How musically educated was Django?

Lango-Django

I've gotta 99% agree with Jeff, except for one tiny little niggledy-piggledy---- the Dregni book makes it clear that while Django had no "equal" among his fellow gypsy guitarists, he did have plenty of "peers".

So the thing that we don't know about his music, and probably never can know, is exactly how much of the great stuff Django played was unique to him alone, and how much of it was drawn from a sort of communal vocabulary of phrases and ideas shared among the leading gypsy players (jazz or non-jazz) of that day.

We North Americans tend to think of artists stuggling all by themselves to come up with their art, but from what we know of gypsy culture, it seems that over the centuries they've advanced their musicianship and preserved their unique musical heritage in a sort of family-folklorish way. This process seems likely to be similar to that of other cultures which focus on guitar music, such as southern bluegrass or Spanish flamenco... what you hear when you hear someone like Doc Watson or Paco de Lucia play does include a large amount of unique individual virtuosity, true, but it is equally true to say that their virtuosity is very much based upon learning from those who have come before... as well as picking up whatever cool stuff they can from their peers--- why wouldn't they?

What seems likely to be true is that Django had been so well-schooled in both rest-stop picking and his knowledge of arpeggios at every possible location of the fretboard that he had reached the point of thinking instinctively in arpeggios without a lot of conscious effort, the way you or I or lesser mortals might be able to instinctively figure out the right chords to some song we've never played before, just by listening as we go along.

But after learning all the usual arp patterns inside and out, it seems that Django's 1928 LH injury forced him to relearn a lot of his fingerings in a way that made his playing totally unique... as you'll quickly see if you ever attempt to learn some of his solos note-for-note, Django uses arp fingerings (and chord voicings) that you or I would probably never think of using...

I think the other thing that gets overlooked when listening to Django is that he was actually coping with a disability, and how hard he must've had to work to overcome that disability and become one of the greatest guitarists of all times.

Because he was good-looking and smoked cigarettes and drank and gambled and womanized and had the traditional gypsy insouciant approach to most things in life, we tend to think of him as being some sort of magical combination of Mozart and Elvis, who probably didn't have to practise much or work very hard at his music...

But somehow I sincerely doubt that this was the case. I think Django must have worked like a bastard to achieve greatness after the burns he suffered in Nov 1928--- injuries which apparently bothered him for the rest of his life. But as the phrase goes, his was "the art that conceals art".

Jeff Moore

When I say I don't know what Django was thinking, its probably a personal revision of Djangoprodigy's question. I'm really "thinking" about what he's thinking in the moment he's playing.
I've always wondered "where'd he come up with that shit". Humbly, painfully just wondering.
Of course Lango is largely right: Most of the material was diffused in the culture, and through study (whatever that meant for him) his way of synthesis of what is around him and his knack for putting things together uniquely till it sounds instinctive (good choice Lango) even as its being created.
The only Niggledy part for me is, I don't hear the same value (for me) in his peers, so I'm back to what Djangoprodigy (I think) is asking. "What is DJANGO" thinking, not just where and whom did he come from. If he was handed lots of bricks and mortar by the cultures around him, he still, found the techniques to sound "instinctive" and he still has to assemble it somehow into his own sound.

I subscribe to the "great person" idea: An individual can be more than the sum of her environment. Their approach to the stuff around them can and will be unique and yeah, just like Lango said practice like a bastard! And practice like you have the confidence to change the fabric of the game your in. But practice exactly what? Swing and the other styles he drew from each had their own vocabulary but his seems to some extent qualitatively new.
Perhaps if I knew more about his peers, and therefore the environment, I'd give up some of the individualism I attribute to D, but the recordings I've had access to (not that much) lead me to believe there's no equal...............so, "what was HE thinking" becomes the issue. Or "how should I think" or even "what is thinking when applied to music" etc..

Undoubtedly Lango is right to huge extent, because nobody gets where he got alone.
I took Djangoprodigie's question to mean very literally: what was he thinking as he played.

Another intangible: How much influence was the fact that D was in an epoche (the advent of swing)? He'd both, staked his bet on it, and the wider culture (Europe, not just Sinti) were evolving and looking for radical new outlets. D's prolific inventions then become perhaps an answer to the changing culture around him, seeking what he's got and him using his already prodigious practice skills, perhaps Stephane's influence, and his audience's urge for innovation to answer the wider culture's desire's and: "give it to them".... hard. "Let them hear like they've never heard it" already knowing he can probably do this creation thing till the cows come home. Both aloof and dependent on them for acknowledgment and gratification.

Lango-Django

What a beautiful last paragraph, Jeff...

I'm off travelling right now, and my copy of the Dregni book is nowhere at hand, but from what I remember of it, Django's major competitors in the thirties were

-Oscar Aleman, an Argentinian who played with a thumbpick... some writer or other once dubbed him "the man who outswung Django", but I don't agree with that. He was pretty good though.

- the three Ferret brothers, who often served yeoman duty as rhythm guitarists in the HCQ. All three did record as soloists and though they got nowhere near the level of acclaim that Django did, they were pretty goddam good, and I'd be happy as hell if I could play like any of them... Check out this website to learn more about them and hear some of their recordings:

http://www.paulvernonchester.com/FerretDynasty.htm

Additionally, there was another guitarist mentioned in the Dregni book whose name I can't recall... Surprisingly enough, he was not a gypsy, but as soon as Django heard him play, he is supposed to have exclaimed to Joseph, "But he plays just like us!"

One influence on Stephane and Django that is often overlooked is the American duo of Joe Venuti and Eddie Lang... if you've never heard them, you're in for a real treat!

brandoneon

Getting back to the original question: Django had a tremendous musical education, if not untraditional by 'academic' standards, as stated variously above. Of course much of this was the result of an oral tradition, from his early "schooling" with players like Poulette Castro, to trying to emulate his jazz heros and trading licks with jazz musicians that visited Paris. But I would like to add to this conversation the role of playing in the bals musettes, which is an aspect that may be over-looked when considering Django as a jazz musician. For decades in France, the importance of the accordion meant that guitarists had to learn the profession in the bals. This was the case for players in Django's time, and for players who are still with us, including Dominique Cravic (Les Primitifs du Futur) and Patrick Saussois. So how did the bals influence Django? This is just speculation, but I would say that he profited from exposure to novel musical ideas and to the constant demands of being a performing musician. For example, it's likely that Django acquired his taste for diminished and chromatic runs by playing with accordionists (both of which are ridiculously easy to play on the button accordion). Also, the rhythm sections of these orchestras were often stocked with the best gypsy guitarists, making the bals veritable laboratories of new musical ideas. These guitarists often gave the music a distinct, mysterious tone (which one could call 'gypsy' for lack of a better term). Django may have out-grown the bals musettes, but one can only imagine how this exposure to novel sounds and ideas, and the rigors of playing in these louche places, acted as a crucible for his musical and performance skills.

jmcgann

Lango-Django wrote:

-Oscar Aleman, an Argentinian who played with a thumbpick... some writer or other once dubbed him "the man who outswung Django", but I don't agree with that. He was pretty good though.

Leonard Feather's quote was Aleman "outswung Django by a country mile". Although I like Aleman, I'd offer Brendan Behan's bullseye here:

Critics are like eunichs in a harem- they know how it's done, they see it done every day, yet they cannot do it themselves.

I heard a recording of Leonard Feather on piano once. :roll:
(Ooops- now I'm a critic! :twisted: )

scot

I think Brandeoneon has nailed it, but I'd add a couple of details. Django and Baro did learn from Poulette, who was the pit guitarist at Chatelet theatre and was a professional musician. Accordion typically was taught formally and the accordionists were all readers. You would thus expect that their guitarists would at least be capable of playing chords on demand. I am certain that they were able to do this - I have a recording of a rehearsal at La Lanterne from the mid-60s, you can clearly hear Baro calling out the chords.

In our times, there have been scores of guitarists who don't read very well but play just fine. But before WWll, that wasn't necessarily the case. In those days, most people who played music professionally had some musical education, and as Django, the Ferrets, etc had to live and work in a relatively professional world, they would surely have known something of professional ways. These men were not like the vast majority of people who are playing this music today, who for the most part are amateurs who play it as a hobby. I honestly do not think they had the time or inclination for romantic illusions and ideas - which amateur musicians today often do have. They were outsiders who relied on playing music to make their living - which of course does not mean that they did not love playing music and did not want to always give their best. They did. But it wasn't an easy life and they would have learned whatever was necessary to get jobs and put food on the table. Those guys could and did play all sorts of music. Plus they practiced all the time and as is well known, the more you already know, the easier it becomes to learn even more. If you play enough, you can hear all the changes in a tune in real time, and the need to read, memorize, etc becomes unimportant. That's true even for modestly talented people. Matelot Ferret (who could not read a chart) often played sessions with Charles Trenet, who would laugh and tell producers who did not know him not to worry about that. Matelot would always get it right. Listening to Django on the early records where he played with vocalists, he clearly was like any great studio musician - he added something special to everything he played on. That never changed!

I admit that I'm guessing at some of this but it's at least an educated guess. I recommend reading "Escaping the Delta" by Elijah Wald. It's about blues players here in the USA but there are some interesting similarities in that book regarding romance v reality.

Lango, the guitarist you are thinking of is Marcel Bianchi, who played some sessions with the quintet in 1935. He went on to become a celebrity guitarist on the Cote d'Azur playing popular music, but if you listen to the recordings he did with the Jerry Thomas Swingtette in '44 or so, it's true - he was a terrific jazz player.

Thanks to all for the excellent posts.

Michael Bauer

Excellent posts, all.

Wes Montgomery, who I consider one of the best and most original players ever couldn't read a note. I remember reading that he got as excited as a kid at Christmas seeing his music transcribed for the first time. I seem to remember that Charlie Christian couldn't really read either. Does it seem to anyone else that many of the most original and inventive players were unburdened by the paper side of music and relied solely on their ears and imaginations? Not that there haven't been great players who had a formal education, but so many of the most original players have played by ear. As Scot said Brandoneon is really right: Django, Wes and their ilk all had tremendous musical educations, just not formal ones. They were free to go where their ears took them without any theoretical restrictions. It retrospect, I wish I'd learned that way.

jmcgann

There is a video of Wes teaching his group a tune and calling out chord changes as we'd all recognize them- seeing it was a bit of a mythbuster to me...

Jeff Moore

I think its widely understood that Django could not read or write anything including French prior to the Hot Club. I've never heard whether he could name chords verbally or not. I'd think though that the same ear skills evidenced in his work would well suffice for any work he was called to perform.
Grappelli helped him out later, with music scores and helping him produce a rudimentary writing for signatures for fans, legal stuff, and his pride. As D developed as a composer I suspect his own ability with writing scores came along but he continued to have others do the notation.
Irving Berlin: "Alexander's Ragtime Band," " White Christmas," and "God Bless America" also couldn't read, but I believe had more hits in his 70 year career as a song writer than anyone else in the 20th century. Berlin paid 50 cents a page for notating Ragtime Band, and had a piano built so the keys shifted in such a manner that he could play everything in F# as was his childhood method (black keys are easier).
Reading and writing is certainly another way do this, but is an intermediary step in the process and obviously not strictly necessary to learn to play, write, or transform popular forms of music.
Let's be frank, reading for guitar is a real skill: a separate and tedious one too.
I think its hard for some people who come out of the western tradition which is dependent on all kinds of literacy and numeracy skills to know how its done without those skills, but it's all the more interesting when attempting to view the masteries of another time and culture.
If you learn from paper, I suspect that you spend that much less time with your fingers and your mind fixed to the fretboard, and with pop music (most kinds) there are many advantages to being able to do everything by ear.
Prior to 1996 I'd occasionally buy a chord book, like Beatles or other and consistently find a few or a lot of poor chords choices in every tune though the book purported itself to be perfect. I've yet to see one that's consistently right though my sample is small. I think people with highly trained ears are few. It's another skill and not unlike playing like a whiz (not me) and takes tons of time to do well though a guitarist is likely playing a guitar directly while listening. Plus, there's always nuances that you can't notate but you can directly steal from the greats only by ear.

Jazzaferri

One of Oscar Aleman's oft repeated complaints was about "Django and his gypsy tricks" which I believe was referring to some of the techniques for really fast playing that Django used.

I love Aleman's playing as much as Django's they are just different to me. He was much more at home with Latin rhythms (being Brazilian that is natural) than Django and I think Django could pick faster. IMO both are wonderfully lyrical in their own styles.