Jazz in the 21st century: Playing outside the box

“If you don’t want jazz to change, you are putting a pillow over its face, and it’s going to die.&quot;<p>Truer words have never been said. Jazz wasn&#x27;t meant to live in the shadows of Coltrane, Ellington, Monk, Bird, or even Miles Davis forever. Sure the history is important, and technique and the theoretical rigor will always be a necessary ingredient, but the moment Jazz stops innovating and expanding is the moment it dies.

Teaching Jazz is the way to go for most people who want to make a living from Jazz. I know several successful musicians who started as Jazz musicians but make a good living in rock and pop music. Getting to be known as the best of the best on your instrument via your Jazz chops can open doors in other genres to be invited to work with very successful, established artists. To make a living directly from Jazz you really want to go into education. If you have some hustle and you live in a medium to large sized city, no matter where you are there are likely enough kids interested in learning to play Jazz that you could develop a viable income as a private Jazz instructor on your instrument. From there you&#x27;re taking part in building the scene of the future.

I clearly know nothing about music, but why does it even have to be called &#x27;Jazz&#x27;? Given those market numbers cited, it seems like it would be a very bad brand to be associated with your music.<p>Having a son who&#x27;s 12, and having recently had a bunch of pre-teens running around my house all going through the timeless ritual of identity crafting, I have gotten to listen to their music, watch their media, and hear their thoughts. When I talk with them about music, it doesn&#x27;t surprise me that they view the music of my day (80s &#x2F; 90s) with as much boredom as I had viewed big band music in my day. To them, rock and jazz are Baroque. Guitars and Drums? I might as well play them a harpsichord.<p>On the other hand, I know several highly skilled, expert musical technicians in their 20s and 30s. They have spent the majority of their lives training to master the practice and theory of music. They know so much about their instruments and their technique, it frankly astounds me. In comparison to dedicated musicians of my day, they seem like masters. Yet, for some reason, they spend their time playing Jazz derivatives and covers or as studio musicians. Interestingly, they&#x27;re all playing Jazz - which to me is so puzzling. It&#x27;s akin to being a master visual artist and being absorbed in re-creating Pollack or Rothko or Kadinsky.<p>Jazz had a moment, and it was a beautiful moment. It can be admired and relished as such, and the music can help transport one to that moment in time. But, does Jazz even make any sense in the modern world? I love listening to some of it - Coltrane and Davis, of course. But, if I went to a music venue today, and the band was playing Jazz, I&#x27;d be bored out of my mind.

Many developments in jazz of the 60s and 70s are just starting to become normalized and institutionalized in the 21st century. Check out the history of the AACM and Art Ensemble of Chicago for one important example:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;books&#x2F;titles&#x2F;138018824&#x2F;a-power-stronger-than-itself-the-aacm-and-american-experimental-music" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;books&#x2F;titles&#x2F;138018824&#x2F;a-power-stronger-t...</a>

Playing outside the box office, too...