[Harp-L] feasible goals

[Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mojo Red writes, in response to Paul Messinger's call for new  
paradigms to popularize the harmonica:

"It would require a potent group of innovators who
not only ~explore~ harmonica music outside the
currently accepted norm (blues, campfire and
country, I might add), but those pioneers must also
create music that resonates vigorously with the
masses. It is this resonance that is key. "

And then:

"The goal is feasible, but we must remember this:
for a profound and irrevocable societal change
we?ll need the help of the masses."

The goal isn't feasible.  Not really.  Music has changed.  People no  
longer care about instrumental prowess, it simply doesn't move the  
masses anymore.  Hasn't for a generation--name one "Gen X" guitar  
hero?  You can't, at least not from any major band.  And that's  
already a generation ago.  Probably because so much emphasis was put  
on technical proficiency for the last, oh, hundred odd years.  We've  
all been blown away too many times--the shock value has worn off.  It  
takes something outstanding to get noticed (a 12-year old, for  
example) in just about any genre.  For the most part, great technical  
skill is expected, and with that comes the idea that it isn't  
particularly interesting.

Thus, the biggest movement in music for the last ten or even fifteen  
years has been anti-technique.  Whether it is electronica or the  
return of non-musician punk attitudes, technique just doesn't matter  
anymore.  The instruments used barely matters.  It's about results,  
nothing else.

I do wonder at how quickly the past is forgotten.  In the 70's there  
were three fairly major bands/musicians featuring harmonica in non- 
traditional formats: Stevie Wonder, Lee Oskar and the J. Geils Band.   
These were as radical as anything I've heard since compared to what  
had come before.  And the impact on producers and the like?  It  
doesn't seem to have been huge.  It would be hard to imagine more  
commercial success for non-traditional harmonica playing than these  
three, and so why expect any greater impact than they had.

Now, if someone were to do something truly unusual and innovative in  
a major genre where no-one has really played harp before (hip-hop,  
trance, etc...) and it got noticed as more than just a quick hook fad  
(remember the altered vocal thing a few years ago?  Probably not...)  
well, maybe that would be something else.  But, I really don't see  
that being advocated--I see people talking about playing differently  
and such, and somewhat in different genres.  But really, Rosco's band  
isn't traditional blues, but it's sure as hell not anything radical  
in 2006 from a larger music perspective (which says nothing about  
quality--the Bob Mintzer Big Band isn't radical, but it's innovative  
within its tradition and quite good, for example).

Moreover, the people who would do such stuff with harp probably  
aren't on this list--they're 20 year olds (or younger) who play harp  
but mostly listen to modern music and modern forms, if they exist at  
all.  Us fogies talking about this really is quite funny.  We're all  
way past the age where we have any real perspective on the current  
youth music scene--and pop music is, and has always been, all about  
youth.

I don't expect anything to change.  The harmonica is, was and always  
will be a small instrument in the much larger picture, never really  
central to any genre.  Even in the blues, the guitar is much more at  
the heart of the beast, with harp being a key secondary instrument  
(though one could argue less important than bass or drums--certainly  
in the last fifty-odd years).  And that's fine by me--there is  
nothing wrong with being small.  It allows each player more freedom  
in many ways--more need to differentiate yourself when you know what  
everyone else is doing (perhaps).



 ()()    JR "Bulldogge" Ross
()  ()   & Snuffy, too:)
`----'