Friday 26 February 2016
Week 8 - The "Democracy" of Jazz
The recording below is taken from the studio LP production of a musical called
"The Real Ambassadors," which was created by Dave and Iola Brubeck and
Louis Armstrong in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The musical directly
addresses issues of race while also exploring the history of the jazz
tours, as the Brubecks and Armstrong had experienced them. Listen to the
first track in the line-up on this video, titled "The Real
Ambassadors." What do the words and the characteristics of the music
suggest about the Brubecks' and Armstrong's attitude toward the Cold War
State Department tours?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In “The Real Ambassadors” the lyrics address the lack of representation present in the current line-up of ambassadors, presumably in the jazz tours. These ambassadors only represent the congressmen and diplomats, and the Brubecks and Armstrong advocate for someone who could embody the human race. Race is specifically brought up in the mention of removal of segregation and “the only difference will be in personality,” where the trio attacks the lack of diversity and inclusion in the State Department Tours.
ReplyDeleteJazz has a greater potential for improvisation than classical music, allowing for its musicians to adapt it to suit their niche style. Jazz is an effective vehicle for inclusivity in this way, as is hypothetically invites a broader audience in its potential to fuse high and low art forms, and therefore appeal to tastes of all kinds. It is also diverse in its evocation of music history in its link to African Americans whose involvement in American history had historically been negative or supressed. In this flexibility and alternative viewpoint, jazz is better representative of the human race, making it a valuable Ambassador for another perspective of American people. In this way, the song seems to attack not only the representatives themselves, but also the style of music in the Cold War State Department tours. There was not enough balance and diversity in both the performers chosen and the styles of music played, in favour of predominantly classical music to represent what the trio calls the sober, proper state of the United States that the government wanted to convey.
“The Real Ambassadors” highlights several issues facing musicians during the early 50s and early 60s. The song asks the question, “Who’s the real ambassador?” and lists many of the qualities that the typical ambassador exhibited: etiquette, sobriety, conservative manner and dress. However, it is made clear that this has become a “habitual” and increasingly meaningless ritual of diplomacy, one that is not truly reflective of American society. Louis Armstrong then appears to answer the question: He and his fellow jazz musicians are the ideal ambassadors. They are depicted as humble, down-to-earth people who are only interested in making a direct connection with people of other cultures by playing their music. They are not concerned with the letter of the law, which allows segregation through its policy of separate but “equal.” Rather, they are hopeful that through musical exchange cultural differences can be overcome. The fact that these jazz musicians are willing to represent the government internationally despite their lack of representation at home indicates that they believe that change is on the horizon, and that they want other nations to understand that “soon our only differences will be in personality.”
ReplyDeleteThrough the song “The Real Ambassadors” the Brubeck’s and Armstrong were able to comment upon some of the difficult issues that were dividing America in a peaceful way that could still be attractive to audiences. In first section of the song the sparse instrumentation (bass and piano are barely audible) and lively pace allow the Brubeck’s (without Armstrong) to convey their criticism of normal diplomats in a non-confrontational manner. This energetic style directs the audiences’ attention towards the music and away from the message being presented. This is understandable because this section is meant to mock the impressions of normal American diplomats sent abroad. In contrast, Armstrong’s section (which he presents by himself) is slower and the bass and piano become more audible. This textural and rhythmic change with a more emphatic declamation may have been an attempt by Brubeck to signal to the audience that their focus should be directed towards the message being conveyed in this section and not the music. This may have been their intention because Armstrong’s section conveys some of the issues that he and the government do not agree on while expressing his hope that they will be resolved. When the Brubeck’s come back in, rather than presenting Armstrong’s section again in its entirety they choose only to present the section that deals with his disagreements with the government’s policies. This reiteration of a specific section with Armstrong responding at “That’s what I stand for!” allows the message of the piece (a desire for equality) to be further presented without being assertive.
ReplyDeleteThis selection presents a pointed discussion of American culture. The musicians in this piece discuss the constructs of race and class that are, in part, responsible for the oppression of racial minorities and negative views of jazz music. Race is dealt with largely in regards to the government. Armstrong directly states that the American government does not support desegregation. He cites the constitution in critiquing the government to demonstrate that American domestic race relations are illegal and based on irrational conceptual constructs. This piece critiques American society as well, but seemingly for constructs of class and the perceptions of jazz music rather than for race relations. There is no explicit mention of race until Armstrong enters with his critique on the government, and prior to that there are claims about true Americanism. Brubeck says “…we represent American society,” and that “…We’re Yankees to the core.” I interpret ‘we’ in this section to mean jazz musicians, with the goal of showing the American people that these artists are intellectually and culturally equal to their critics and that the government’s use of them for diplomacy provides evidence for that.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the message is one of a serious tone, the music does not reflect this seriousness. It seems to me that this critique was intended as satire. The entire selection is done in a very typical 1930s swing style, with historical implications of being music for entertainment. That is, not ‘serious’ music like art music. There are countless examples of highly idiomatic items (to the point of becoming cheesy clichés) in the melody, harmony, and instrumentation that also contribute to the satirical tone. One striking example of this is the unaccompanied descending lines that lead into the cadences and, in one case, occur with the lyrics: “Though I represent the government, the government doesn’t represent [me].” Further, the double time section before Armstrong enters presents the still serious material in a joking way. This musical style, with all of its 1930’s jazz clichés, plays on the role of jazz as entertainment and combines with the serious social and political message of the text to provide a provocative critique of the state of American race relations.
The musical explores the balance of promoting American ideals while concurrently confronting government leaders about racial equality. It’s a satire about the State Department tours and a comment on race relations in the US. The musical depicts Louis Armstrong as a jazz ambassador fighting for equal rights.
ReplyDeleteJazz music and its improvisational style was associated with freedom. The musicians taking part in the Cold War State Department jazz tours knew of the US government’s political agenda and the double standards of a program advertising America as the great democracy of the world, while civil rights were being suppressed in the US. This piece allowed Armstrong and Brubeck to comment about what was going on in the U.S., but in a humorous way. The music is very catchy, like a jingle, and comes across light-hearted while poking fun at racial segregation and the so-called good American values the U.S. was wanting to portray on the international stage.
At first, there is no mention of race or segregation, the focus is on American society and the positive values it represents “Noted for its etiquette, its manners and sobriety, We have followed protocol with absolute propriety.” Then later Louis Armstrong sings “Oh, we learned to be concerned about the constitutionality, In our nation, segregation isn't a legality” which is funny because all segregation wasn’t abolished in the U.S. until 1964. Brubeck and Armstrong comment on the irony of American democracy as an example of freedom during the Cold War, and a model for those struggling against Soviet oppression. Meanwhile, the U.S. practiced discrimination against minorities within its own borders.
Louis Armstrong and Brubeck’s song “The Real Ambassadors” was intended to be a satire on the tours of the American musicians abroad during the cold war. The lyrics of this song are very pointed and intend to draw attention to the race issues in America as well as disagree with some of the government policies. For example, the text states “our nation segregation isn't a legality. Soon our only differences will be in personality.” This is an obvious attack on the race issue in America. In addition, the lyrics also say “though I represent the government, the government don't represent some policies I'm for” which is a blatant critique on the government. Part of the charm and the element of satire in this song is the jazz style in which it is set. The song is speaking very directly about issues under the mask of a chipper jazz tune.
ReplyDelete“The Real Ambassadors” is a satirical look at the different people the US government had sent abroad to represent the American people. The music is a swinging, light-hearted song reminiscent of the 1930s; the tempo changes and funky bass lines add to the satirical effect.
ReplyDeleteThe first three verses, which are sung twice with second time doubling the tempo, are a look at the government officials sent overseas. As the song points out, even though these people are seen to “represent American society, noted for its etiquette, its manners and sobriety,” the NBC and CBC analyzed and criticized the government’s choice of sending officials as ambassadors. This criticism likely stemmed from the fact that these ambassadors were upper-class white men who did not truly represent anyone outside that stereotype.
When Louis Armstrong comes in for the fourth verse, he is claiming he is the true representative of the American people. He was from a working class family, and a black one at that. He “represent[ed] the government,” but he was also a free individual who admits “the government doesn’t support some policies that I’m for.” (which seems to be a dig at his views of equal rights for blacks and whites)
In the last verse, Armstrong is singing of the America he desires. No longer will segregation be an institutionalized and legal act, but rather “our only differences will be in personality.”
“The Real Ambassadors” is a clear critique of the State Department’s choice of musicians for cultural diplomacy. Brubeck’s opening verse, in which he outlines the various characteristics the State Department would have considered important (i.e., sobriety, propriety, etc), but the identification of these characteristics as “habitual” indicates that Brubeck and Armstrong may have believed that the State Department’s criteria for choosing cultural ambassadors missed the point. Armstrong’s later verse, in which he refers to himself as “the real ambassador” who “plays the blues and meet[s] the people face-to-face” contrasts what he believed to be his purpose as an ambassador. Furthermore, the civil rights movement brought America’s race issues to the world’s attention, and these lyrics represent the hope for inclusivity – the hope that “soon our only differences will be in personality”. Furthermore, the sardonic quality of some of these lines can be seen as the artists’ assertions that they were not simply pawns of the State Department, but had their own reasons for traveling abroad and interacting with foreign peoples – as Armstrong states, “Though I represent the government, the government don’t represent some policies I’m for”. These artists wanted to make it clear that while they were representatives of the USA (and proudly so), that they were not synonymous with their government.
ReplyDelete"The Real Ambassadors" is structured in three contrasting narratives showing the composers understanding of how culture can be used politically not only to represent but mis-represent American culture through its “ambassadors”.
ReplyDeleteThe first part represents the official version of culture that America is selling to the rest of the world. It is neat and tidy representing a polished image of the United States. The lyrics are structured to influence the listener that this version of the ambassadors embodies the best that America has to offer. In the second verse the composers’ use of the words “attire” and “hats” to show that these ambassadors are merely two dimensional images. The vocals, sung by both male and female at a medium swing tempo signify the American brand that presents a duality of tradition and freedom. The second refrain has identical lyrics but is now played double-time, inferring that this “party line” is in reality double-talk, meant to obscure the truth.
In the second part, Louis Armstrong’s laid-back vocal delivery and its simple, two-beat accompaniment contrasts the frenzied double-time verse, setting up his version of representing the United States. Declaring himself to be the real ambassador, Armstrong’s vocal describes a real person who meets people face to face, and through conversation, explains the reality of segregation in the United States. Armstrong’s lyrics acknowledge the political purpose of being an African American chosen to represent American society in the lines - “it is evident I was sent…” and “all I do is play the blues” but as we see in the last line of the stanza where he says (in the vernacular) “…and don’t pretend no more”, the narrative signals a change in function in the role as ambassador or one who represents something. Armstrong’s lyric, “Soon our only differences will be in personality” expresses hope that soon, in the America he humbly represents, everyone will be equal.
This third section, now a chorus of all the vocalists heard from the first and second sections repeat Armstrong’s lyrics, in a show of support and resolve. The refrain “Who's the real ambassador?” clearly shows that the composers were keenly aware that there was political purpose in being a "State Department" sponsored ambassador during the Cold War however Brubeck et al, make their own statement that people, not propaganda are the real ambassadors.
The song calls in to question the fact that the US State Department used black jazz musicians as cultural ambassadors, given the state of race relations at home. This is made explicit by mentioning segregation, and the fact that it is mentioned by both the Brubecks and Armstrong indicates that, at least for some people, equal rights was a concern of both blacks and whites. The song also calls attention to the fact that while cultural ambassadors such as Armstrong are meant to represent America, the American government does not represent him on equal footing as white Americans.
ReplyDeleteThe song also calls in to question the place of the cultural ambassador. The ostensible purpose of cultural diplomacy was to show how great and free America was, and yet, the song states that they must follow protocol as set out by the State Department.
Musically, the opening verses sung by the Brubecks are sung in a very straight, stiff style, whereas Armstrong's verses are in a heavily swung, 'cool' style, underscoring the cleavages in American society.
The single public performance of "The Real Ambassadors" and the musical of the same name took place in 1962, and it is difficult for myself to imagine how the audience reacted to the lyrics and subject matter. One confirmed member of the audience mentions that
ReplyDelete"it's [difficult] to remember the mindset of 1962, which was at the outset of the Civil Rights Movement [...] I remember the idea that Louis sang about how a black man was representing the American government and how ironic that was ... that was obvious to everybody. I don't know if you would call that controversial, though." (http://digitalcollections.pacific.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ambassadors/id/120)
The "Brubeck part" of "The Real Ambassadors," in its melodic repetition and stiff vocal delivery, resembles the routine delivery of an introductory speech given by U.S. government officials sent overseas during the Cold War. There is a dull routineness generated by the regular phrasing structure, that is compounded in the double-time section to the point that it is uncomfortable. Armstrong's vocal delivery, on the other hand, is deliberately slow and varied in its phrasing, making it both accessible and interesting. The contrast of the sections might evoke the aforementioned irony, but this was only to offset the sincerity of Armstrong's delivery of potentially controversial message.