Are books dead, and can authors survive?

[Joe Allonby]

Jazz wasn't taken seriously, it was popular dance music. Once it
ceased to be, it was relieved of the burden of having to be popular.
It's path was not obscurity. I don't think you can call Bitches Brew
obscure. Jazz flourished during the rock era because it was less
popular. Jazz musicians could take risks that pop musicians couldn't
because they weren't expected to be teen heartthrobs. They were free
to be real musicians.



On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:01 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> Pickin' a few nits here on your theory/history re. rock & jazz:
>
> Dominant forms of popular musical mass entertainment change with the
> generations.  Dominant audiences change (are born and die) parallel
> with genres.
>
> Jazz didn't get "serious" in response to rock displacing its audience.
>  It was following its own path, and that path led it to its own
> obscurity.  Serious listeners and pop music don't usually cross paths.
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Joe Allonby <joeallonby at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm reminded of the critics of popular culture who thought that rock 'n' roll would kill jazz by replacing it as the dominant form in musical mass entertainment. In fact, rock 'n' roll made jazz better by allowing it to take its place as a serious art form as opposed to mere dance music for the masses.
>