Oleander

Music & Visual Arts Lifestyle & Fashion Culinary & Travel

Nr. 6 - August 2011

M A G A Z I N EPassion for Music & Lifestyle

SPECIAL EDITION

Nat ‘King’ Cole

Norman Granz

In Loving and Respectful Memory of

Oscar Emmanuel Peterson

Born on 15 August 1925

Photo: Bill King ©2009

is a creation by

Passion for Music & Lifestyle

M A G A Z I N E

Welcome to the 6th edition of Oleander Magazine.

In this edition presented to you on the birthday of Oscar Emmanuel Peterson,

(today 15 August 2011) I pay tribute to two gentlemen who always have been

of massive inspiration to me being a musician. But not only from a musical

standpoint. Also from the standpoint of promoting my music and serving the

artistry of Jazz the best possible way I can, under the best conditions for me as

artist to serve the music…

The eminent Nat „King‟ Cole and the visionary Norman Granz brought the music

genre known as JAZZ from the dark and smokey back alley clubs into the

concert halls of the world and on television for everyone to be able to enjoy

watching and listening too. Norman Granz upgraded the way jazz was

presented to a wider audience. And he was a true ambassador for jazz

musicians by insisting on certain conditions in favour of the musicians involved

and the audiences. Oscar Peterson - influenced by his longtime friend and

manager - continued to execute „the way to do business‟ when he arranged for

his own concerts by his own management. Grace, dignity and professionalism

are the keywords…

In continuance to honour the legacy of Norman Granz , Nat „King‟ Cole and

Oscar Peterson, I embrace their overall artistic approach. And by doing so

honouring artistry itself…

Boni Li-A-Sam

Boni Li-A-SamEditor

The subtle and

elegant style of

Nat „King‟Cole

My very first encounter with the

music of Nat Cole came in a

very early age. I must have

been 4 or 5 years old when I

was introduced to his piano

music and his vocal music…

I heard jazz piano for the very

first time, although I was not

aware that it was called „Jazz

music‟. I loved the sounds of

these 2 records. The string

arrangements of conductor

Nelson Riddle and his orchestra

inspired me to study the violin

as my premier instrument at

age 10.

Nat Cole became world

famous with his velvet voice as

a singer. However, his piano

style became somewhat

forgotten…

In this tribute to Nat Cole I

especially would like to share

the genius style of his piano

playing with you. As a soloist

and as an accompanist of

himself and other artists.

Elements of the subtle,

elegant, loose and swinging

piano approach of Nat Cole

were also adopted by Oscar

Peterson in his own playing.

Boni Li-A-Sam

The very first 2 albums that brought the music of Nat ‘King’ Cole into my life…

"Nathaniel Adams ColesBorn: March 17, 1919, Montgomery, Alabama

Died: February 15, 1965, Santa Monica, California

BIOGRAPHY

Nathaniel Adams Coles, known professionally as Nat „King‟ Cole, was an American

musician who first came to prominence as a leading jazz pianst. Although an

accomplished pianist, he owes most of his popular musical fame to his soft

baritone voice, which he used to perform in bigband and jazz genres.

Inspired by the playing of Earl Hines, Cole began his performing career in the mid

1930s while still a teenager, adopting the name "Nat Cole". His older brother, Eddie

Cole, a bass player, soon joined Cole's band, and they made their first recording

in 1936 under Eddie's name. They were also regular performers at clubs. In fact,

Cole acquired his nickname "King" performing at one jazz club, a nickname

presumably reinforced by the otherwise unrelated nursery rhyme about Old King

Cole. He was also a pianist in a national tour of Broadway theatre legend Eubie

Blake's revue, "Shuffle Along”.

Nat King Cole ShowHe was the first black American to host a television show. The Nat King Cole Show,

a 15-minute weekly variety show aired on NBC-TV. The first episode of the Nat King

Cole Show was aired 5 November 1956 and the last on December 17, 1957. Cole

had survived for over a year, and it was he, not NBC, who ultimately decided to

pull the plug on the show. NBC and Nat had been operating at an extreme

financial loss due to the lack of national advertisers willing to sponsor a show

hosted by a black man. Although it was a very popular show, businesses were

afraid that white southern audiences would stop buying their products if they advertised during the show.

Cole said shortly after its demise, "Madison Avenue is afraid of the dark”.

Nat King Cole Trio by Rick Seguso 48”x 40” oil on canvas

www.rickseguso.com

Nat “King” Cole conquered the pop charts in the Fifties and early Sixties as

a warm-voiced singer of orchestrated ballads like “Mona Lisa” and

“Unforgettable” and breezy, countrified sing-alongs like “Ramblin‟ Rose”

and “Those Lazy-Hazy-Crazy Days of Summer.”

Less well known is the fact that he played a mean piano (in the style of Earl

“Fatha” Hines) and led a swinging jazz trio from 1937 to 1955. Cole‟s

drummerless trio was an innovation, and no less an authority than Count

Basie marveled at their improvisational interplay: “Those cats used to read each other‟s minds—it was unbelievable.”

Although Nat moved away from jazz, and is best known as a melodious,

smooth singer of such popular songs as "Pretend," "Route 66," and The

Christmas Song ("Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire" ) his stronger claim to a

place in musical history is as a jazz pianist. The sixties opened with Nat

celebrating reaching his 50 million record sales by recording some outstanding albums including his signature one “Unforgettable”.

Nat died on February 15, 1965. He died of lung cancer because he used three

packets of cigarettes every day for many years. After that, his music still was

very popular and more of his records were sold.

Capital Records, built in 1956, is home to the renowned Capital Studios,

where iconic artists from Frank Sinatra to the Beach Boys recorded albums.

Nat King Cole was a truly remarkable character; his big break came in 1943

when he was signed to the newly formed Capitol Records. Nat soon

became Capitol‟s most successful recording artist and their premises - the

Capitol Records Tower on Hollywood and Vine - eventually became known

as “The House That Nat Built”.

Racism

Cole fought racism all his life and rarely performed in segregated venues. In

1956, he was assaulted on stage during a concert in Birmingham, Alabama,

with the Ted Heath Band, (while singing the song "Little Girl") by three

members of the North Alabama White Citizens Council (a group led by

Education of Little Tree author Asa "Forrest" Carter, himself not among the

attackers), who apparently were attempting to kidnap him. The three male

attackers ran down the aisles of the auditorium towards Cole and his band.

Although local law enforcement quickly ended the invasion of the stage, the

ensuing melée toppled Cole from his piano bench and injured his back. Cole

did not finish the concert and never again performed in the South. A fourth

member of the group who had participated in the plot was later arrested in

connection with the act. All were later tried and convicted for their roles in

the crime.

In 1948, Cole purchased a house in the all-white Hancock Park neighborhood

of Los Angeles. The Ku Klux Klan, still active in Los Angeles well into the 1950s,

responded by placing a burning cross on his front lawn. Members of the

property-owners association told Cole they did not want any undesirables

moving in. Cole retorted, "Neither do I. And if I see anybody undesirable

coming in here, I'll be the first to complain."

In 1956, he was contracted to perform in Cuba and wanted to stay at the

Hotel Nacional de Cuba, Havana, but was not allowed to because it

operated a color bar. Cole honored his contract, and the concert at the

Tropicana was a huge success. The following year, he returned to Cuba for

another concert, singing many songs in Spanish. There is now a tribute to him

in the form of a bust and a jukebox in the Hotel Nacional.

The best way to get acquainted with

the pianostyle of Nat Cole is to see

and hear him play.

Therefore I selected some rare

videoclips that are fortunately

available today.

Please enjoy watching and listening to the pianostyle Of Nat ‘King’ Cole by clicking the links at the following

pages… Enjoy!

Nat King Cole Piano Blues

http://youtu.be/7tWfYpPxOD8

Nat King Cole - Tea For Two

http://youtu.be/7ytok8dRGEc

Nat King Cole - Sweet Lorraine 1963

Live: Nat "King" Cole - It's Only a Paper Moon

http://youtu.be/MCg11BL6Ydw

http://youtu.be/v1K5hwkQqMI

An evening with Nat King Cole

Let there be Love

http://youtu.be/n2K54w-vK6g

Miss Otis Regrets

(She's Unable To Lunch Today) – Live at the Sands

http://youtu.be/sUfQFVHj69w

Nat King Cole, June Christy, Mel Torme

How High The Moon

http://youtu.be/gvfNsZaDk-A

Nat King Cole Show Feat JATP Sweet Lorraine

http://youtu.be/TzlYSCiRCqA

Norman Granz

Jazz At The Philharmonic

A gentleman who gas been associated with the piano

playing of Nat Cole is impresario Norman Granz.

Granz invited Nat Cole to play in the rhythm section of his

very first Jazz At The Philharmonic (JATP) Concert in Los Angeles in 1944.

Norman Granz in The Nat King Cole show

It's only a paper moon-JATP

(First ever television appearance)

http://youtu.be/UwTl8RoWfPw

Nat King Cole Show Feat JATP – C Jam Blues

http://youtu.be/XbdCjTEEEdg

Nat „King‟ Cole & Oscar Peterson - Tenderly

http://youtu.be/CvSbCmXKvBc

Nat King Cole Show Feat JATP

I Want To Be Happy

http://youtu.be/CUD0QiD00hY

The visionary

Norman Granz

It was because of my interest in

the music of Oscar Peterson that

I became familiair with the work

of Norman Granz as an artist

impresario and concert

promoter.

Norman Granz was the first to

break up the „colour barriers‟

that segregated black and

white artists and black and white audiences. In the unequal

society that was America during

the Forties, he demanded and

got equal pay and

accommodation for his black

and white artists. He refused to

let them work where there was

segregation and promoted the

first mixed-race concerts and

dances in the Deep South. He

cancelled a concert in New

Orleans where all the tickets had

been sold when he found out

that the theatre seating was

segregated and, as he told

Down Beat magazine, he lost

$100,000 in 1947 by refusing

bookings in segregated concert

halls. That shows just how much

he believed in his goals.

His massive contribution to the

audio and video-

documentation and

preservation of Jazz music,

together with the way he

handled certain issues „business

wise‟ have made Norman Granz

to become my great inspirator in

the artistic field.

Boni Li-A-Sam

" the audience must treat the concerts as if they were of classical music. I insisted that my musicians were to be treated with the same respect as Leonard Bernstein or Jascha Heifetz because they were just as good, both as men and musicians,"

Norman Granz

Born: 6 August 1918, Los Angeles , California

Died: 22 November 2001, Geneva, Switserland

‘He’s not a performer, he’s not a composer, he’s not even a musician, but Norman Granz is Mr. Jazz’. Oscar Peterson

BIOGRAPHY

Norman Granz began as a fan and record collector during the Thirties and rose to

be the first jazz millionaire. The empire that he built for himself included control of

the music of Ella Fitzgerald, Count Basie, Charlie Parker, Billie Holiday, Oscar

Peterson, Stan Getz, Art Tatum and Dizzy Gillespie, and, at one time or another, of

other top artists such as Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong and Sarah Vaughan. His

Jazz at the Philharmonic unit became the most popular touring jazz group in theworld.

Like most Americans that grew up in the depression era, he fell in love with music.

During the early 1940's, Granz started promoting Monday night jam sessions at the

331 Club in Los Angeles. He used local musicians and invited famous sidemen to sit

in when the touring big bands came to town.

When the big war (WWII) came along, he joined and ended up serving in the

Army Air Corps and got a transfer to a special branch charged with entertaining

the troops. After returning from the war, Granz went to work at Metro-Goldwyn-

Mayer films studios as a film editor.

Born in Los Angeles, the son of Jewish immigrants from Tiraspol, he first emerged

into the public view when he organised desegregated jam sessions on Sunday

nights at Billy Berg's Trouville Club in Los Angeles. On July 2nd,1944, Granz

organized a fundraiser concert to benefit Mexican youths that were wrongly

convicted of murder and sentenced to San Quentin prison in the (then) notorious

Sleepy Lagoon case. After borrowing $300 to promote this fundraiser, he ordered

posters to announce this concert. The title of the concert, "Jazz Concert at the

Philharmonic Auditorium", had been shortened by the printer of the advertising

supplements to "Jazz at the Philharmonic". Only one copy of the very first concert

program is known to exist.

Coleman Hawkins

That first lively jam session included performers like Nat King Cole who, at the

time, was an aspiring pianist rather than the singer we now him as and Les

Paul who, at the time, was a jazz guitarist. That evening, the fundraiser netted

$500. This concert was the cornerstone on which he would build the jazz

empire we know today.

Later known as JATP, the ever-changing group recorded and toured

extensively, with Granz producing some of the first live jam session recordings

to be distributed to a wide market.

After several JATP concerts in Los Angeles in 1944 and 1945, Granz began

producing JATP concert tours, from late fall of 1945 to 1957 in USA and

Canada, and from 1952 in Europe. They featured swing and bop musicians

and were among the first high-profile performances to feature racially

integrated bands. Granz actually cancelled some bookings rather than have

the musicians perform for segregated audiences. He recorded many of the

JATP concerts, and from 1945 to 1947 sold/leased the recordings to

Asch/Disc/Stinson Records (record producer Moses Asch's labels). in 1948

Granz signed an agreement with Mercury Records for the promotion and the

distribution of the JATP recordings and other recordings. After the agreement

expired in 1953 he issued the JATP recordings and other recordings on Clef

Records (founded 1946) and Norgran Records (founded 1953). Down Home

Records was meant to be reserved for traditional jazz works.

JAMMIN' THE BLUES (1944)

http://youtu.be/2v_Y3Pbiims

Anti-racismNorman Granz is generally remembered also for his notable anti-racist

position and for the battles he consequently fought for his artists (many,

perhaps the majority, of whom were black), in times and places where

skin color was the cause of open discrimination. Literally decades before

anybody was thinking about desegregation in the States, Norman Granz

was a pioneer. Granz is quoted as saying, "Black musicians were playing

all over Los Angeles in the early '40's but almost entirely to white

audiences. This was because there were very few places that welcomed

blacks as patrons." Realizing this fact and prompted by complaints by

Billie Holiday, Granz began only accepting bookings from clubs that paid

the black musicians at the same scales as their white counterparts.

Maybe more importantly, Granz insisted that black patrons not be barred

from attending. Granz also was among the first to pay white and black

artists the same salary and to give them equal treatment even in minor

details, like dressing rooms.

In 1955, in Houston, Texas, he personally removed the labels "White" and

"Negro" that would have separated the audience in the auditorium

where two concerts were to be performed by (among others) Ella

Fitzgerald and Dizzy Gillespie; between the two shows they were found

playing cards in the dressing room and arrested by local police, but after

some nervous negotiations allowed to perform the second show, and

only formally released after that. Granz nevertheless insisted on fighting

the charges, which cost him the immense sum of $2,000.

Oscar Peterson recounted how Granz once continued to insist that white

cabdrivers take his black artists as customers even while a policeman was

pointing a loaded pistol at his stomach from close range (Granz

eventually won).

It was in 1956 that the popular singer Ella Fitzgerald finally joined

Norman Granz's "community", and Granz unified his activities under

the common label of Verve Records. Granz became Fitzgerald's

manager, and remained so until the end of her career. Fitzgerald's

memorable series of eight Songbooks, together with the duet series

(notably Armstrong-Peterson, Fitzgerald-Basie, Fitzgerald-Pass and

Getz-Peterson) achieved a wide popularity and brought acclaim

to the label and to the artists. Granz was also the manager of

Oscar Peterson, another lifelong friend.

In 1959, Norman Granz moved to Switzerland. In December 1960,

Verve Records was sold to Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.

Granz founded his last label, Pablo Records, in 1973; in 1987, he

sold it to Fantasy Records.

Beloved by his artists, not only because he paid more than average,

Granz has often said that his three main goals were to promote

integration, present good Jazz and to show that good money could be

made from promoting good Jazz.

In the process, he became jazz's first official millionaire, a fact held against

him in some quarters. At the same time, he fought tirelessly on behalf of

both his artists and audiences, demanding the same treatment for jazz

musicians as accorded to classical performers.

He was offered a lifetime achievement award from the National Academy

of Recording Arts and Sciences in 1994, but in a characteristic gesture, he

declined to accept, saying simply "I think you guys are a little late." Given

his often rather slapdash recording techniques and amused disregard for

high fidelity sound, the award might have been rather ironic.

Norman Granz retired to Switzerland, having greatly helped the music he

loves. He died in Geneva from complications of cancer on November 22, 2001.

It Don't Mean a ThingElla Fitzgerald & JATP 1958 Amsterdam,

The Netherlands,

The Concertgebouw

http://youtu.be/fgQ3KOZHKGo

More Than You KnowElla Fitzgerald & Oscar Peterson

http://youtu.be/lsgP4Hjgyv4

"OUT OF THE NORM" THE LIFE OF NORMAN GRANZ

http://www.youtube.com/user/the50sjazzfan#p/u/249/-tU-5dqzrLQ

This is a BBC Radio 2 programme from December 2003.

Charting the life of Norman Granz.

All the 18 parts are to be found via the following link:

INTERVIEWwith

NORMAN GRANZ

By Les Tomkinsin 1966 and 1967

Les Tomkins made the following interviews with

Norman Granz in 1966 and 1967

It’s seven years since I last interviewed you, Norman. How would you say

your activities have changed since then?

Well, I had three primary activities then. The first was my record company,

Verve Records, the second was managing Ella Fitzgerald and the third

was presenting my concerts with artists like Duke, Basie, Jazz At The

Philharmonic and, of course, Ella. Now, my activities are confined to the

latter two. That is, I still manage Ella—and also Duke Ellington and Oscar

Peterson. And I still give concerts. However, they‟re primarily in Europe,

and occasionally in Asia. But I no longer have the record company—I sold

that in 1960.

The company was successful, and I had the chance to sell it for a lot of

money. And, in view of the tax situation in America, it seemed best to do it

as a complete sale, rather than keep running it. Also I think possibly that

my juices needed restoring. I needed a sabbatical from the record

business. Because I don‟t think I was doing as much creative work as I did

when I began making records. And I need that kind of self-satisfaction that

comes from creation, as well as the economic successes.

How do you mean—not so creative?

Well, I pioneered in certain areas. 1 was the first, I think, to do live concert

recording—back in 1943. It then became popular, and many other people

did it. But for years Jazz At The Philharmonic albums were the only ones of

their kind.

I was also the first to exploit fully the possibilities of LP, by having artists get

away from the three-minute formula—which most of the first LP‟s consisted

of, twelve times over. I allowed artists to play for as long as they felt they

could justifiably continue to create. And I was the first to do the spoken

word with comedians like Shelly Berman, Mort Sahl and Jonathan Winters.

These things gave me satisfaction, not only because they were „firsts‟, but

because I was contributing more than an ordinary businessman might,

who simply owned a record company.

My function at Verve was that of a genuine producer in artists and

repertoire. Even to the use of famous paintings on record covers by

people like Matisse and Buffet. De luxe packaging—like the Fred Astaire

album, which sold for one hundred dollars—that kind of thing. But finally—

and especially since I was spending more and more time in Europe—I

found that I was unable to do that. Then it became less interesting for me.

Norman Granz and trumpeter Dizzy Gillespie

Why were you spending more time in Europe? Was this a matter of choice on your

part?

Yes, I made my first trip to Europe in 1949. My parents are from Europe— they were

born in Russia. I was the first member of my family to be born in America. But, after

coming here on a holiday, I began coming back each year, for the promotion of

my records. Then in 1951 I made the first of the Jazz At The Philharmonic concert

tours, which continued each year thereafter. And I found myself spending a

growing amount of time here. Finally, in 1958, I decided that I was going to live in

Europe permanently. So in 1959 I moved to Lugano, Switzerland. Concurrent with

that I sold the company.

Have you felt a definite physical benefit from this?

Well, I think that it‟s more of an emotional satisfaction, rather than physical. I still

travel a great deal. I go to the States, not for too long periods, but I make

frequent trips because of my management problems with Ella. And I move about

in Europe, because I still continue to do at least four concert tours a year, and in

many cases, as many as six. No, I just find myself more at peace with myself and with my environment when I live in Europe. So I‟m making that permanent

Charlie Parker & Coleman Hawkins – Ballade

Introduction by Norman Granz

http://youtu.be/iFwzHuK8q-c

Would you say you’re happiest in the concert field?

No, because I think managing an artist like Ella gives you two choices, as

does running a record company. One is simply to manage her as any

agent might normally do, and the other is

creatively to contribute something. Apart from giving her the exposure

on records, which was obvious, because I owned the company, there

have been many areas in which I‟ve been able, let‟s say, to make a

contribution to Ella‟s point of view, and to the direction which she takes in

her public activities. So that‟s been satisfying. But, as far as concerts go, I

don‟t think I will ever do any tours again in the United States. I rather think

that that‟s over with.

Now there are obvious exceptions—people like Coleman Hawkins, Roy

Eldridge, Dizzy Gillespie are quite prepared to do it. But then these are the

same people that I did it with twenty years ago. Of the newer people

that I would like to display to the public, I find it almost impossible to get

them to agree to the jam session form.

I remember, years ago, when I was doing jazz concerts in America, though

admittedly I would use the biggest names I could find, I still would find a

place on each tour for a great artist that might be unknown. Like, Fats

Navarro made a tour with me. And Monk made a tour with me in 1945—

twenty-one years ago, before people ever heard of him. There were a lot

of people like that, that I was in a position to display. But the new, younger

artists today are too insecure to be willing to face that kind of musical

competition afforded by the jam session.

Just to tour, let‟s say, Ella Fitzgerald and Duke Ellington in America then

becomes simply an economic problem, with none of the advantages that

I find, and I think they find, too, of playing before different nationalities in

different countries. To play today in London, next week in Madrid and the

week after that in Warsaw is a bit better than playing Newark and

Baltimore and Philadelphia. Obviously, I‟ve been doing that for twenty

years, as they have.

The economic picture in the States today doesn‟t allow for jazz concerts in

a tour fashion. The people now are too used to the occasional Festival

which gives then, not necessarily more musical values, but, at least,

quantitatively more names for the same price. And even then, the

Festivals—let‟s say at Newport—have to kick it up occasionally with a

major pop figure like Frank Sinatra. Or by putting on a folk music afternoon

and things like that. But I understand the problems of economics here.

Do you think that, generally speaking, jazz appreciation has declined in the

States?

Well, I never did know how people defined jazz as being or not being a big-

selling item. The point is, I don‟t think t hat it‟s a growing item. And that‟s

more important than whether it‟s big or small. I‟m much more concerned

with trend. And I don‟t know where jazz fans will come from twenty years

from now.

The younger people now are listening to a kind of pseudo blues or a

modified pop music. As they get older, they‟ll become bored with the

sameness and the homogeneity of the kind of music they like as kids

because it‟s easy and it‟s rhythmic. And even the lyric they may get tired of

as they become older. Well, in that case, they may turn to popular music.

But I don‟t know where the roots will be sunk to enable them to grow into

jazz fans. I don‟t see how that can work.

I know that I had people come to my jazz concerts in 1946, who were then,

let‟s say, eighteen. Well, now they‟re thirty-eight, but they still stick with my

shows—depending, of course, on the artists. But I don‟t know who‟s eighteen

years old today that, twenty years hence, is going to be a jazz fan. Certainly, if

you look at my audiences, even in Europe, they‟re hardly teenagers. A

sprinkling of teenagers may be attracted towards jazz. Many of the pop artists,

using jazz arrangers, have indoctrinated them, almost unconsciously, to hearing

a sound. Most of the average arrangers—say. Nelson Riddle, Billy May, Marty

Patch or Frank DeVol—could hardly avoid jazz influence. Even Quincy Jones,

who‟s possibly more of a genuine jazz figure—when he writes for pop artists, he

still falls back on jazz techniques. And so the public, hearing pop music is,

without knowing it, also soaking up jazz—of a sort.

You find that in sound tracks, too. Many of the movie people, who would

never have dreamt of using jazz arrangers or composers for scores are doing

it frequently now, even though they water them down, of course. Still, the

general public gets a taste of it. But that isn‟t a firm enough foundation on

which to build major tours, let‟s say, for jazz artists.

Speaking of two of the artists you manage personally, have Ella Fitzgerald

and Duke Ellington reached the point today where their

talents are receiving the maximum scope?

Ellington has the greater scope, because he‟s a writer and arranger, as well

as a musician and leader. He does movie sound tracks .and things like that.

On the other hand, Ella can work night clubs that Duke might not be able to

work, because of having the big band. But where they go now is strictly a

matter of their own names and talents. I don‟t think it‟s because of their

exposure on concert stages by me.

Duke Ellington

There‟s one obvious area where there‟s never sufficient chance or scope given

to them at all—I speak of the United States primarily—and that‟s in television.

This is because of the prejudice that obtains in America against jazz and, in

particular, against Negro artists, whether they be pop or jazz. You don‟t find

shows that will take them, other than possibly as guest artists, occasionally. But I

don‟t know of any networked jazz show that would use Negroes.

In fact, you don‟t have any complete regular jazz shows of any kind on

television in the States. Occasionally, there have been syndicated shows—that

is, shows which played specific territories— that would run 30-minute shorts that

were made years ago by different artists, and usually the ones that were more

pop than jazz, like Nat „King‟ Cole, let‟s say. Some of these may still pop up. You

must remember I don‟t live in the States now, and I don‟t keep up with it.

Ella Fitzgerald and Oscar Peterson arrive at Schiphol Airport Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1959

Ben van Meerendonk

But I know the problems attendant to trying to convince a network to

have a Duke Ellington or an Ella Fitzgerald show. As I say, the primary

prejudice is colour, and the secondary one is the fact that they think that

jazz wouldn‟t go. And you can use any indices that you like to prove the

contrary, but they just won‟t give you the shots, and there‟s nothing you

can do about it.

Well, I don‟t say that the supposed Civil Rights development is a myth, but

it‟s a matter of dealing with reality. It‟s purely peripheral and, in many

cases, it‟s—how shall I say?—just a facade. It really hasn‟t cut across

enough that the advertising agencies, the sponsors and the networks will

really go all out and simply evaluate people on the basis of talent. And

the basis of selling, of course, since they‟re in business.

That isn‟t peculiar to America, I might add. For example, in Germany, we

just completed a very successful tour with Duke and Ella. And Germany, I

would imagine, is probably the richest country in Western Europe. Yet they

wouldn‟t take any television with Duke and Ella, their reaction being that

people weren‟t interested in it. So it was an economic matter—they didn‟t

want to do it. Now, mind you, these are not sponsored shows. These are

government-owned networks. But they still have their own peculiar rating

system.

On the other hand, in the Scandinavian countries we‟ve done television. In

Sweden we did two one-hour shows. In Italy we did a show. Well, for that

matter, even in England they‟re not televising Duke and Ella, so there you

are. Here‟s the biggest show, possibly, that one could put together—and

they don‟t want it. I‟m not reading in any reasons; I‟m only telling you the

facts.

A past criticism may be renewed in London this month. Namely, that it isn’t a

good idea to have Ella Fitzgerald sharing the bill with Duke Ellington,

because this prevents the band from getting adequate exposure. What is

your answer to this?

Oh, that‟s completely ridiculous. Obviously, you will always find a few people

in any area that would like things done completely their way. If they‟re rich

enough to subsidise a concert, I‟d be delighted to give them Duke Ellington

for two-hour shows, eight-hour shows—whatever they‟re prepared to pay.

But, as long as we‟re in a democracy, and I have to give what I think the

majority of people will enjoy—and which has reason behind it, too—then this

kind of statement is nonsense. I mean, if I were to put on, let‟s say, Barbra

Streisand and Duke Ellington, one might cavil with that and say this is not

jazz, that the combination isn‟t good. But to take the best jazz singer and the

best jazz band and say that this doesn‟t make sense—when each one gets

a full hour—is arrant nonsense, I think.

It isn‟t as if this is the only time they come here. Ella‟s been making tours for

seven or more years here—as has Duke. And people have had ample

opportunity to hear them for two hours. Also it‟s a healthy idea that people

get a chance to hear Duke‟s band in an accompanying role—which the

history of all big jazz bands shows was the way singers started, as well as

the bands. First they played for dancing and then they played for singing.

So there‟s nothing unusual about this idea. To do it, is rather daring on my

part, I think—in terms of the economics. So, in fact, they should be glad.

I don‟t want to sound as if I‟m doing something tremendously special. I‟m

not. But you must remember that, at root, I also am a jazz fan. And I know

that, if I can make an artist like Duke concentrate his efforts into one hour,

you get the essence of what he‟s doing. I don‟t mean that he necessarily

pads a show for two hours, but in one hour you get the heart of the matter,

as you do with Ella. It‟s healthy, I think, for Ella to be heard, not only with a

trio, as she has in the past, but with a big band behind her.

Anyway, the band is doing more concerts here on their own than they did last

year. And if those who criticise are really sincere—let them take a trip to

Leicester, Bristol, Birmingham or Portsmouth and they can hear Duke for two

hours. Or, better yet, let them buy tickets for both shows in London—because

Duke changes his programme each time. Then they‟ll get one hour and one

hour. Or let them go to all four houses. This gives them four hours of Ellington —

they can get sated on that.

Now, if they say: “But that‟s a ridiculous answer that Granz is giving, because

we have to pay double”—well, what do they think I’m paying for the show. If

they‟re sincere enough, they‟ll be prepared to pay. But I think we‟re dwelling

on that point too long.

Yes. You mention being a fan yourself. In fact, you started out as a jazz collector

and enthusiast. Having been exposed to it so much over the years—has this in

any way dimmed your basic enthusiasm for the music?

No, it‟s made my standards, if anything, more strict and higher, I listen to

everything that comes out, in one form or another: records, or clubs, if I have a

chance. Just as I, say, look at paintings by the most modern of the painters—the

fact that I may return to a Picasso or to an impressionist painter, as I return to

Ellington and Fitzgerald, simply means that I haven‟t found anyone yet that

enthuses me enough to want to present them. It doesn‟t mean that they

oughtn‟t to be presented; I‟m not derogating them as artists.

Frankfurt, Germany, March 11, 1956: The stars of the "Jazz at the Philharmonic" tour pose for a photo backstage at the Frankfurt Zoo Theater. In front are Herb Ellis and Ella Fitzgerald; in back, from left to right, are Oscar Peterson, Roy Eldridge, Ray Brown, Dizzy Gillespie, Illinois Jacquette, Gene Krupa and Flip Phillips.

I had a conversation in Paris recently with Ornette Coleman. And Ornette

put it to me on that basis—he said: “You have a big enough name that you

could take all the young people who need a chance, and showcase

them.” And I said: no, I wouldn‟t. I‟m not saying that their playing doesn‟t

justify presentation, but let someone else do it. Because I‟ve reached the

stage now, after almost 30 years of doing jazz, that I can enjoy the luxury of

liking what I present and, if necessary, as I‟ve done in the past, even

subsidising shows because I think that the artists should be presented.

I‟m not going to put down these other artists. I think that it‟s a form of bigotry

to do that. Everyone has a chance to be displayed. It‟s a matter of doing

what I want to hear. There are many artists that I present that I admit that I

like less than I do others. But I think that they warrant being presented by my

own special personal standards. I won‟t debate whether I ought to present

Ornette Coleman, let‟s say, in place of Sonny Stitt. And I would be the first to

admit that I like Sonny Stitt less than I like Duke Ellington. But I still think that, if I

want to present Sonny Stitt—that‟s the fielder‟s choice that I make.

Sonny Stitt

I‟m talking as a professional

impresario. I‟m not judging

anybody at all. As a jazz fan—well,

then, my taste is completely

subjective, and that you don‟t have

to justify, any more than I would be

critical of these people. But what

I‟ve heard obviously hasn‟t

enthused me enough as an

amateur jazz fan or as a

professional concert promoter to

want to present them. I‟m obviously

generalising, because, when I say

“these people”, I‟m merely talking

about a lot of new, younger people

that have come up. I wouldn‟t like

to be too specific or make an

inaccurate generalisation but,

speaking in the large sense, those

are my feelings.

It was a great pleasure recently to be able to enjoy “Jazz At The Philharmonic”

again. Why did you discontinue JATP for so many years?

Well, I often tried to put a show together—but I must say I failed completely. I

couldn‟t get the artists that I wanted. It wasn‟t even a question of economics,

because the moneys I offered were more than even they thought of asking.

But they just didn‟t want to accede to the form—which is the jam session.

Other than that, there‟s no sense in my putting on “Jazz At The Philharmonic”.

If I can‟t do it in the best possible way—by my own standards —then I don‟t

choose to do it.

In order to make it possible to perpetuate the JATP name in the future, what

about having, say, three set groups each doing their own part of the

programme, then the leaders of the groups combining with a rhythm section?

Sure—that could be a marvellous idea. But you can‟t even get the leaders to

do it. And besides, that isn‟t good, really. That‟s cheating the audience and

being dishonest with oneself. Just to have them all come out, let‟s say, to do

the blues and one number—it‟s too easy, too cheap. They have to pit

themselves against each other for a whole evening, under all conditions.

You can‟t have a finale that runs one hour. You certainly can‟t have a display

of the man‟s ballad point of view on an ending. So you give each man 40

minutes or so, and you say: “Let‟s do a jam session at the end with the

leaders.” If they‟re willing to do it, you‟re still short-changing people—in terms

of calling it JATP. But I‟ve presented a lot of groups as groups. I‟ve had

Mulligan‟s Quartet in the company of another group, Coltrane‟s group in the

company of Gillespie‟s Quintet, Jimmy Smith with Dizzy—but this wasn‟t “Jazz

At the Philharmonic”. This was just presenting a bunch of artists as they wanted

to present themselves. I didn‟t even routine the show, so I wasn‟t even being

creative as I would be with JATP, where I don‟t dictate the programme—but,

let‟s say, give it some direction.

But surely JATP has contained established groups in the past—or complete

units that have also operated independently?

Only by the definition of the group allowing itself to be broken up and

performing two roles—and, obviously, this was always concerned with the

rhythm section. The Modern Jazz Quartet did their first tour with me years

ago. But then John Lewis would play piano for Coleman Hawkins, Connie Kay

would play for Ella, Milt Jackson would work with Dizzy—and so on. So they

allowed themselves to be displayed in two ways. When Peterson had the trio

that included Herb Ellis on guitar, he also combined with, say, Buddy Rich to

support the horns. So you heard some Peterson trio, but in addition you heard

them as accompanists.

Generally speaking, do you feel that there is a greater market for you in

Europe nowadays, than in the States?

No, I don‟t think it is. It‟s a more satisfying one for me. But if you‟re talking

about objective standards, it isn‟t, because the economics of it aren‟t at all

rosy. If you‟re talking about my personal satisfaction in presenting jazz

throughout different cities in Europe—well, obviously, I like it, so I do it. But the

grosses of many of the shows that I bring to what are considered to be major

cities in Europe—say Amsterdam, for example, which must have at least

more than a million people—are not good enough to warrant bringing too

many shows.

No, I think it‟s the same all over. The only area where jazz is really terribly profitable

and successful in an economic sense is in Japan. But that‟s because they haven‟t

been exposed enough. Once it catches up with them, then they‟ll begin to pick

and choose, as they do all over the world now.

A problem in the jazz world seems to be that there are a certain number of groups

that make enough money to stay together, and a much larger quantity of good

musicians who want to work in regular groups, but don‟t have the opportunity.

Yes. And, in fact, there are very few groups that really stay together, anyway.

Because, if you look carefully, over 52 weeks a year, you‟ll find that the leaders of

groups make enough money to be able to afford to work a maximum of 35-40

weeks a year. But what happens to the poor sideman who, at the same time, is a

creative and, in many cases, a great jazz artist? It‟s the rare one, as you say, that

can form a group.

We keep thinking about groups, though. For me, the essence of jazz has always

been the big band. Which, as you know, is an almost non-existent field today. So

the sidemen who do get names in bands finally form their own groups—but the

employment isn‟t all that good. I don‟t mean to be striking a pessimistic note all

the time. I‟m trying to be realistic and honest about what I think to be facts.

When I toured Miles Davis in Europe originally, he had Coltrane. Then Coltrane cut

out on his own. But I don‟t think Coltrane works 50 weeks a year. Neither does

Miles. Well, then, what do their sidemen do? And I‟m naming two of the most

successful groups, by the way. The MJQ does a tour, then breaks up and takes

long vacations.

I‟ve always worried more about the sideman, in any case. Because where else

do you get the growth of jazz, if not from the men who cut out? Like, Count

Basie pushed Lester Young in the right direction, and Lester went for himself.

Same with Harry Edison, Buck Clayton and a host of people like that. Jimmy

Lunceford, too, created certain great names. But now these sidemen have no

place to go.

So would you say, then, that all your efforts to raise the status of jazz and to gain

greater respect for jazz artists have been in vain?

I think you‟re putting it a little too philosophically for me. It certainly wasn‟t in

vain for the artists concerned. They played before more people, made more

money and had more dignity accorded them, and so there was genuine

benefit there. You could see it.

Ella Fitzgerald is a perfect example of it. An artist like Lester Young or Charlie

Parker, who would hardly have played on concert stages, had direct benefit

from this, I‟m sure. But, as to whether I think that, permanently, jazz was uplifted

by what I did, I‟m not too sure. I might doubt that, because I don‟t think that

jazz, as any kind of an art form, has any permanence attached to it, apart from

the practitioners of it. I don‟t think you can take it as a concept and say: “Has

„jazz‟ benefitted?” No. I think you have to be specific about certain artists.

Now, I think, as a precedent, I made it easier for many artists to play in certain

areas where they might not have played today. But then if they do or don‟t

play these places that the precedent was established for—it depends on their

talents.

Anyway, Norman, as regards your own future—what plans have you?

Well, I‟m hoping, if I can, to do something in television for jazz artists. Because I

think that‟s the best way to do it now. The record companies, obviously, are

interested in the kind of sales they can get from the rock groups —although they

do what they can for jazz. Television is the answer for artists in most media. It

provides employment for actors who have months between films or plays. It

devours talent—and jazz is waiting to be devoured!

I mean, let‟s take my present concert tour here in England. We have to travel

around to all those cities. Whereas one TV show would have an audience of

around 20 million people seeing them. So—if the people at the top have the

courage to do it—that‟s the next area. I can only hope. ■