Defining any genre of music within clear boundaries may be difficult or even impossible, especially jazz, the essence of which is spontaneity and improvisation. I am not an expert in music nor am I a practitioner – I am just an average fan, one who refuses to be taken for a ride.
Its Jazzmandu time again in Kathmandu, and I am yet again stuck with a misgiving. Not with the event as such, but with the artist line up. In fact I have a problem with the way jazz is portrayed here – is jazz really a free for all? Will picking up an exotic instrument tomorrow and making a show of it make me a jazz artist? And will my sounds come under the periphery of the jazz frontier? If blues is jazz, fusion is jazz, pop is jazz and everything is jazz, why have jazz? Why not music? Or even better why have music in our lexicon, why not just jazz?
Sticking to music in Kathmandu, but moving away from jazz – should amateurs and hobby singers be given the stage in paid events? I do realize that every singer starts off as an amateur, but should any one be allowed to practice one’s calling at the expense of another? Support – yes we do need to support our local talent, but can it happen at the expense of our entire music industry and system?
I have heard many of our young artists cribbing about having to struggle initially. Looking at the quality of stars, or rather the lack of it, I believe things are just too easy for them now, and yet the cribs about the going being tough…
Music has to be made and stars too – but?
No comments:
Post a Comment