A guy running a local record store is coming pretty close to convincing me that free jazz is Punk. I’ve always been reluctant to accept this, figuring the two weren’t even in the same league, but my view of punk has been broadened. Up to now, it’s been rather narrow, mainly because I’ve always associated punk with punk rock.
Punk rockers (i.e., the Sex Pistols, the Damned, etc.) just seemed like more duped rebels to me. The rebelliousness was there, but it was already so subsumed by the hegemonic harmonic/rhythmic world in which it existed (and to which it offered no real challenge) that it was already appropriated before it began. The words might have been angrier and the playing more aggressive, but the musical grounding was the same ole same ole. Trying to revolutionize the musical universe by using the same chords/tunings and rock ‘n roll rhythms seemed/seems as futile as trying to change the oil and gas empires by becoming ‘independent’ drillers for oil and gas. Your attitude may be subversive and rebellious, but the “tools” you’re using have long age been stripped of any power to challenge the appropriators. They‘ve already defined the parameters of the game and to play within those parameters is to concede that theirs is the only game to play. Fast and furious won’t do much except wear you out, until the next set of young “rebels” appear, all playing within the same set of un-examined guidelines.
Free jazz, and later free improvisation, made a much more dramatic break from the hegemony of western chord structure and heartbeat rhythms. Those of us who followed and learned to enjoy these breakthroughs – i.e., learned to appreciate the music of Beef heart, Derek Bailey, Ayler, Evan Parker, AMM, et al – were afforded a glimpse at how vast and expansive music could be, and how much it had been chopped and channeled to conform to mass taste (while, simultaneously, manipulating mass taste).
Punk rock, to me, hadn’t really analyzed the forces opposed to it deeply enough and played right into their hands. When latter-day punk became hugely successful through Nirvana, I was surprised that this somehow shocked people. It was bound to happen – it was just a matter of time – though it is indeed tragic that mega-success led Kurt Cobain into such desperate straits. I was reminded of the James Dean character in Giant who strikes it rich only to realize that he can’t stand rich people and now he’s one of them. It’s like buying into someone else’s dream, only to find out it’s your nightmare – Hell, in this case, being all those people who are now attracted to you, people who wouldn’t have spit on you before, people who derided your ‘Punk sensibility’ until it turned into money.
There’s simply no way that free jazz or free improvisation will ever become popular in this huge, mass appeal way – it’s unthinkable and, in my mind, undesirable. The free music rebellion took place not only in energy and spirit but by consciously removing the restrictive roles musicians were expected to assume: Supplier of the Chords, Keeper of the Beat, Player of the right notes at the right time in the right way. This disavowal doomed it from popular acceptance. And it still does. Hopefully, serious players understand these roles are as much economically pre-determined as they are musically, and shedding them automatically means becoming an economic outsider. This is a huge trade-off, one not be taken blindly. Being a rebel then isn’t so romantic, especially when push comes to shove, and it always does.
But, as I said, my friend has convinced me that punk rock and Punk are not necessarily synonymous: some punk rock is Punk and some isn’t, but that free jazz is definitely Punk. Punk, from his standpoint, simply means “going for it”, refusing to allow your limitations or others’ criticisms to prevent you from expressing yourself. Just barreling ahead, following your muse, come-what-may, not concerned about the response. In this sense, Ayler, Bailey, Sun Ra, Brotzmann are punk. They went for it, didn’t wait to see if “it” was going to sell or if it was cool with other people or not. Punk, in this sense, isn’t about genre but about passion and purpose; trying to break out of whatever accepted cultural norm you’ve been handed. If this involves destroying the genre you’ve grown up with, well, so be it.
To him, Punk is timeless: Mozart’s punk, so is Charley Parker. And it’s not just about aggressiveness, either. Chet Baker’s punk, a smooth punk. And it’s not about age – it’s about attitude, and that attitude isn’t limited to the young. In fact, a young band copying their favorite punk band, hoping to emulate their success, isn’t Punk, at all. Nor is an aging punk band playing its old hits: nostalgia for punk isn’t Punk.
Keeping it near the edge, refusing to get complacent: these are punk qualities. And ones which any free jazzer should possess. OK, I’m convinced – Free Jazz is Punk. Long live them both.