I do agree with you Bill. I think blues often receives the same
disrespect
the harmonica receives. Just because something can be easy and
simple does
not mean it needs to be confined to that. Nor does something being
complex
or difficult make it inherently better.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Bill Kumpe <bkumpe@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Jonathan Mets said: "It's easy, and I'm not good enough yet to
play jazz
or
classical." I'm not a good enough player or sufficiently educated
to speak
with authority on this subject and Jonathan, I mean no disrespect
to you,
but your answer bothers me. Maybe some of the more accomplished
folks on
the list can speak more to this subject. However, I don't see it
as fair
to
compare blues with classical and jazz in that way. It is my
understanding
that jazz grew out of the blues and good players go back and forth
over
whatever imaginary line divides them without worrying about it too
much. I
know when I hear it happening and I love it. As a matter of fact,
I've
started playing around with standards and throwing in a blues lick
whenever
I think it will sound good. But the very simplicity of the blues
format
leaves much more room for personal expression and interpretation.
I don't
see the blues as musical step-child to be abandoned when you master
your
insrument but rather as a distinct art form with its own peculiar,
expressive, challenging characteristics. Am I wrong here?
Bill Kumpe
Attorney at Law
320 S. Boston, Ste.1026
Tulsa, OK 74103
918-381-9792
_______________________________________________
Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
_______________________________________________
Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l