Journal 8 – Bebop is Nowhere
After reading excerpts from an article written by D. Leon Wolff for Down Beat magazine, “Bebop is Nowhere”, write your own paragraph in support or condemnation of the new Bebop style. Use musical language.
The University of Alaska Fairbanks is an AA/EO employer and educational institution and prohibits illegal discrimination against any individual: Learn more about UA's notice of nondiscrimination.
© Copyright 2019 Enjoying Jazz
Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Gridster by ThemeFurnace.
© Copyright 2019 Enjoying Jazz
Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Gridster by ThemeFurnace.
I support the new Bebop style. The excerpt mentions that bebop relies on fast tempos but that is what makes the music so intriguing. It also states that there is this overcompensation because there are more notes per bar but that very form itself also contributes to making a Bepop song interesting to listen to. I also disagree with the author’s statement of how the trumpet can be toneless. In the musical selections we were given the trumpet seemed anything but. The trumpet was very lively and had a full tone rather than thin the article states. As for the piano, utilizing whole-tone runs makes the song airy and adds depth. I could also argue that most jazz solos are fairly predictable and not just Bepop.
I am against the new Bebop style. Often, the fast tempo is too much to handle. It doesn’t allow for the admiration of the individual instruments and the musicians behind them. When solos are implemented, they are often over too soon to really appreciate the style. Bebop is often repetitive, using the same tone, which isn’t appealing. In some cases, certain bars sound like they have been taken from a separate part of the song and dropped in another, which can lead to confusion.
I feel strongly that the new Bebop style should stay. While fast paced and erratic at times, this new style of Bebop allows listeners to navigate through the speedy current of the rhythms and chorus of Bebop songs. I think listening to Bebop and having an understanding of the internal working and composing of these tunes allows the listener to indulge themselves and activate their minds to listen to the cacophony that is present. Most of Bebop can be simplified to unexpected chord progressions and harmonies that last longer highlighting the groups abilities to be in tune with each other. It’s always very impressive to hear groups synchronize through challenging melodic phrases even when you might never be able to guess the next 4 bar or 16 bar phrases. All together I feel that as with any genre there will always be fans of it and appreciation for the artistry in it.
I am in support of Bebop. I disagree with the claim that Bebop violates good art and the claim that all good art comes in graceful and effortless forms. Bebop’s eccentric yet dynamic style is more mechanically and psychologically graceful than it is musically. The same can be said about combat sports. Both have a sense of irregularity or unpredictability yet are predictable. Rapid complex harmonies, offbeat accents, and an emphasis on individual performance. Bebop takes improvisation to another level. Bebop artists are playing so rapidly, yet create listenable music, that they are united with their instrument. Bebop articulates artists showing how music performance is second nature, its effortless effort.
The author of the article is clearly someone that feels negatively towards bop, even to the point that he seems offended that it even was part of jazz’s evolution. It’s hard to come up with an educated opinion with just the singular perspective, but if I have to lean one way or the other, I would not mind the end of bop. There’s many rules of thought when making a decision like this, such as a person’s musical taste, do they dance to music, skill in band cooperation vs. improv, etc. For my reasoning, bop just seems too fast. I personally do ballroom dance and sometimes like to think of dancing to certain genre’s of jazz, but bop’s pace it too much to keep up with the majority of the time. And the author of the article seemed offended that some musicians might receive credit for putting on a good show with bop, seeing how improv is a major factor, leaving me to believe that he/she does not do imporv well, but more follows the notes on the sheet of paper in front of him.
I really believe in the new Bebop style because it gives jazz a distinct intensity and complexity that makes it both difficult and captivating to listen to. Its sheer structure adds to its appeal, with each fast-paced note adding depth and excitement, even if it depends on complex phrasing and quick tempos. Although having more notes each bar may seem like too much, it actually adds a dynamic texture that keeps the listener interested. The trumpet in Bebop is full-bodied, vivacious, and bright rather than thin or toneless, which runs against to the article’s assertion that the instrument can be toneless. The piano’s use of whole-tone runs gives the music a feeling of depth and openness while also adding an airy aspect and enhancing the harmonic landscape. Bebop solos, which are frequently erratic with difficult chord progressions and long harmonies, showcase the artists’ precise timing and improvisational prowess. Even though the music may seem chaotic to some, Bebop is a fascinating and avant-garde jazz style because of its intricacy and the performers’ skill.
I am in support of Bebop. To say you are against a certain style of music is to say you in turn are against music. Music is a style, a method of communication, and to say you are against it just brings me energy that no one needs. The music incorporates drumming that is unheard of at times, and creative, and energetic. Its use of the rhythm section having more play in its music is nice to hear against jazz’s more consistent drumming. Although it is more serious, it does give the musicians more freedom to be themselves, to push themselves in whatever manner they might need.
I support the new Bebop style not because I like it, but because others do. Even though I find the fast tempos to be chaotic, and the simplification of the piano parts to be unimaginative, clearly there is a market for it. Because a market exists, that means that there are people who enjoy it. There’s no reason to say a form of music shouldn’t exist just because I don’t enjoy it. Although, I do agree with Wolff that Bebop can be a-rhythmic at times.
I support bebop because it makes jazz more complex and dramatic, which makes music both cooler and captivating. I am in favor of the Bebop style. Its fast structure adds complexity and excitement. It has complex phrasing and quick tempos that create a dynamic texture that holds listeners’ attention. For example the trumpet sound tkes center stage often and play beautiful melodies and the piano’s lines offer openness and create a better harmonic landscape. Bebop solos involve complex chord progressions and long harmonies which showcase the precise timing and improv skills which is why I support it.
I love the fast rhythm of Bebop. However, I don’t think it should be its own style and music genre but a nice optional addition to traditional jazz. The fact that it simplifies piano is mindblowing, and that is the biggest reason why I think that Bebpop should stay in its own respectful line. I do feel that nowadays there is a market for almost any kind of music, and in that aspect, Bebop might survive and develop.
After reading D. Leon Wolff’s article, I have to disagree with his harsh view of bebop. While I get that bebop sounds chaotic compared to swing or earlier jazz styles, I think that’s kind of the point—it’s meant to challenge both the musicians and the listeners. Bebop isn’t trying to be easy or background music. It’s full of fast tempos, complex chord progressions, and unexpected phrasing, which, to me, shows mastery, not “over-compensation.” Saying it’s “unbeautiful” just because it doesn’t stick to traditional ideas of beauty feels narrow-minded. Musicians like Charlie Parker and Dizzy Gillespie weren’t trying to repeat the past—they were making something new. And yes, it can sound wild or even messy at first, but when you really listen, you hear how intentional the improvisation is. Bebop might not be graceful in the way older jazz is, but it has its own rhythm, voice, and purpose. I don’t think it’s an “aberration”—I think it’s evolution.
I support the new style of bebop. Bebops whole point is to take jazz back to its original state as an art for, not entertainment. The style of music is extremely different in style from most forms of jazz, and i personally don’t think it was ever about the music, but more about what the music stands for, which makes the music extremely beautiful in its own way. The new style of bebop is extremely unpredictable, has a very fast tempo, and has lots of solos and improvisation, which makes it extremely unique in its own way. Condemning a style of music just because it is not in your taste, is to put simply, tasteless. You don’t have to like a type of music but condemning a style of progressive music because it doesn’t fit your taste is absurd and inconsiderate of what artists are trying to achieve by making this music.
I am a stronger supporter of the progression of Bebop and jazz. A reoccurring theme in art and music, and especially jazz, is its rejection and condemnation by traditionalists. I believe that musicians are on to something whenever they start producing something polarizing. Within experimentation and progress, not every attempt will result in something noteworthy or useful. Actually, most of the attempts won’t result in anything at all. However, it is through this defiance and absurdity that progress and brilliancy is discovered. Sure, I agree that Bebop can be excessively frantic, chaotic, or even noisy, but this doesn’t at all discredit it as a genre or art. Most of these complex reharmonization, non-traditional scales, and virtuosic melodic lines won’t result in anything of long-lasting musical value, but eventually, all of the chaotic planets will align into something eye-opening. My favorite thing in Bebop is when you hear something, maybe a melodic line or harmony change, that completely transforms your perspective of music. Moments that you couldn’t have ever imagined to be possible in music. Bebop is jazz in its purest form, challenging, progressive, transformative, and misunderstood.
I would have to agree with the consensus of the excerpt. Simply put, bebop is too hard to listen to. The biggest contribution to this are the dissonant chords. The way I see it is that dissonant chords are like hot spices they are used to accent a piece, however if you add too much it becomes unpleasant to interact with. Because of the overuse of dissonant chords I often felt lost when listening to bebop as there was always this off setting tension that I felt was never resolved.
Bebop is the fire in the alley, the midnight whisper of a mind that won’t sit still. They say it’s frantic—maybe. But it’s the frenzy of genius stretching beyond the comfortable, refusing to play pretty for anyone. These aren’t just notes; they’re bursts of thought, streaks of rebellion, truths too wild for dance halls. Dizzy’s horn climbs higher because the world demands it, and Bird’s sax shatters time because the old rhythms no longer hold. Thelonious doesn’t “emasculate” the piano—he turns it into a trickster, a philosopher, a boxer with rhythm in his fists. Bebop is where jazz stops smiling for the crowd and starts talking to itself. If that sounds like chaos to some, maybe they just don’t hear the music yet.
After reading through the article, I mostly side with Wolff: bebop seems to have less finesse and delicacy to it, and is prone to repetitive melodies and stereotyped soloes. I don’t think that this makes it bad, though: not to put too fine a point on it, hyperpop and similar genres exist. Different genres are valuable because they provide different functions for music. Country blues music isn’t very technically complicated, but it’s meant for storytelling: it’s got a pretty consistent AAB, chords tend to go I-IV-V-I with specific flattened notes, which is the definition of predictable and repetitive. Chicago Jazz is far more technical and requires stricter adherence to musical rules. Swing places more of an emphasis on being music to move to rather than exact notes. Bebop is just another genre: so what if it’s repetitive and ham-fisted with the piano? It might feel forced and predictable, and is far too high tempo to dance to, but the goal of bebop isn’t to admire the delicate intricacies of everything weaving together into a perfect picture, it’s high energy and meant to stir you up and make you feel excited.
Therefore, while I personally prefer other genres, bebop is a legitimate genre, albeit a more polarizing one.
Bebop is great, Dr.Wolf is just a hater who wants to put down a new form of music. I love the almost overwhelming flurry of notes, and the rapid arpeggiating, even if it could be classified as formulaic at times. I think bebop is the natural evolution of jazz for those who want more action and less filler. It isn’t a replacement for jazz and if you dislike it, maybe don’t listen to it, instead of writing a paper being a hater.
After reading “Bebop is Nowhere” by D. Leon Wolff, I agree with his opinion on bebop. He points out that bebop often feels rushed and chaotic, with musicians playing as fast and complicated as possible instead of focusing on making the music sound good. It seems like bebop tries too hard to impress, and it loses the smooth, enjoyable feel that makes jazz special. The constant high notes and random-sounding solos can be hard to listen to, and the rhythm isn’t as strong or clear as in traditional jazz. While some musicians, like Charlie Parker, may still shine in this style, I think bebop overall lacks the lasting beauty and appeal of earlier jazz music.
I support the new style of Bebop. Bebop is a revolutionary step forward in jazz, far from being chaotic or meaningless, bebop embodies pure artistic freedom. I believe the fast tempos and unconventional phrasing are not signs of insecurity but rather of innovation, it requires exceptional skill and deep musical understanding. Bebop artists like Charlie Parker or Dizzy Gillespie introduced a style that needs engagement. I don’t believe Bebop is a fad, I think it is a wonderful addition to Jazz, it may not be for everyone, however most music isn’t. It is an art form of Jazz that reaches for new heights of creativity and expression.
Personally, I support the Bebop style. While I wouldn’t say it is my favorite jazz style, it certainly is interesting. I think it is wrong to suggest that a style of music just shouldn’t exist. D. Leon Wolff is correct that bebop lacks the fluidity that many music styles of that time presented, but that shows the ingenuity of the style. It took inspiration from previous jazz and built something off of it. The rhythmic differences and ‘dropping bombs’ in bebop make it striking against other jazz forms, but that adds to the ingenuity of the style.
I am not a huge fan of listening to bebop. It is fun to listen to one or two songs, maybe, but then it devolves in my ears to mindless noise. I enjoy appreciating the talent musicians put into their work, their effort, and love for their art. While I can sense passion, it seems a lot more mindless and not as thoughtful, which isn’t fair to the musician because I’m sure there is a lot of effort and heart in their music. All in all, it’s decent but not for me.
My opinion of the Down Beat magazine is that it is extremely harsh. While bebop is not everyone’s cup of tea, it still a way of art and expression. I do not think that it is anyone’s right to judge how someone expresses themselves. Even though bebop came from jam sessions which some may consider too informal to grant attention to, I think that it was a way of celebrating what creative sounds and notions humans can make. The purpose of bebop isn’t to be fluid or have every note perfectly placed, it was about the possibilities people can create out of the genre.
After reading the Beat Down Magazine, I think I disagree with what they say about the bebop style. the funky feeling of the bebop is something i enjoy. It might not be the “normal” jazz style but i say jazz can be whatever you make it. this is why the almost harsh views about the bebop style is something that i would disagree with. I think that bebop is a great thing that has been brought to the jazz world. Jazz is about the improve of the music and bebop for me is something that you cant predict like “normal” jazz music. this is why i like the formation of bebop music.
I support bebop despite Wolff’s harsh criticism. The fast tempos and complex harmonies aren’t flaws but innovations that make the music exciting. What he calls “unbeautiful” is actually musicians pushing boundaries and creating something new. Bebop represents jazz evolving from simple dance music into a serious art form meant for listening. This isn’t a musical “aberration” but a natural progression.
I think Wolffs obsolete horrendous opinion is based off jazz in the past, music he got far too used to and can’t seem to open up his mind. Slower music is definitely his thing and it shows nice and bright in these few fuming paragraphs. The swift tempos seem to “lack of form” to him, whereas they most definitely have a form and he just isn’t willing to hear the music out. He talks about how bebop discards the characteristic pound that all jazz includes, well I believe that the name of the style “bebop” discards his own argument in the sense that as explained before the name comes from scat terms, plus the classic pounds not being able to fit well into bebop.
I would have to say that I am for bebop to stay. I find it interesting how Wolff seems so disdained with this style of jazz, however, I am not surprised considering the time. At the first reading I had to ask myself why does he seem so angry using words such as emasculate to describe the play of a piano or “grotesque phrase endings” and “unbeautiful” as amdescriptors of something just because he doesn’t care for it? Then it dawned on me, could Wolff possibly have been racist? As a style of music that certainly was melodic and harmonic at times even if you didn’t know when it was happening, the fast tempo was very rhythmic and the improvisation was very impressive. I mean really, would he have had some of the same feelings towards someone who was Caucasian, and had an innovative way of expanding the musical arts? Wolff made comparisons using phrases like “good jazz”i and “normal standards.” He even made an example of a time in a quote where Charlie Parker he said was “usually contained and thoughtful” So I’m guessing that his exploration of different ways to manipulate instruments, and how to expand and explore his own talents wasn’t being thoughtful. I wonder if somehow a portion of people felt challenged by not being able to understand or emulate the skill set required. I mean, you had to have some skill to be able to carry out complex harmonies throughout a band. That had to have a much higher emphasis on technique. The younger generations were eager to be more creative with how they played.
My paragraph will be in condemnation. Bebop has strayed far from fundamental tenants of jazz. The relentless tempos and chord progressions stray from the grace and swing that once defined jazz. The melodic lines often lack the emotion of earlier jazz forms. The once vibrant emotional jazz has transformed into bebop that leaves listened unmoved.