Week 13: Le Jazz: Jazz and French Cultural Identity.

Jordan, F. Matthew. 2010. Le Jazz: Jazz and French Cultural Identity. US; Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

本書介紹的翻譯：

在本書裡，Jordan用文本分析、批判理論、和文化歷史來說明爵士樂如何從原本作為一個外來的文化新物，首先受到法國傳統主義者抗拒，到逐漸轉變為這個國家的身份認同的一部份。[怎麼argue它變成這個國家身份認同的一部份？] Jordan參考了媒體的評論、二十世紀初的法國文學來檢視當時法國對爵士樂的接受狀況：從起初大眾對步態舞(cakewalk)的瘋狂、此音樂對二戰過後文化療癒的重要性，到它至今在法國民族誌和文化混雜性所佔有的特殊地位。[要怎麼argue爵士樂佔有特殊地位？此所指的爵士樂是特定哪種樣貌的爵士樂？]

一反將焦點擺在歷史上法國人對爵士樂慶祝式的接受表現，Jordan聚焦於法國公民接受爵士樂的程度並沒有他們對1930年代湧入的自由人文主義及世界主義一般殷勤熱烈，主張有些聽眾及評論都覺察到爵士樂對法國傳統文化有所威脅，而一直要到法國人將自我身份認同“現代化“了以後，爵士樂才開始與“法國性“的概念相容。[法國人怎麼樣將自我身份認同“現代化“？怎麼樣叫做身份認同被“現代化“了？]

當流行文化藝術與表現被激烈辯論的同時，便能激盪出足以建構生氣盎然之文化身份認同的強大力量，Jordan的作品說明了這一個現象，並將此視為法國人戰後如何檢視與解讀自己的關鍵。

這本書爵士樂文化論述的深度研究，對法國流行樂有原創性的貢獻。

Week14: End of presentation

呼...有點累,這篇寫中文好了.疲憊.今天是五月二十五日,這個數字大概是這個月以來我最懼怕的一個日期吧,那時剛寫完論綱,內心還是很沈重.口考結束只有形式上的解脫,心裡很空,回家聽錄音,全部沒錄到,沒電了...憑記憶趕緊寫下口委給我的問題和建議,邊寫邊想學姊跟我說的意見,心煩是否需要搬家,一弄完一心只想把成發吹好,把出國的事情辦好,明明知道漏洞百出,卻又感到非常無力,時間有限,家裡又正好出事...整個身心頭腦都沒有空間與心力,回想當時看了這麼多有用的沒用的paper,看進去,腦袋抽屜標貼都還沒貼,根本不知到底看進去的東西要存哪邊...跟我要做的事情關連在哪,很亂很亂,只要想到論文,就全身焦慮, 內心非常害怕,質疑自己能不能順利畢業？為什麼我說我想這樣寫、那樣寫,就是都不對,都不行,都只是憑我的直覺,沒有討論價值.

Guck說音樂分析故事說的好最讚,當然哪! 這樣才吸引人,但分析的人就是覺得他有意思才會想要去分析它不是嗎？不然就是某個歌手你本來很討厭他所以你想知道他到底為啥會紅成這樣,研究了以後是否改觀當然又是另一回事.但我很慶幸我改觀了,原來人的腦袋可以開發,可是一但開發似乎就不可逆了.當我來到這兒,我就不可能回到當初還沒經歷過這段經歷的自己,"你現在知道了,那你就有責任了"老實說我不完全同意這句話,因為這責任是它自己自動加上來的,你無法除去或取消.(無知是福.是嗎？然而回頭看過去的無知真的是讓現在的自己覺得驚嚇.)

Abbate的說法不禁讓人想問,...ㄟ...學術似乎不是為了你個人的Taste而存在,你寫paper當然要看目前甚麼東西正在被討論,人家問了什麼問題,妳如果不是要回答的話,妳的研究是要問大家什麼問題？可是...有的東西很popular,popular到可以為了一個郵戳或一頁目錄花費一個暑假去遙遠的歐陸待在圖書館裡尋寶.對有些人來說這是他們的信念、生活的樂趣..(?)我則完全無法體會,但我現在懂去尊重每種人幹這行所持不同的purposes.即便是以前或今後的自己仍可能會改變.

絲竹空、阮黎、秋吉、跟迪格藍的共通點？亞洲.有點誇張,我一個碩論怎麼可能做亞洲呢？光題目Title心裡就覺得自己怎會如此過度的...audacious？

總之我很清楚自己是在很不清楚自己的論文到底要幹嘛的情況之下出了國，然後出了國又遇上了別的課題，心情實在盪到谷底,為什麼出國時滿懷期待又青春洋溢,然而卻一直撞牆,一事無成,什麼也做不好,讀了台大音研所快三年,卻...唉.不該這麼怨歎,碩班生活除了學校,其實我也做了一些別的事情,上天很公平.英國的學費真的貴得荒謬,真不敢相信我竟然來了.最近對一些之前懼怕的東西不再怕了,因為我放棄了一些不必要的執著,到底什麼事情需要這麼care?包容那些不好的,接受就是了,沒有什麼好反駁的,看清楚便可.

上個月有本新書出版,還真是燒燙燙,立刻推薦圖書館購買,希望回去以後就能借到,不過想看這本書已經不是出於它可能跟論文有關了.難以想像為什麼自己會變成現在這樣？

Week11: SUJO at bridge bar!

I've known SUJO (Southampton University Jazz Orchestra) for a while, but never had a chance to see them practicing or performing. One day when I finished practising and was about to go home, I passed by the classroom at the ground floor of the management building. I saw a big band rehearsing, and among them I noticed several undergrads I've met at the soul cellar before. I knew it wasn't good to peek what other's doing, but I stood outside of that classroom watching them rehearsing for 5 minutes. I noticed that there were only two trumpets in the session, so I thought: "If only I could play with them..."

The next day after the Rock History class, I bumped into Jai at the corridor, who was the trumpet player I saw at soul cellar gig with Owen two months ago, and he happened to be one of the two trumpeters from that big band I saw. He saw me carrying my horn, asked: "you practising?" "yeah." "Mind if I join you and see what you got?" "definitely not." Then he grabbed his horn and walked me to the practicing room. I told him I saw them rehearsing yesterday, and asked whether there's any chance for me to join them. "Do you improvise? Which key you play?" He sat down in front of a piano, started playing blues. "Do you know any tunes? How about Blue Monk?" He said while he continued playing, that he was the principal of the 'SUJO 2,' who takes care of the audition for new band members. So we worked on several tunes and finally he said he'll text me the details for rehearsal. I was very happy and excited, this was how I got in and started playing in SUJO2. 

The first rehearsal, I arrived with only two options: either playing the1st or 4th trumpet, because the 2nd and 3rd were already taken (Jai plays the 2nd, as I supposed.) Albeit knowing that I am very lousy at hitting the high notes, I still picked the 1st chair, imagining that there would be probably no other chances for me playing as the 1st trumpet in other occasions. Anyway, this will be a good opportunity to train myself as a lead. However, I didn't manage doing it well, because I couldn't force my embouchrure to do things it couldn't do, it turned out that, I played the lead trumpet with one octave register lower. However, I decided not to feel shameful this time, for I am trying my best here and it should be left with no regret. 

Jai invited me to their gig, the guerilla jazz band at the bridge bar last week, yet for some reason I was late and missed theirs. It's a shame... but fortunately, when I arrived the 2nd set was just about to start, and it happened to be the SUJO!! Luckily I brought my camera that day, so I am now having the chance sharing the clip I took there:  (uploaded with the band director's permission)

Groovy (funky) tune, I like it!!

Week 8: Reading Adorno

This is a belated post for the very end of my Easter break, when I started reading Adorno's articles. The Adorno INT group could be the most challenging thing here for me. In this unit, every participant got to choose a long article according to their own preference for a presentation. I chose "On Jazz" (1936), and "Farewell to Jazz" (1932) from the Leppert fat book. To be honest, before I really got into the reading itself, I was really excited about it, and thought it would be fun, because I love jazz, and I was always fascinated by "Adorno." I was curious about how Adorno would criticize jazz as I've already 'heard' about how mean he gets on jazz. Considering the activity would definitely be a lot more enjoyable than reading "Kitsch," I started my journey. However, it turned out: I was wrong. I must admit that not until seeking the secondary sources did I had better understanding about Adorno's view, and not until I met Tom for help did I get (even several points from the secondary source) it right. I've always had  this weird assertion that it is some sort of 'cheating' reading other's understanding about 'authentic' classic piece like Adorno's, (wondering how I got this conception?) and feel very frustrated that I couldn't grab the point after reading the whole paragraphs again and again, slowly, with every word looked up from my dictionary.

I have a friend who studies sociology. She told me that, when they are approaching unfamiliar 'big names' (and especially those difficult ones) such as Bhabha, Bourdieu, their instructors encouraged them approaching it firstly through the secondary sources rather than original classics, because that's the most efficient way for students to have at least a picture or some directions to look for while reading the originals. Her sharing gave me nerve and confidence to stop struggling, and decide trying to read carefully on how other people write about the originals. I selected "Why did Adorno Hate Jazz?" written by Robert Witkin as my understanding tool to approach Adorno's writing on jazz. I tried to make sure I understand it first before I proceeded carrying on the originals. It was helpful indeed.

I jotted down some notes, questions, and thoughts while reading, and would like to share them as my reading diaries:

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (1/7)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (2/7)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (3/7)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (4/7)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (5/7)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (6/7) (recommended)

Why did Adorno “Hate” Jazz? (7/7) (recommended)

It was my presentation today. I would say, I wasn't quite satisfied with the delivery, mainly because of the ways I phrased my points and the proficiency problem. However, I felt very rewarding that whenever Tom breaks in, he helped me clarify some ambiguous part and the points I missed, for example, the concept of 'collective' based on political situation could have bad connotation rather than merely implying  'progressive' in general sense. Also, we accidentally found that Parker and Dizzy's "Ko-Ko" recording from 1945 was an exemplary tune showing how refrain has its collective power, that when the real tune 'cherokee' came in, Parker, as individual with an 'Adornian hearing,' stopped the take in case of being violating the copyright. I wouldn't think of Parker as having an 'Adornian hearing' (as Tom would put it,) yet I did find it interesting that how one can relate and conceive this as individual making personal choices in resisting the power of its 'social constraints.' (Though pityingly not of an aesthetic but economic one?)   

Anyway, this post is just for sharing some reflection about today's presentation. Unfortunately we didn't get enough time to discuss the question I prepared to stimulate discussion for other Adornites, yet I really think Witkin's alternative perspective worth discussing! 

Week 12: Nguyên Lê/Saiyuki Live & interview

Week10: Dinner at GeeSoo's & The Tree Was Falling!

Dinner at the Gee-Soo's! 

I had a wonderful weekend! One of the PHD student in composition, Gee-Soo, invited me and Nacho having dinner at her house. Gee-Soo is from Korea. She prepared some Korean cuisine for us: Kimchi, Korean pancake (?) and a special kind of salted leaves that you can roll rice to eat with, tasted delicious! She used a traditional Korean China pot to cook rice, but for me it looked more like an antique, very beautiful. Gee-Soo said that nowadays there aren't many people using it for rice cooking because it requires no electricity, instead, it needs proper heat and pressure. I guess all one might need is just some experience to do it well (and right species of rice of course :p) because I think the rice cooked tasted really good, saturated with water and elasticity! 

A Sibelius user might find the stickers helpful! Gee-Soo said she got it from e-bay!




The tree's falling!


Sunday morning when I was riding the bike heading to the Uni as usual, something blocked my way... It was a tree lying before me (I guess it was blown down by the bloody wind the night before because it I didn't see the fallen tree Saturday night!) At first I thought I was on the wrong way... I happened to carry the camera with me so I took a few, for me this is an odd scene that barely happened in Taiwan, I mean, we hardly have a forest like the common, let along seeing a tree fallen?? very special!!  

But then the next day when I rode to the school through the same path, I saw that tree blocking the way disappeared, some workers came to fix the route and cut down the tree. I was impressed by the efficiency how thing was managed!

Week9:倫敦地區科技學術研討會(Conference at King's College)

  

       在Facebook上發佈這次研討會的相片，標題立刻把平常潛水的朋友給逼出來，不解問道：「啊科技研討會和妳什麼關係啊...」哈哈，我想這也是本次研討會對我來說特別有趣的地方吧！這是駐英台北代表處舉辦的研討會，通常分區進行，上一回大概是幾週前在愛丁堡，這次則在倫敦地區，所以講題涵蓋很多不同領域，這回總共八位講者（其中一位可惜後來因火山灰影響飛機航班沒能前來），上午四位都是醫學背景、下午則是社會人文科學，我是最後一位。

       老實說一開始由於知道早上的發表都是自己非常不熟的領域，深怕聽不懂，所以喝了杯茶，準備用力讓自己保持清醒，殊不知時間過得比想像中還快，越聽越有精神，雖然每篇並不完全聽懂，不過很有意思。和人文科學不同的是，講者花相當的篇幅說明研究方法及步驟，以及為什麼要用這種方法？為什麼要做這個實驗？它要解決什麼問題？做了以後對醫界、對人類能有甚麼貢獻？聽的過程挺踏實，少了繞圈圈+朦朧美的感受；當然如果說真的朦朧了，那肯定是我背景知識不足的緣故。


       印象較深的是頭兩位醫師的報告。方醫師是做關於沙門氏菌的實驗，希望刪去使它複製、有害的基因區段然後利用其易於進入腸道的特質來跟其他醫療結合，變成裨益人類的載體；蕭醫師是婦產科，致力在胎兒出生前預先治療玻璃寶寶跟地中海貧血的寶寶，可是這個實驗目前在台灣還不能做，要在新加坡或其他地方才能進行，方法好像是把有療效的病毒以autologous的方式打回羊水，讓寶寶在出生前接受治療，不知是否理解正確...怎麼感覺上有點驚悚？不過實驗階段都是在大動物(羊)還有小動物(老鼠)身上做的，人體的話...目前已有一個相當成功的玻璃寶寶接受治療的例子(!!)。第三位講者是皮膚科的朱醫師，第四位是做關於癌症的徐醫師，這兩篇很遺憾我比較聽不懂，只曉得似乎與治療乾癬有關，還有解決關於基因結合的基本問題，深奧啊。


       下午第一篇，關於在東方的西方主義，很有意思。不過很慚愧的，身為人文科學領域的一份子，我應該要聽懂大部分的...卻卡在：甚麼叫做東方的西方主義？是東方腦袋裡所想像的西方主義嗎？還是東方腦袋所想像的西方腦海裡自認為的西方主義？西方人腦海裡有西方嗎？還是他們傾向於「我是我，你是東方」這種思維模式？東方和西方講的分別是誰？倫敦、上海跟台北，誰分別代表什麼？還是它們都是西方？講題開頭以Edward. W. Said的東方主義破題，西方想像的東與西是一個想像式而非地理上的分野，用他者來定義自己，有趣的是東方腦袋在這樣的框架之下它們也被建構出某種想像式的西方思維，但，東方腦袋裡的西方和真正的西方終究有距離...。直接拿別人的Model套在自己的建設上，當然有問題，可是為甚麼會造成這樣的狀況？它是怎麼發生的？發生了以後造就的畸形現況是不是能夠說明甚麼？那麼我們反詰的用意是...？又試圖想要解決的問題是...？嗯，繞圈圈，也朦朧了，我一面如是思考著，一面因等會輪我上台而稍稍緊張了起來。


       下午第二篇，很酷, very informative, 標題叫做“Alternating Space: Site-specific theatre” 嗯，聽完不禁回頭問，到底甚麼是劇場？劇場的定義是？邀請觀眾參與的概念越來越夯。去年看了台南人劇團的維絡那二紳士，撇開改編沙劇authentic與否的討論，劇組大膽的把觀眾的反應賭了進來，產生兩極評價。觀眾的反應無法預料，所以整個作品最完美與最失敗的可能性Range拉得很大；又或者，最完美與最失敗的界限要重新定義。兩極評價，或許就是這盤賭局最想要的結果，達到了這個目的，就是成功。這篇很有趣的是劇場地點發生在「表演者」的家裡，或是說，那些表演者本來並不是表演者，是因為有觀眾的參與才讓他們都變成了演員，於此同時他們不過是參與計畫的志願者，某程度來講，他們不也是另一種觀眾？到頭來，是誰在看誰呢？


       四台攝影機，四個演員，從四個地點出發，最後有了交集，觀眾像是玩大地遊戲一樣參與、共同「跑完」這齣劇(本)，然後，他們一起進到劇場(戲院?)欣賞剛剛的傑作。這之中，讓四塊碎片拼成「同一個作品」卻仍保有「劇場」價值的，其關鍵是否在於「時間」？如果這些人沒有意識到彼此的身份，也沒和其他組別同步進行，那麼在這樣的條件之下拼湊起來的碎片(影片)，叫做什麼呢？


       最後，來說說我的吧。很汗顏的，我的講題並不是在英國所做的什麼新發現，甚至與目前碩論無關，而是去年在香港中文大學分享過關於周杰倫音樂錄影帶的講題，不過我稍微去蕪存菁了一番，把上次多餘、效果不好的部份刪減，強調了較為有力的例證，多次再演練過影片與說話的配合，將時間掌握的更好些；雖然不是新東西，但我很開心這次的呈現大大的通順流暢許多，加上由於在場聽眾來自不同背景，我因此聽到了非常多元的Feedback：關於誰握有中國風的發言權？批評或質疑中國風的深度是否意味某種Authentic Chineseness的存在？周杰倫算是巧妙的搶回「定義自己的主導權」、往大陸發展而須顧忌、考量(甚至故意)的表述策略....等等。這些回饋，綜合最近看到的、想的、聽的，真是獲益良多！太棒了！

Week 7: Jazz History Class! (2/2) [Owen's interview]

不知不覺，已來英國49天，轉眼旅程的三分之一已經過去。回想一下目前為止我做了什麼呢？煮菜？玩耍？好像都不是太正經的事。不過我可是很認真的在學煮菜、很快樂的玩耍！來到這兒，才體會過去的自己實在太不懂生活，也不夠了解自己。Anyway, 今天總算可以把爵士樂歷史課的下集完成囉。為什麼拖到今天？因為這篇是打算分享歐文訪問我作為一個 'jazz diaspora' 對爵士樂的一些想法，張貼之前我希望先把Bruce Johnson的文章好好讀完，可惜我似乎花了太多時間在做這件事，真是懊惱！不過快速瀏覽我實在又吃不進去，只好認了。

歐文總共問我五個問題，下面是他根據錄音作的紀錄，發佈在課程的網頁上，這邊只是轉貼，已事先取得歐文同意。

My blog consists of an interview with Yen-Ting, a Taiwanese jazz musician currently on an exchange programme at Southampton University. I have posed 5 questions and beneath each is Yen-Ting’s paraphrased answer:

1.          I would like to elaborate on Tom Irvine’s statement, “if you think it’s jazz, it’s jazz”. In my opinion, the artist and the majority of listeners must agree that it is jazz for music to be labelled jazz otherwise problems occur[1]. This requires a general understanding of what jazz is. Many people would define ‘Louis Armstrong and His Hot Five’ as jazz music but there may be problems categorising the Taiwanese jazz group, ‘Sizhukong’. Do you believe that Sizhukong are a jazz band?

·           Sizhukong consist of six players, three are experienced in traditional Taiwanese music and three are full-time jazz players. The music director sought to combine these two cultural elements. I have participated in workshops with the band and can vouch for their established jazz vocabulary. Also, jazz is organic; it changes over time due to communication and understanding. Sizhukong’s music demonstrates this evolutionary nature of jazz and, therefore, the Taiwanese group are jazz.

2.          If jazz is a developing organic entity, is it ever possible to find a general consensus on the sound of jazz?

·           The traditional understanding of jazz is chord changes, improvisation, etc. The sound of jazz today, however, is very different to how it was in the past because different layers of meaning have built up. For example, the jazz trend was altered when Wes Montgomery’s album ‘Fusion!’ was released. Jazz has since become combined with local materials and traditions [as we hear in Sizhukong’s music] and the definition of jazz has broadened.

3.          Is this a good thing?

·           This is neither good nor bad as long as it is good music.

4.          Bruce Johnson states that commonality in jazz is unclear in the music itself and is more likely to be found in the social meaning of the music. As a Taiwanese jazz musician, do you perform jazz with an awareness of the social meaning of the music, if so what meaning does jazz have to you?

·           When I began learning jazz I had no idea about the social meaning of the music. I grew up in a different environment with a different perspective to jazz. As a student, my first steps were to follow and imitate the jazz cannons. Once I became experienced I wanted to create something new. By then I no longer needed to follow; but to rebel instead. Rebellion[2] has become my social connection and goal over the music.

5.          The social meaning of jazz applies to different people in different ways[3] and becomes distorted as it travels around the globe. The ‘myth’ of jazz is most associated with African American tribulation. Therefore, do African Americans have more of a right to play jazz than you do?

·           I definitely disagree. Jazz is a form of communication it is not something that can be owned. I disagree when people say to me you are not African-American you cannot play jazz. That’s silly and weird.

[1] For example, Shostakovich maintained that ‘Tea for Two’ is jazz but as a listener I disagree because the qualities of the music, such as instrumentation, and lack of clear improvisation, stray too far from my understanding of what constitutes jazz music. Yen-Ting agreed, “musically, technically Shostakovich’s music is not jazz”.

[2] Yen-Ting expresses similar views to the African American meaning of jazz. Her rebellion is in the music but it is not caused by oppression. It is caused by her journey as a jazz musician.

[3] For South Africans jazz was a call for black emancipation. Also, in Australia jazz helped promote women’s rights. Johnson, Bruce (anon.) The jazz diaspora, anon. p41

備註：
後兩點與我的原意有出入，可能是我沒能用英文表達清楚... 
擇日希望以熟悉的語言說完整。

筆記：3. Johson, 2002 (下）

Bruce Johnson 'The Jazz Diaspora', In Mervyn Cooke and David Horn eds., The Cambridge Companion to Jazz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 33-54.


這篇文章若要把細節都讀懂，對我而言還頗有難度，文中遇到不少東西需要補充查閱，所以下面僅是能力範圍所及盡量消化吸收所做的簡單整理，可能不甚精準，也不確定是不是都理解對了，僅供參考，有誤不吝指正。


本文主旨在於破除爵士樂單一源頭的神話，進而挑戰一般認為美國南方非裔美國人的爵士才是正統爵士樂之說。作者舉出第一次世界大戰之前或是之間，爵士樂最初儘管確實是遷徙自美國南方的紐奧良，但其海外散居族群—即其他國家的爵士樂手們在接收到了爵士樂而認識它之後，也都帶入了它們自己的文化色彩，而有了各自表現的爵士樂風貌，產生種種不同的意義連結、認知及表演形式，這些多元的樣貌隨後又相繼散播到各地去，甚至回到了美國對後來的年輕學子發生影響（文中指出一些老黑巨人心目中的英雄根本是白人, 如Louis Armstrong曾以Gay Lambardo的音樂作為臨摹的對象)。然而，那些多采多姿豐富且無法歸整的多元爵士樂風貌卻在二戰之後獲得了「統一」— 某個普世的認知開始風行天下，那就是起初來自美國南方的老黑爵士才是所謂的正統的、純正的爵士樂，而其他帶有各地民族風格或文化色彩的，充其量都只能算是「(正統)爵士樂的變形」。藉此，Johnson指出透過大眾文化媒材傳播為手段，美國如何成功地決定、定義(或霸道的佔有了)一個明明是歷經了多元影響、彼此交互作用共同耕耘打造的表演藝術形式。

以下是順著文章每個段落的簡單翻譯。

Diaspora within the US (p.40)

爵士樂透過娛樂巡演或音樂家遊歷旅行進行遷徙，而使爵士樂的意義發生了變化；當它由鄉村北移到繁榮的大都市，原來和生活緊密結合的關係也逐漸分離，因為爵士樂在紐奧良原本多半都是伴隨日常生活特定場合出現的，像野餐、遊行、喪禮、妓院、舞廳等，但樂手到了芝加哥後，就可能較容易獲得高酬勞的演奏工作，而有更多機會在晚間的音樂會上演奏、曝光。這使得爵士樂與它原來依附的常民生活分開，變成一件獨立的事情，也將樂手形象從庶民推向天才。爵士樂因此變成一種可被欣賞、販賣的商品，而這樣東西也因此有了管道，可依特定標準來篩選靠近它的對象(聽眾)，如種族、社經地位、或性別等因素。除此之外，爵士樂由鄉村邁入都市，正巧被當地汎非主義者或黑人民族主義(Garveyism)拿來與「New Negro」形象作連結，主張非裔美國人歷經都市化之後不該繼續停留在過去「鄉村男孩」(country boy)的形象。爵士樂藉此汲取了足以促成它發生國際遷徙的新文化意義。

The global diaspora (p.41) diasporic meanings:

從各種角度— 緣起、音樂形式、審美觀點、離散族群遷徙途徑、表演形式、整體意涵等等來看，爵士樂在它早期的離散發展階段，被其他國家(敵國或友國)各依觀點視之為某種二十世紀音樂的體現(不確定這樣理解是否恰當)。英國視它為美國疲於奔忙、充斥切分節奏的跳舞音樂；德國的Georg Barthelme(1919年)讚爵士樂為一邏輯的發展以及讓世界更新穎更美好的理念實現；南非則以之作為奮鬥信念與口號、澳洲女性從爵士樂中找到性與社會自由；俄羅斯(pre-revolutionary Russia)即使舊帝國文化體制受到爵士樂衝擊，還是讓它打入了上層社會。

不過普遍看來，爵士樂似乎強化了二十世紀大眾文化的蠻橫。它因帶有原始主義的意涵，是現代性之中腐朽的靡靡之音，普遍引起反感與焦慮，有人認為爵士樂可能污染人們原本純淨的道德觀、導致性氾濫、有使文明瓦解的危險、讓原來的美學價值動搖、威脅依附在文化之內既有的政治體制。

記譜音樂某種程度來說是比較安定、安全的形式，確保了一個體制的正常運作、便於控管，但爵士樂無譜記載、其抽搐式不規則的表演及節奏形態，打破了源於啓蒙之理性主義、思想高於行動的心/物層級關係，暗示人的心智無力再主導身體而反過來被身體的慾望、感官牽著鼻子走，因此，有些主張無產階級革命推翻資產階級的理論家(如Gorky和Lunacharsky)，就以爵士樂過於縱慾享樂特質，聲稱它是資本主義使人縱情肉慾的計謀。

Diasporic Practices (p.42)

爵士樂作為一種音樂形式

爵士在全球的層次上展現了一種音樂的現代性，但是它卻也多多少少帶有一些地方的色彩。像是配器、曲目、音樂結構、表演規則、甚至是音樂情緒表現的張力，當爵士樂的配器慢慢被約定俗成下來，像爵士鼓、薩克斯風等，其他地方也有因地方特色而使用特殊配器的，如芬蘭的手風琴爵士保有了當地的Kaleval傳統，南非保有當地marabi傳統跟曲目而有mbaqunga、majuba、msakazo風格。

Jazz as social practice (p.44); Jazz as social meanings(p.45-)

太多細節無力詳翻，不過這兩段主要表達：第一次大戰到二戰期間，不同爵士樂海外散居族群心目中所認知的爵士樂以及它們表現爵士樂的方式其實各不相同。

筆記：2. Johson, 2002 (上）

Bruce Johnson 'The Jazz Diaspora', In Mervyn Cooke and David Horn eds., The Cambridge Companion to Jazz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 33-54.

如果把前面那篇看作是對主流爵士樂歷史的一種反省，那麼這篇正好是個不錯的切入點，值得致力撰寫新爵士樂歷史的人參考。


大部份的爵士樂著作都是按時間先後順序的，著重在音樂特質的演變，從紐奧良到芝加哥的classic jazz，從堪薩斯城到紐約的bebop hothouse，音樂演變除了隨時間，也隨著地理位置的改變而被一一標註，但是，它們卻鮮少將海外散居族群的元素(diasporic factors)也給考慮進去，所以視角顯得侷限而困於某處。這種形式主義(formalists, text-based)的觀點重視音樂如何演進、進步到更高的一個層次，用一種建制式(institutionalised)的線性觀(teleology)來看待對象，並常與強調爵士樂社會意義的一派(culturalists, context-based)產生對比。強調文化面的人會認為從爵士樂的社會意義，要比起從它實際音樂特質還要更容易找到爵士樂的共通點(commonality)；作者則認為借用海外散居族群理論(Diasporic Theory)作為工具，能夠幫助爵士樂在音樂學與社會學上有所交集。

Jonson認為，當爵士樂表演方式(Jazz practices)與慣有的、經典化了的風格(comfortably cannonised styles)背道而馳，它們往往無論在音樂上或文化上都更能夠說明些甚麼。(p.34)

澳洲、法國、俄國、芬蘭、瑞典等國家，在二三零年代顯然都透過某些途徑接收到了美國的爵士樂，而把它們帶回家鄉，依照聽過的經驗去創作它們所認定的'爵士樂'，這些進入他們耳裡使他們認定「爵士樂為何物」的管道有很多，如：透過音樂家或觀眾的遷徙(船上的樂隊)、印刷(樂譜或文字)、有聲資料(唱片)、電影(有聲或無聲)、廣播...等。

儘管樂譜、雜誌、爵士樂活動文宣或評論等等都為爵士樂勾勒樣貌，但作為一種以表演為主的音樂形式，有聲、具影像的媒介才是真正足以讓外界認識爵士樂的管道，因它們同時傳達了爵士樂當中關於階級、性別的形象，而無聲電影的時代，它們也可能使爵士與戲院背後的現場演奏音樂人員或被選以播放的音樂作連結。

澳洲在二戰期間有感有聲資料貧乏；然而等到1946年再次接觸到音樂唱片，已是bebop的時代，這跟之前所認知的爵士樂風格相差太大，對澳洲音樂家而言突然難以理解了。可見，聲音傳播的科技雖扮演外界認識爵士樂的管道，但也同時可以是限制、過濾爵士樂該以什麼樣的風貌被認識的一個控管機制，如此一來，大眾傳播的運作(或政治操弄)可能被(某些人依某種意圖)拿來對爵士樂下定義。

因為傳播的關係，Diaspora受到了「不均勻」的爵士樂認識過程，比如說， 當爵士樂是這麼容易透過有聲電影來傳播(無論其形象或內容)，正好是白人演員當道(最易登上銀幕)的時刻，所以diaspora jazz musician心目中的大英雄可能就是白人而不是黑人，而跟隨這些白英雄的腳步，他們自己也可能成為自己地盤的爵士好手，而對當地的爵士樂認知發揮很大的影響力；某些人就開始為了維護爵士樂種族純正性、和(它們自認的)藝術性而削減可能打壞正統的爵士樂活動。這樣的氛圍塑造了直到現在都還是有的普遍預設：白人無法演奏出「真正的」jazz.

但事實上，此種化約主義在在模糊、遮蔽了爵士樂當中多樣的音樂表徵及民族淵流，如美國的[.....]及國際散居族群強而有力的地方色彩。(p.39)

此現象迫使jazz diaspora變成一種case-study，讓它被視為一個邊緣的特例而不是主體，必須在地方與全球文化實踐當中進行交涉取捨，又須在所屬文化被大眾傳播媒材介入的同時找尋與外界溝通的平衡點。在這個過程中，海外散居族群的特質就成為它們音樂呈現與展示的一個特殊條件。可是正因如此，作者認為那些複雜的“diaspora再創音樂“，就不應只被視為某種爵士樂版本的輸出而已，而該考量，導致它們輸出背後的條件是否深遠的重塑了該種音樂(即爵士音樂)及其意義。

各地方的爵士樂手雖然選擇了爵士，但他們自身的音樂文化仍舊讓他們保有屬於自己的品味以及音樂技能，每一種海外散居位址都有它獨特的條件特質，比如語言，可能就是其中一種，所以探討芬蘭語在爵士樂上的運用，可以揭露芬蘭爵士樂文化滲透的過程(acculturation process)。語言之外，其他的地方色彩亦然，如地方「音樂語言」-如傳統的音樂形式、韻味、樂器配置...等，也都可能參與進來。 (p.40)

筆記：1. Deveaux, 1999

Deveaux, Scott, ‘Constructing the Jazz Tradition: Jazz Historiography.’ In Keeping Time: Readings in Jazz History. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. 416-424.

晚近爵士樂的發展開始被整理、被寫成書，許多人致力於將音樂演變的脈絡串聯，寫成一套有系統的爵士樂歷史，為每種風格取了名字，規範它們出現的時間或淵源。許多雜誌、音樂院、唱片公司、一般學校等都開始參考、援引這些完整建構的歷史流變、傳奇軼事，它們讓爵士樂精彩豐富並廣為流傳，讓爵士樂變成一個有特定形象與意涵的東西。

Deveaux 提到爵士樂歷史的建構有好有壞，好處在於，它可作為宣傳或推廣爵士樂的有利工具，文中依其被利用方式大概分三種，第一種是為了方便教學，在音樂院裡，已建構及被描述的爵士樂歷史可方便概覽或用來訓練年輕的音樂家們，用最有系統的方式讓他們吸收到目前為止[已達共識]被稱為爵士樂的音樂；再者，它可為美國或非裔美國人文化勾勒一段美麗又精彩的故事，成為使一個民族驕傲的文化資產；最後，唱片公司亦能非常有效的依據既有的分類進行行銷、販賣相關作品（而對消費者而言則是方便理解與辨認，清楚自己買到了甚麼東西。）

有三種角度可以判定一樣東西是不是爵士：音樂上的特徵(swing, improv)、種族(African American)、與資本主義(capitalism)的關係。

當人們被問到某首樂曲是不是爵士，一個常見的回答：「我可以告訴你甚麼不是。」然而，這樣就有太多東西可以因為某些理由而「不是爵士樂」。有人會說：fusion不是jazz,因它牽涉過多商業成敗，且使用電子樂器，用商業手法錄製，用太多搖滾、放克的節奏；Avant-garde jazz則是丟棄約定俗成的形式、結構甚至swing；新古典主義一開始就站不住腳因為它壓根違反了爵士樂力求新、求變的本質。(p.420) 

所以定義爵士，變成一件極為困難的事情，因為要將豐富又多樣的音樂通通納入一個大傘裡並不容易；以jazz一詞統括之，勢必它們至少具備某種程度的共通點，然而在今天科技發達、跨文化交流如此頻繁的衝擊之下，音樂樣貌的多元性已使它們難達共識。可以確定的是，所有以爵士樂手自居的音樂家們，都免不了要追本溯源，彼此互享一套相似的「爵士樂傳統」。以前述三例任一方法判定爵士與否，可能遇到一些狀況，如用音樂特質來看，就容易就把非swing或improv不明顯的作品排除開來，而用種族來界定的話又遇到兩個問題，1.很難清算不是非裔美國人對爵士樂的影響（或貢獻），2.很難把其他也是黑人音樂的界限劃清楚，像福音、blues, R&B等。(p.421)

這兩者之外，同樣(甚至更加)備受爭議的，是爵士樂與資本主義的關係。

爵士樂一直以來被認為是與商業劃清界限的，只要爵士樂與商業有所掛鉤，就成了叛徒，或是被污染。Deveaux引述Blesh, Feather, Russell的文字來說明，如Bebop的生成就是一種反叛的精神，要跳脫被商業化了的原本那樣東西，商業(Commercial)和藝術性(artistic)常年來都被截然切割開來。(真正的)爵士樂(應)被排除於流行之外，隔離於商業活動，這樣的形象或概念已根深蒂固存在於爵士樂傳統當中，即使近來不必然如此了。所以文末Deveaux一段話讓我頗有共鳴，同時也鼓勵了我。他說：

If we, as historians, critics, and educators, are to adapt to these new realities, we must be willing to construct new narratives to explain them. These alternative explanations need not displace the jazz tradition (it hardly seems fair, in any case, to deconstruct a narrative that has only recently been constructed, especially one that serves such important purposes).

上面important purposes, 我想Deveaux指的是爵士樂歷史作為一個強而有力的文化資產，它所能賦予一個特定族群[或特定身份認同的人]驕傲的力量，其Romance威力讓音樂教學變得有趣，容易親近學生，貼近人、鼓舞人心。(p.423)

這段話幫助我找到一些研究的信念，讓我相信自己現在做的事情是有價值的，雖只能算是整件事當中的小小一環，但學術的貢獻本來就是靠一點一滴的累積，儘管不過是一粒小沙，但小沙下面也躺著其他的沙，上頭更等著未來的沙相繼堆疊。不久，我們終會建成一座塔，等著別人來摧毀。

Week 6: Returning from London! (2/2)

       雖然這次踏入倫敦沒多久就因為地下鐵忽來的整修、加上上篇所述讓人失望的小事件而對它有些幻滅... 不過作為歷史這麼悠久的一座古城，它仍保有不少令人驚歎的一面。將近十天的旅程，挑幾個具代表性的倫敦景點分享一下吧！：）
（點選照片可放大影像）

The Natural History Museum (自然史博物館)

Fish and Chips (炸鱈魚和脆薯)         

                 

Camden Lock (卡姆登船閘)

'Wicked' (音樂劇: 綠野仙蹤女巫前傳)

Harrods (哈洛斯百貨公司)

Covent Garden (柯芬園)

Ronnie Scott's 爵士樂餐廳

China Town (中國城)

Notting Hill & Portobello Market (諾丁丘及波多彼洛市場)

British Museum (大英博物館)

River Thames (泰晤士河)

Big Ben (大鵬鐘)

B.A. London Eye (倫敦之眼)

Southwark Cathedral (沙薩克大教堂)

Millennuim Bridge (千禧橋)

Shakespear's Globe (莎翁環形劇場)

Tate Modern (泰德現代美術館)

St.-Paul's Cathedral (聖保羅大教堂)

Royal Court of Justice (皇家法院)

Tower Bridge (塔橋)

Somerset House (索美塞宅邸)

Baker street station (貝克街車站)

Camden Town station (卡姆登城車站)

Charing Cross Station (查令可羅斯車站)

Taiwan, still my favorite XD !

備註：景點中文翻譯參考精英出版社《JTB世界自由行: 05英國United Kingdom》(2005)