Rob Austin of Harvard Business School is fond of quoting Martha Graham -- something like "...technique is the dancers freedom..". In jazz technique and simplification have been two elements which liberates the player - both in terms of individual expression but also in interaction with others.
Martha Graham: Technique is the dancers freedom.
I think there is a third element which gives an artist freedom in collaborative performance art, namely standardized preset rules or guidelines (I guess this is what we refer to as the JazzCode). If you think about music, we have a large number of absolute standards which eliminate the need for discussion and help reduce complexity. Up front, we often agree on key, harmonic structure, tempo, and groove/style (each with its own sets of guidelines and patterns) and roles. We have memorized the same songs -- we even call them standards -- and taken together, these guidelines (which we may break but at our own risk) help pave the way for the decision making which must be made in the moment. If we were to negotiate all elements of music in the moment, we would be unable to interact and play. The innovative breakpoints in jazz can be found whenever some of the shared standards for interplay are challenged.
One example is be-bop. In the 1940's they expanded the boundaries of acceptable tempos, played faster but with fewer people (one could say as a way to compensate for the added complexity brought on by faster tempi and more chords). New complexity was made possible with modal jazz, -- check out Miles Davis' Kind of Blue -- where the practice of using complex harmonic chords and structures were eliminated and replaced with slow tempi, simplified structures and scales instead of chords. It certainly happened later when Miles and other challenged the practices of form and structure furher with e.g. Bitches Brew. I think one could say that added technique was en enabler in the sense that when more technically advanced players emerged, they both saw new opportunities outside the existing boundaries. In order to pursue new complexity, they compensated by simplifying along other trajectories. If you look at the development of standards in music, one could argue that they have been developed as a way to facilitate more complexity on one axis by reducing complexity on another.
Thus, technique is one way of gaining freedom in itself, but in a sense, it also acts as a catalyst because it helps musicians explore, stretch and
break out of the boundaries of existing rules. An obvious example outside music is traffic; with more and faster cars, the need for new
and simpler rules has emerged -- faster cars require simpler signs (because of tunnel vision), and because everything happens so fast, we
have to reduce and standardize the signals in order to make ourselves understood with the least taxation on our presence. In fast, dense, dynamic traffic, our attention is taxed to the point that even small levels of alcohol or the distraction of a simple phone call renders us unable to participate and be fully present.
Comments