Racial Dialogue during the Swing Era

Any account of the history of jazz that does not include a discussion about race would be incomplete. Jazz as a communication of Black life was integral to the genre’s genesis in New Orleans as well as its development and growth across the country over time. However it was not until the 1930s that the subject of race within jazz was explicitly written and talked about. Race coming to the fore at this time in particular was largely due to the increased interracial relations as a result of the larger prominence of Whites in jazz, and the asymmetric power balance contained within. 

The advent of radio in the 20s was one of the great technological feats of the period, and by the decade’s close annual radio sales “had skyrocketed to over $850 million” [Gioia, 128]. The spread of this technology had inevitable effects on the industry of jazz as a whole. It created an expansive, national market for jazz, causing an explosion in the popularity of Swing. However, with radio, “supply and demand were brought further out of alignment,” for one band could entertain listeners all across the country—the work previously done by thousands of jazz bands could now be done by only a few [Gioia, 128]. 

Access to the supply side of jazz was controlled by White businessmen in the recording and broadcasting industries. Because access was so limited, these businessmen had unprecedented leverage over the musicians vying for the distribution of their music, and White presence and influence in jazz was bigger than ever. The period’s great musicians are historically linked to the powerful agents that they had relationships with, including “Louis Armstrong and Joe Glaser, Duke Ellington and Irving Mills, [and] Benny Goodman and John Hammond” [Gioia, 128]. The dire economic climate of the Depression gave these businessmen even more leverage. Even great, proud musicians such as Duke Ellington were forced to make concessions in order to maintain success and prominence during this period. 

This increased influence and control of Whites in jazz during the 30s Swing period also involved a larger number of white musicians playing to white audiences, which “marginalized black bands during a period of segregation” [Stewart, 02/10/15]. Unfortunately, though not unexpected of the time, White musicians were afforded an unfair advantage with regards to access to resources and opportunities creating a racial competition. This competition was only exacerbated by the Depression economy—both Blacks and Whites struggled in poverty.

The increased interracial relations during this period was a critical juncture for the dialogue about race contained within jazz’s history. The racial dynamic between Blacks and Whites within jazz was not unlike the dynamic between the two groups in society as a whole—“the hegemonic role of Whites remains” [Stewart, 02/12/15]. In a racialized society, this racialization of jazz was inevitable.




Commented on Sam Karlin's blog. 

The Emergence of Jazz in Chicago

In the early 20th century, many Blacks migrated out of New Orleans to head North—a sort of promised land where an African American could go to fulfill his dream of a good job and a good life for his children. During this time, “60,000 Negroes migrated from the South to the city of Chicago,” and this mass exodus of African Americans was known as the Great Migration, not only for the number of migrating musicians, but for the wide range of Black society that the Migration affected [The City, 95]. And it is because of the unique economic and social conditions of the city, as well as the jazz stars it was able to attract at an earlier stage, that I believe Chicago was a more important city for jazz in the 1920s than New York. 

For the Southern Black, Northern cities like Chicago represented the idea of vertical economic and social mobility; and many musicians held to the idea that through their music, they would be able to create a better future for themselves and for their children. And in this era, many jazz performers were able to further their musical interests due to the large nightclub scene in Chicago. However, this furtherance of jazz in the mainstream came with both risks and rewards for Black jazz musicians, for the mob control over the nightclubs in Chicago created a relationship of coercion and intimidation between club owners and musicians, not much unlike the relation between slaveowner and slave in plantations in the South. Famed Chicago clubs such as the Lincoln Gardens Café came to be recognized as jazz sanctuaries, where Blacks could go to possess a modicum of self-determination, but in reality, the “Jazz Slave Masters,” such as the Capone gang in Cicero, controlled the supply of jazz performances to the public in Chicago. They “controlled the cash register, paid the piper and called the tune” [The Jazz Slave Masters, 49]. And though such gangs were largely responsible for the commercialization of jazz to a more mainstream public, they also used their power to coerce musicians to sign bad-faith contracts, furthering a tradition of exploitation and appropriation of Black labor and culture by institutionally dominant forces. This cycle of exploitation and appropriation is only further perpetuated with the emergence of radio as the main distributor of mass media in the late 20s and early 30s, for it is Whites and other majority groups that control the means and resources to determine what is distributed via radio. 

To the question of whether or not a new, distinct Chicagoan style of jazz emerged during this period, I would say yes. Proponents of this claim argue that what renders Chicago jazz a distinct style is its emphasis on more prominent solo performances, as well as an increased complexity of ensemble play. Opponents, however, hold that the jazz musicians of this period in Chicago, such as those in the Austin High School Gang, “tried to copy New Orleans jazz and simply got it wrong,” meaning that the music produced from this period was not a distinctly new style, but rather an imitation of greater, New Orleans jazz [The Chicagoans, 154]. In the end, I am not able to accept the claim that this type of jazz does not constitute a new style simply in virtue of a value judgment made regarding the subjective quality of this music; the objectively different stylistic and structural choices of this new music are sufficient for me to accept the claim that it does in fact constitute a distinct style. 

Ultimately, the musician who best represents the spirit of Chicago jazz is Louis Armstrong, who, at the same time that Chicago was emerging as national cultural hub, emerged as an extremely exceptional musician whose sheer talents led to the heralding in of the so-called jazz Age of Soloists. His “Hot Fives” and “Hot Sevens,” both recorded in Chicago, are some of jazz’s most important works, and “no other body of work in the jazz idiom has been so loved and admired as the results of these celebrated sessions” [The History of Jazz, 57]. His relationship with Chicago was symbiotic, he improved the jazz musical presence of the city at the same time that the city helped propel him to jazz stardom, creating a dynamic that would come to benefit the genre of jazz in a significant way going forward. 



Commented on Leah Bleich's blog