Blackface Minstrelsy Lives...and That's OK

[seeline]

I think Louisiana is a world unto itself. (I like Ardoin, fwiw.)

[Alexander]

I am aware, of course, that this is a very complex issue and my take on it in the first post was simplistic. I guess what I meant was simply that I've decided to stop trying parse out what attitude informed what performance.

Once again, I think that it is a mistake to say that all blackface performers were mean-spirited or that they were engaging in vicious parody. Joel Chandler Harris, the author of the "Uncle Remus" stories (which - remember - have largely been removed from children's reading lists on the grounds that they are racist), had a deep love of the African-American stories and culture he had been exposed to in his childhood. Was there an element of condensation in that love? Well, sure, but you can't argue that he wasn't writing "from his heart."

[Alexander]

here's one of the best things written on the subject, by Tony Russell, in a review of a CD of old time medicine show and minstrel music:

"Throughout the 1960s and well into the 70s, one of the most popular British TV shows, equally successful on the London stage, was a song-and-dance extravaganza by performers in Edwardian boating costumes....

Great piece, Allen. Thanks for posting this. Of course, I have that collection, and it is wonderful...

[AllenLowe]

" I don't understand what rock-based blues is. If you mean blues-based rock, I can understand it; but then I'd be interested to know which of the old-line blues bands were forced by Korner, the Stones, Cream, Mayall, Yardbirds etc to change some of the old formulas."

I'm thinking more on the American side - everybody was - hear Buddy Guy before and after that rock era - I know he influenced Hendrix, but in my opinion the influence went more strongly the other way - or Albert King's early and later work; even Muddy was rejuvenated by the excitement and the attention. Butterfield's post 1969 band - Buzzy Feitin, Phil Wilson, Gene Dinwiddie, et al - was the most exciting amalgam of blues and soul I ever heard; notice that, after this era, the old, tired, blues shuffle was largely either retired or given new life by the re-emphasis on the Chicago side of the blues, as reinforced by the ROCK guys like Bloomfield. Electric Flag and the Blues Project gave new intensity to what was becoming a fairly tired club music, and players like Howlin' Wolf not only had a new audience, they had to sound fresher when they faced it. Bloomfield woke a lot of these guys up, too - and when I heard him go up against BB King one night he tore him to shreds, he really did.

so it was not just musical but audience - you'd be amazed at what a new and open-minded audience can do for a musician - look at Hendrix, rejected on the Chitlin circuit, kicked out of Little Richard's band, who found acceptance FIRST from the white kids who were stoned out of their minds on smoke and pills (after all this was in England where speed was king) and looking for something new.

and Hendrix - well, he's proof of the whole idea as I stated it - no one sounded the same after getting a dose of Hendrix. He woke everybody up sonically.

Edited December 10, 2009 by AllenLowe

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

" I don't understand what rock-based blues is. If you mean blues-based rock, I can understand it; but then I'd be interested to know which of the old-line blues bands were forced by Korner, the Stones, Cream, Mayall, Yardbirds etc to change some of the old formulas."

I'm thinking more on the American side - everybody was - hear Buddy Guy before and after that rock era - I know he influenced Hendrix, but in my opinion the influence went more strongly the other way - or Albert King's early and later work; even Muddy was rejuvenated by the excitement and the attention. Butterfield's post 1969 band - Buzzy Feitin, Phil Wilson, Gene Dinwiddie, et al - was the most exciting amalgam of blues and soul I ever heard; notice that, after this era, the old, tired, blues shuffle was largely either retired or given new life by the re-emphasis on the Chicago side of the blues, as reinforced by the ROCK guys like Bloomfield. Electric Flag and the Blues Project gave new intensity to what was becoming a fairly tired club music, and players like Howlin' Wolf not only had a new audience, they had to sound fresher when they faced it. Bloomfield woke a lot of these guys up, too - and when I heard him go up against BB King one night he tore him to shreds, he really did.

so it was not just musical but audience - you'd be amazed at what a new and open-minded audience can do for a musician - look at Hendrix, rejected on the Chitlin circuit, kicked out of Little Richard's band, who found acceptance FIRST from the white kids who were stoned out of their minds on smoke and pills (after all this was in England where speed was king) and looking for something new.

and Hendrix - well, he's proof of the whole idea as I stated it - no one sounded the same after getting a dose of Hendrix. He woke everybody up sonically.

Thanks Allen. I can hear a difference. In my mind it's mainly been associated with new guys coming along - Jimmy Dawkins in Chicago, Bee Houston, Johnny Copeland and Albert Collins in Texas and so on. I can hear a change in Otis Rush's music, too, but I put that down to these new guys coming along and influencing him and others.

I never realised this was coming from rock bands. Mainly because I never listened to them more than I could help after the mid sixties

MG

[Brad]

Regarding MG's point about not listening to rock after the mid 60s more than he could help it, I had the same attitude but after the Beatles box came out I started going back and listening to things and enjoying it, almost hearing it for the first time again so I wouldn't necessarily sell it short IMHO

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Regarding MG's point about not listening to rock after the mid 60s more than he could help it, I had the same attitude but after the Beatles box came out I started going back and listening to things and enjoying it, almost hearing it for the first time again so I wouldn't necessarily sell it short IMHO

I don't think I'm selling it short. I just don't like it. And, in the mid-late-sixties, I started getting heavily into soul jazz and buying loads of stuff by Big John Patton, Freddie Roach, Willis Jackson, Baby Face Willette, Don Wilkerson, Freddie McCoy, Gene Ammons, Les McCann, Hank Crawford, Grant Green, Jimmy McGriff, Arnett Cobb, Jack McDuff, Billy Larkin, Johnny Hammond Smith and so on. That stuff was REALLY doing it for me and it seemed urgent that I get what I could because, unlike that of the acknowledged masters, this music was always put down as commercial rubbish by the jazz press and didn't look a good candidate for being perennially available (and indeed, a lot of it has never been reissued on CD).

And between music I don't like and music I love deeply, there was no competition for my money or listening time.

And later, there was Mbalax, Djeliya and Wassoulou and other kinds of African stuff. Again, no competition. And still no competition now.

MG

[Brad]

Can't disagree with that MG. When you don't like something, no use going back....

I love soul jazz myself and would have loved to been interested when these guys were recording.