Jazz Wax: What do you call your music if not “jazz?”
Yusef Lateef: The term I like to use is autophysiopsychic music. This means music from the physical, mental and spiritual. I think it’s an adequate term.
My first live-listening experience involving a string quartet involved the University of Michigan's quartet in residence, the Stanley String Quartet. I was in high school (1955-9). A couple of friends and I attended a performance by the Stanley Quartet that took place in the small auditorium in the Rackham building next to the Detroit Institute of Arts. I don't recall what the Stanley's music program consisted in; whether it was Haydn, Mozart or Beethoven, I don't remember. What I do remember, as a refined devotee of this and that music, is something that has caused me distress throughout my life. It is with horror that I remember that occasion.
For me the string quartet - two violins, viola and 'cello - and the improvisor's quartet - horn, piano, bass, and percussion are for that music (aka 'classical music' and this music (aka 'jazz music') are forms of music of which none greater can be conceived. 'Jazz' quartets allow substitution-instances, another horn or guitar instead of piano. 'Classical music' quartets are fixed; it's 2+1+1, as noted.
[Note the four instances of scare-quotation marks. In the terminology of those who know, 'jazz' is in one sense a notational variant of the term "jazz"; but it's something else in addition.]
The Classical Style in Charles Rosen's sense is embodied, for the most part, in the works of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. When people contrast 'classical music' with 'jazz music' they may have in mind non-improvised verses improvised music. Most of us are aware of another divide that has separated 'jazz' and so-called "classical music" [note in most cases we have "jazz" v. "classical music"]. "Classical music" is reckoned to be straight-up music while 'jazz' may not be so-reckoned. In my view both 'jazz' and 'classical music' [note the scare-quotes!] are, or can be, straight-up music. Today more and more European-inspired music is influenced by 'jazz' music, by improvisation techniques and 'jazz' improvisors. It should be noted that improvisation has always been a part of European music - indeed Bach, Haydn, and Beethoven used to jam, used to improvise at the organ and/or piano, used to play in taverns &c. So what we're left with here is just music. If one understands what's happening in a music performance, one feels comfortable with the music, whether it's composed or improvised or both. If one feels discomfortable with music, then certainly one can get comfortable with it. Witness all of the ardent rap-music enthusiasts. There are no bars to understanding music; just let the music - be it this music or that music - take you.
When my mates and I descended upon the Stanley String Quartet that afternoon, we had no notion of what we were about to hear - it was our very first string-quartet adventure. What we did notice when we sat down in our seats was that the backs of the seats in front of us had ashtrays embedded therein. "Hey," we thought, "this is going to be alright, just like a 'jazz' joint." So we lit up and smoked throughout the quartet's entire performance. This is what I've been embarrassed about for all of these years. Talk about a lack of respect for the music, the musicians, and our lungs. The quartet's members pressed on. Because they were University of Michigan faculty members, the quartet may have been used to the silly ways of youth. Perhaps they were conversant were the ways of a 'jazz' audience - smoking, drinking, talkin' loud, etc. I asked David Murray if the antics of 'jazz' crowds annoyed him when he was performing. He told me that he didn't mind; he just played harder. Perhaps the Stanley Quartet held the same view.
The differences between this music and that music, between 'jazz' and 'classical music' are in many ways stylistic or notational. But as music both are straight-up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Eet937d4I
