to have always found it easier to incorporate the dynamic of jazz into their structured forms; in different fields, Bartok, Gershwin and Stravinsky were able to do this successfully. The jazz musician, who (usually) individually improvises within a less formally structured collective, seems to have the greater difficulty in reconciling the musical forms.
That great exception to every rule, Miles Davis, made the outstanding "Sketches of Spain" album which used scores by Spanish composers of the traditional school. But when Miles' trumpet soared through Rodrigo's "Concierto de Aranjuez", he was backed by jazz musicians, albeit in a very structured form. Under Gil Evans' direction they swung. Although it worked, Davis was widely criticised at the time by black Americans for, as they saw it, turning his back on their music.
Jazz itself developed out of the struggles of a desperately poor people held down in a sub-class of a racist society. This struggle was reflected in the work of innovative black musicians whose avant garde not only challenged the old musical forms, but whose opinions of their social conditions were often considerably in advance of their peers. Ellington occasionally let slip the mask of implacability; others like Charlie Parker, Charles Mingus and Freddie Hubbard were, in different ways, much more to the point and openly so.
Many of today's leading black jazz musicians openly reject the values of US capitalism, but the lack of a mass based socialist party forces the diversion of political energy into other channels. Nowadays, Islam is not just embraced by musicians from the Cape, but also by many of the finest North American black artists. It is an expression of their rejection of that society and their need to identify with values which transcend the squalid condition of its black working class.
So why should a vastly creative genius like Abdullah Ibrahim stifle his powers in a musical context which in no way reflects any social or musical force for change in Africa, Europe or America? Clearly it is not for commercial reasons. In all probability it is an attempt to get wider recognition for his music as a "serious" art form. Jazz musicians, especially those of the stature and dignity of this artist, bitterly resent the low status attributed to their music by "serious" art critics who neither understand it nor have the slightest interest in its social origins or tensions.
The inherent racism of European capitalism can be seen in this society's view of music from other cultures. Collins' National Dictionary describes jazz as, "n. syncopated, noisy music derived from negro spirituals, and played as accompaniment to dancing, -a. discordant, raucous, garish."
The Concise Oxford Dictionary speculates as to its origins with the comment, "20th c.; perh. orig. = copulation."
So there we have it! The raucous dance music (therefore not serious by definition) of an enslaved (therefore inferior) race!
No wonder Abdullah Ibrahim wants to break the barriers in music. But the question and possible answers might be different if he had counterposed his own music to the avant garde forms of the European tradition. He may choose to move in this direction; possibly such a change could produce exciting results. But Abdullah Ibrahim's lasting contribution will probably be to continue to fuse the subtlety of Ellington and the unpredictability of Monk with the fire born of struggle in South Africa. His music simply does not need the artificial elevation of the European conservatoire. Interestingly, Ellington made several forays into more formal structures but his most memorable "serious" pieces were produced at a time when his band was enormously successful in the commercial world of the dance halls.
Artistic direction for this creative artist will not be determined by the promoters and exploiters of music; and neither by committees of music critics or jazz fans (not even political ones). In the final analysis his course will be determined by the relationship of his own creativity to the society in which he lives.
The struggles of an imprisoned society are central to Abdullah Ibrahim's music; yet within it, there is hope - the harbinger of change and revolution. The greatness of his music is largely derived from the diversity and intensity of his cultural background. And that is his strength. Essentially there is no musical or political point in trying to reconcile his work with archaic forms from the European tradition; rather there are very compelling reasons that he continues to challenge the established values of western music as well those of South African racism.
Donald MacDonald
30th July, 1989
Comments after a concert in Glasgow on 24th June, 1989.
Since the above comments were written, Miles Davis and Don Cherry (both mentioned in the text) have passed away.
Copyright Donald MacDonald, 1989. The above text may be freely reproduced in electronic format for non-commercial purposes provided acknowledgement is made - and it would be nice if you let me know about it, so, "thanks" in advance.
Maybe you sympathise with or strongly disagree with the views expressed above. If you have any comments, I can be e-mailed at donald.macdonald@btinternet.com.
Also links with and lists of other jazz oriented URLs would be appreciated.