Re: Chris Pandolfi on the State of Bluegrass
Originally Posted by
lmartnla
...some of you seem to resent us overmuch. Rejection of labels or wanting to broaden labels is somewhat counterproductive. Labels have a function. They tell us that what we are likely to hear may be like something we have enjoyed in the past and want more of, or something new we may want to experience. Change within the label too much and you end up with inclusion of things your audience would prefer to avoid. Bluegrass is roots music and should remain as such...Most roots music genres struggle with the same issues dealt with in this thread. Blues, traditional jazz, cajun, zydeco, old time, bluegrass, traditional country. They don't get the radio play, sell out large venues, or hold young audiences...God forbid you should destroy them...I am happy to have my roots.
No one that I've heard "resents" bluegrass fans for being older. As a fairly eclectic musician and fan, closing in on age 70, I'd be on shaky ground doing that! And no one is trying to "destroy" any traditional music style. But just as Bennie Goodman fans may have said of Charlie Parker, "That ain't jazz!" and yet we now see bebop as a vital part of the jazz idiom, we have old-line bluegrass fans saying of the more experimental bands, "That ain't bluegrass!" Not that it's a kind of bluegrass that they don't happen to like, or that it's avant-garde bluegrass and they're traditionalists, but that it's somehow outside the range of acceptability. Comparatively, a definition of "blues" that can include Keb' Mo', B B King, Stevie Ray Vaughn and John Mayall is positively "big tent" and inclusive. "Jazz" apparently can include King Oliver and Sun Ra, Bix Biederbecke and Archie Shepp, without public prosecution for heresy.
What I think some of the old-line bluegrass fans don't realize, is that orthodoxy and exclusivity have the effects of chasing some of the more creative musicians away -- musicians who might bring some energy to the genre, broaden its audience, enlarge its niche. The discussions Pandolfi talks about among the Stringdusters are probably echoed in other "edge" bluegrass bands: "Do we want to continue to be a 'bluegrass' band, accepting the limitations of that label, or do we want to become an 'acoustic-roots-Americana-jam-eclectic' band, or whatever, and get to play some new places and win some new fans?" Because it's hard when the label "bluegrass band" actually restricts a band's options, rather than offering additional possibilities.
Defining a musical genre restrictively, may result in defining it out of existence. Any musical style needs continual transfusions of talent, creativity and fan base. As a long-time folkie, I look around at my peers' gray locks, and wonder where the next generation of folkies will come from. Ditto bluegrassers. The last remnants of the "first generation" are passing from the scene. So, "teach your children well," and let them flourish.
Allen Hopkins
Gibsn: '54 F5 3pt F2 A-N Custm K1 m'cello
Natl Triolian Dobro mando
Victoria b-back Merrill alumnm b-back
H-O mandolinetto
Stradolin Vega banjolin
Sobell'dola Washburn b-back'dola
Eastmn: 615'dola 805 m'cello
Flatiron 3K OM
Bookmarks