As I was reading Ingrid Monson’s “The Problem with White Hipness”, I was surprised that homosexuality was not discussed in her analysis of the reality of black sexuality and African-American society. I do not fault Dr. Monson, because as I thought about it, a consideration of homosexuality and queerness in general within the social context of jazz is a fascinating and difficult topic unto itself; one that I do not intend to fully answer in this blog post. I do however, find it interesting use Monson’s framework from the article to tease out some of these issues.
“White Hipness” , as I understand it, is the constructed and romanticized notion of a primitive, sexually deviant, drug using, “hip” black musician. This could also include all the trimmings of the zoot suit, goatee and other external aesthetics. This image has been emulated and reinforced by musicians throughout the end of the century, and leaves its mark on the music even today. I think all can agree that the standard narrative presents jazz as predominantly a heterosexual male music regardless of race. The most noted exceptions to that over the standard history of Jazz are women; most of whom are vocalists as far as the history books are concerned. A second and related group often left out of the history are queer people. Queerness (and by that I mean homosexuals, bisexuals, transgendered people and anyone acquainted or perceived as being acquainted with those communities) has long been a part of jazz culture. Blues singers like Bessie Smith, Ma Rainey, and countless other musicians in the 20’s and 30’s sang openly about there lifestyle according to many accounts. However, the relatively open queerness that was a staple of jazz as a dance and blues music, faded when bebop and its hyper-masculine image brought the music off the dance floor.
[There was also a hyper-masculinity going on in general society influenced by WWII and the predominance and promoting of the nuclear family post WWII...]
One theory I have for the prevalence of the hyper-masculine image rather real or imagined is two fold. First, as Monson reports the press used the “hip” and “competitive” nature of the music as a promotional tool. This allowed a very specific image of what a jazz musician should be to permeate the culture. As sensationalized as the macho persona of these musicians were, it was not entirely fiction. Secondly, to play such an interactive music is quite an intimate experience; you really get to know the musicians you play with when you remove the competitive aspect. I know many musicians who react to that intimacy by adopting a macho persona. Another reaction, and the tactic of many queer jazz musicians over the years, is to simply stay silent. According to some more public gay jazz figures (Fred Hersch, Gary Burton, Patricia Barber etc) even today countless musicians remain “in the closet” for the sake of their career. I see a parallel between these tactics and the politics of respectability that Monson so often refers to. It’s seems to be that the binary (mastery of form versus deformation of mastery) is not quite adequate. We have queer male musicians adopting a hyper-masculine persona (males are a more concrete example; not quite sure to unpack the parallel with the queer females) as a representation of mastery of form. Queer musicians being silent about their lives, which represents a tactic not really inherent in the binary. Unfortunately I don’t see much in the way of rebellion against the lingering homophobia in jazz music. A google search of open queer jazz musicians turned up 3-4 articles on the topic. Most of these articles or mentions dealt with Billy Strayhorn, Fred Hersch, Andy Bey, and Gary Burton (note: all males, all play a keyboard instrument). Secondly I found it disheartening that many sites that mention Fred Hersch and Andy Bey, qualified them not a Gay male jazz musicians, but as “openly HIV+ jazz musicians”. Politics of Respectability exists from a historical/racial perspective as a continuum. Musicians and ordinary people constantly negotiating between rebellion and mastery of form. However, when the extremes of the binary do not necessarily exist, the continuum shifts. Musicians, until very recently chose between silence and adopting a new image of themselves that adheres to the standard definition of a jazz musician. This holds true across the entertainment industry as well, perhaps in more egregious form in the film industry. Is this still an issue today? At NEC... maybe not? I am still mulling it over. Any thoughts on the subject are welcome!
This conundrum of when Jazz became a “straight” music and why the attitude still exists today will be the topic of my research paper so I don’t want to delve too deeply here. I thought I would leave with some problems that I intend to unpack
- The queer jazz musicians that we do know about, predominantly perform as singers and pianists. What does it mean to be queer and a horn player? Has bebop imbued extra-masculinity onto horn players?
- The perceptions of lesbian vs. gay jazz musicians.
- Does this affect younger generations of musicians?
- unpacking the idea that queer musicians (and straight women for that matter) are told that “as long as you play well you won’t face discrimination”.
-and much much more!!!
“White Hipness” , as I understand it, is the constructed and romanticized notion of a primitive, sexually deviant, drug using, “hip” black musician. This could also include all the trimmings of the zoot suit, goatee and other external aesthetics. This image has been emulated and reinforced by musicians throughout the end of the century, and leaves its mark on the music even today. I think all can agree that the standard narrative presents jazz as predominantly a heterosexual male music regardless of race. The most noted exceptions to that over the standard history of Jazz are women; most of whom are vocalists as far as the history books are concerned. A second and related group often left out of the history are queer people. Queerness (and by that I mean homosexuals, bisexuals, transgendered people and anyone acquainted or perceived as being acquainted with those communities) has long been a part of jazz culture. Blues singers like Bessie Smith, Ma Rainey, and countless other musicians in the 20’s and 30’s sang openly about there lifestyle according to many accounts. However, the relatively open queerness that was a staple of jazz as a dance and blues music, faded when bebop and its hyper-masculine image brought the music off the dance floor.
[There was also a hyper-masculinity going on in general society influenced by WWII and the predominance and promoting of the nuclear family post WWII...]
One theory I have for the prevalence of the hyper-masculine image rather real or imagined is two fold. First, as Monson reports the press used the “hip” and “competitive” nature of the music as a promotional tool. This allowed a very specific image of what a jazz musician should be to permeate the culture. As sensationalized as the macho persona of these musicians were, it was not entirely fiction. Secondly, to play such an interactive music is quite an intimate experience; you really get to know the musicians you play with when you remove the competitive aspect. I know many musicians who react to that intimacy by adopting a macho persona. Another reaction, and the tactic of many queer jazz musicians over the years, is to simply stay silent. According to some more public gay jazz figures (Fred Hersch, Gary Burton, Patricia Barber etc) even today countless musicians remain “in the closet” for the sake of their career. I see a parallel between these tactics and the politics of respectability that Monson so often refers to. It’s seems to be that the binary (mastery of form versus deformation of mastery) is not quite adequate. We have queer male musicians adopting a hyper-masculine persona (males are a more concrete example; not quite sure to unpack the parallel with the queer females) as a representation of mastery of form. Queer musicians being silent about their lives, which represents a tactic not really inherent in the binary. Unfortunately I don’t see much in the way of rebellion against the lingering homophobia in jazz music. A google search of open queer jazz musicians turned up 3-4 articles on the topic. Most of these articles or mentions dealt with Billy Strayhorn, Fred Hersch, Andy Bey, and Gary Burton (note: all males, all play a keyboard instrument). Secondly I found it disheartening that many sites that mention Fred Hersch and Andy Bey, qualified them not a Gay male jazz musicians, but as “openly HIV+ jazz musicians”. Politics of Respectability exists from a historical/racial perspective as a continuum. Musicians and ordinary people constantly negotiating between rebellion and mastery of form. However, when the extremes of the binary do not necessarily exist, the continuum shifts. Musicians, until very recently chose between silence and adopting a new image of themselves that adheres to the standard definition of a jazz musician. This holds true across the entertainment industry as well, perhaps in more egregious form in the film industry. Is this still an issue today? At NEC... maybe not? I am still mulling it over. Any thoughts on the subject are welcome!
This conundrum of when Jazz became a “straight” music and why the attitude still exists today will be the topic of my research paper so I don’t want to delve too deeply here. I thought I would leave with some problems that I intend to unpack
- The queer jazz musicians that we do know about, predominantly perform as singers and pianists. What does it mean to be queer and a horn player? Has bebop imbued extra-masculinity onto horn players?
- The perceptions of lesbian vs. gay jazz musicians.
- Does this affect younger generations of musicians?
- unpacking the idea that queer musicians (and straight women for that matter) are told that “as long as you play well you won’t face discrimination”.
-and much much more!!!
I now leave you with Johnny Hartman singing Billy Strayhorns "Lush Life" :)
No comments:
Post a Comment