Jazz Was Denounced by Some Black Leaders, too





Mr. Russell, is a professor of history and American studies at Barnard College.

Direct Textbooks Textbook resource center

A leading African American newspaper published a series of articles assailing black musicians for holding back the race. The music"is killing some people," the paper claimed."Some are going insane; others are losing their religion." The artists under attack were not rappers such as 50 Cent or Ludacris but Fats Waller, Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington."The young girls and boys who constantly take jazz every day and night are absolutely becoming bad, and some criminals," the (New York) Amsterdam News wrote in 1925.

There is a long but little-known history of African American leaders denouncing black popular music as self-destructive and an impediment to integration, a history that continues in the current campaign against rap. This is unfortunate because rap, like older forms of black popular music now considered to be"America's classical music," is distinctive and important because it differs from the norms of"respectable" culture.

Last month, when Lil' Kim was sentenced to prison for lying to a grand jury about a shooting, her raps were also indicted as an obstacle to black progress."Her music is laced with lyrics that glorify promiscuous sex and gratuitous violence," wrote DeWayne Wickham, a nationally syndicated columnist and former president of the National Assn. of Black Journalists."She is a Pied Piper of the worst kind -- a diva of smut."

The criticisms of Lil' Kim were launched amid an anti-rap movement that began in March, soon after shots were fired by the rival entourages of 50 Cent and the Game outside a New York radio station. Al Sharpton demanded that the Federal Communications Commission ban violent rappers from radio and television, and he launched a boycott against Universal Music Group, which he accused of"peddling racist and misogynistic black stereotypes" through rap music. Sharpton expressed special concern about white perceptions of African Americans. Rappers and their corporate supporters"make it easy for black culture to be dismissed by the majority," he said, and the large white fan base"has learned through rap images to identify black male culture with a culture of violence."

Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition signed on to the boycott, as did Princeton professor Cornel West, who issued a statement claiming that music companies and rappers made it easy for whites to"view black bodies and black souls as less moral, oversexed and less intelligent."

These critics argue that the"damaging" images of African Americans in rap discourage whites from opening the door to full citizenship. Yet a consideration of the troubled relationship between civil rights leaders and black popular music in the past might give pause to the opponents of contemporary rap, and, for that matter, to the proponents of integration. In fact, blues, jazz, rock 'n' roll and rhythm and blues were all denounced by advocates for racial integration, and for the same reasons rap is now under attack.

In the 1920s, several civil rights leaders were so concerned about the sexual and violent content of popular blues and jazz songs that they established a record company to"undertake the job of elevating the musical taste of the race." Promoted by W.E.B. DuBois and A. Philip Randolph, two of the most important civil rights leaders of the 20th century, Black Swan Records pledged to distribute"the Better Class of Records by Colored Artists," which meant recordings of"respectable" European classical music.

Civil rights leaders similarly opposed the next creations of African American musicians: rock 'n' roll and rhythm and blues. In the 1950s, Martin Luther King Jr. told African Americans to shun the new music, which, he said,"plunges men's minds into degrading and immoral depths." Likewise, Randolph's Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, which produced a great portion of the civil rights leadership, condemned rock and R&B for their overt sexuality and their"degrading portrayal of Negro womanhood."

This history suggests that the cause of integration has always been at odds with what is now widely hailed as America's most important contribution to world culture. Many scholars argue that the creators of jazz, blues, rock and R&B were great because of their willingness and ability to work outside European cultural forms and to speak about elements of the human condition that white artists would not, such as sex and violence.

Those who attack the latest form of black popular music for the sake of racial unity and"respectability" might stop to consider which side, in the history that will be written of this time, they wish to be on.

_____________

This article was first published by the Los Angeles Times and is reprinted with permission of the author.


comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


James Spence - 8/28/2005

Nothing to do with racial unity. Rap seems, to me, to be more like modern poetry, but with a music soundtrack behind it. But it cannot in anyway be compared with jazz, the blues, etc. which sometimes can be considered "beautiful" in one sense of the word. Rap is, like poetry seems to be an act of discovery, a political, cultural statement expressed in cleverly rhymed lines that ask the "why" question or make bold or controversial or sexual statements for shock effect or whatever, pronouncements particular to its author and his/her vision. Listening rap, for me, is not an enjoyable past-time like a great leisurely jazz piece. Rap seems to be a much cruder form of expression and indeed is sometimes pure smut. I believe blues, jazz, rock 'n' roll and rhythm and blues were attacked for different reasons in a time when racial integration posed a threat to the white man. Rap doesn’t hold a candle to jazz.


Don Adams - 8/24/2005

Two points:

1) While doing research on the (mostly) unrelated topic of propaganda and race during WWII, I came across the following remarkable passage in a letter to the editor of the Chicago Defender.

“Why worry about the light colored people keeping to themselves? It’s a well know fact that black Negroes wear outlandish colors, they talk flat and loud, they wear anything from drapes to wide hats and red shoes. So any light colored person that thinks anything of themselves will keep strictly away from them. Their loud talking and cursing can be heard at all hours of the night, also the rowdy blues records they listen to so much. There will be some light colored married to blacks no doubt who will object to this awful truth. Say what you like, we do not care.”

This passage was written in response to a previous article about “cliques and prejudices with the race among dark and light colored,” and the most striking thing about it is obviously the author’s explicit association of skin color with character. Probably there is enough sociological, psychological, and other material in just these few sentences for an entire dissertation. The relevance to Russell’s article, however, is in the reference to blues music. Even if we factor out the deeper and more difficult considerations of intra-group stereotyping, this letter tells us that it was not only black leaders who decried jazz and other forms of black music. It seems that ordinary folks such as this anonymous author also saw it as a threat. At minimum, it is clear that he or she sought to distinguish himself from exemplars of black culture he saw as inferior. Given the broader context within which this letter was written, it is in fact a safe bet that this author sought to associate himself with white culture. Either way, it is clear that he saw blues music as inferior, even as dangerous.

2) Having said that, Russell goes too far when he equates the shallow vulgarity and misogyny of rap with Jazz. Rap’s most talented artists may offer substantial commentary about -- or at least insight into -- a very real sub-culture, but neither that, nor the fact that one can find criticisms which are at least superficially to those directed at early Jazz and R&B, means that it will come out on the same side as history. Lyrically, it has failed to produce anything as relevant or enduring as "Strange Fruit," “What’s Goin’ On,” and countless others. Musically it has produced nothing at all. What Russell does not do, because it cannot be done, is find even a single rap song which does without words what “Alabama” or “Kind of Blue” manage to accomplish. Indeed, the drum machines and production loops which comprise the instrumentation for most of rap are about as far removed from Jazz as ear wax is from wine.

Russell has made his prediction about the likely view of rap in future history. I will gladly take the opposing view. Allowing for a few exceptional pioneers, rap will be remembered not as an original and elevating art form for the ages, but as a lewd and cheap reflection of its time

History News Network