DjangoBooks.com
Welcome to our Community!
Categories
- 18.2K All Categories
- 447 General
- 287 Welcome
- 11 Archtop Eddy's Corner
- 82 CD, DVD, and Concert Reviews
- 39 FAQ
- 9 Gypsy Jazz Italia
- 19 Photos
- 27 Gypsy Picking
- 4 Unaccompanied Django
- 4 Pearl Django Play-Along Vol.1
- 1 Gypsy Fire
- 26 Gypsy Rhythm
- 606 Gypsy Jazz University - Get Educated
- 117 Gypsy Jazz 101
- 192 Repertoire
- 144 History
- 96 Technique
- 40 Licks and Patterns
- Daniel Givone Manouche Guitare Method Users Group
- 17 Eddie Lang Club
- 1.1K Gypsy Jazz Gear
- 701 Guitars, Strings, Picks, Amps, Pickups and Other Accessories
- 353 Classifieds
- 41 Recording
- 39 Other Instruments
- 17 Violin
- 3 Mandolin
- 6 Accordion
- 3 Bass
- 10 Woodwinds
- 223 Gypsy Jazz Events
- 87 North America
- 87 Europe
- 49 International
In this Discussion
Who's Online 0
Today's Birthdays
The name 'Gypsy Jazz'
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I have decided to edit out the comments I made here. I think the most pertinent thing I said was “this is not the forum for political debate” and I should have stopped there. I regret engaging with the member I engaged with. For the moment, I couldn’t tell the difference between the Djangobooks Forum and Twitter. To be clear, I think my points were correct and they are not being recanted. I only regret making them here. Of course, my post was quoted elsewhere so anyone interested enough can find it if it’s important enough to them. I love Michael and his forum and I pledge to refrain from engaging in anything I deem as approaching extreme political argument. I come here to learn more about the music I have adopted as a hobby, regardless of what we label it, and for that there is no greater value than this forum.
So you start with "I know this is not the forum for political debate but....." then go into a very politicised rant making wild presumptions about my character and going full 'snowflake' in reaching for the moral high ground at any cost. And following your logic, I did not change the meaning of a snowflake from a tiny piece of frozen water to a person who cries and complains about the slightest thing that offends their their sensitivities, that too is an example of how words get repurposed and quickly become absorbed into normal speech whether we like it or not.
Yes, language is constantly changing, that was my point; I do not know how much it happens in other tongues but English has been hijacked, twisted and mangled so much in the last thirty years it would need a regular refresher course at the local evening college to be sure we are all up to date with the latest interpretations so as not offend someone. Of course it was always changing, many today do not understand Shakespeare at all for instance, but in recent times the changes have accelerated due to new social movements and political causes applying new meanings to words daily and taking offence at old ones such that we are all having to walk on eggshells to avoid the type of harangue you just posted.
As for the 'N' word, even that coy reference is spinelessly less than honest. Say what you mean. If you mean N for Nigger (and apologies if anyone is offended reading that but for the purposes of debate and linguistic education it is relevant and should be included) then yes, that is and always was an offensive term and has no place in civilised society; if however you mean Negro, that is still an acceptable factual term that some have decided to also take offense to, although there is no logical reason why. Likewise, as was debated on another post here a while ago, some black people now find the word black offensive, although others have used it with pride (Black Power, Black Lives Matter etc) and the rest of us are never quite sure if we are the right side of political correctness or not in using the adjective.
If any part of what I wrote is genuinely offensive (and I don't mean just in your imagination) then I am sure Michael can have it removed and I apologise, but I will not be lectured to in that manner by someone who thinks they have the right to dictate the meaning of the English language to me.
I did wonder if you had thought you were writing on Twitter rather than here in the guitar circle, your original post (since edited) certainly had that spite, anger and name-calling typical of such 'social media' sites (or should that be anti-social media?) maybe it was a couple of hours past 'beer o'clock'?
But anyway, apology accepted.
I vote we take off and nuke this whole thread from orbit.
May as well.
A certain person has backed himself into a corner with his imagined convoluted interpretation of my comments and even now refuses to apologise for turning what was previously an apolitical discussion into a platform for his own insulting rants. It is equally insulting to suggest (as an award winning writer) that my command of English may be not all it should be and I should go back and re-read my posts to see the error of my ways.
All of this just so some bored person can score some 'feel good' points by airing his own views, but to be a hero you first need an enemy to fight, and for reasons only known to himself he chose me and to reinterpret my comments.
It was after all he who admitted "I couldn’t tell the difference between the Djangobooks Forum and Twitter" so maybe he forgot which one he was logged in to?
If anyone really has a serious question or point to make they can always send a private message, but then that does not flatter one's ego the same as going public with such a moral stand does it?
Anyway, if the rest of you are bored with this ongoing argument and feel the post has run its course, by all means take it down. I think we at least established that the term Gypsy Jazz is still ok to use to describe the music we are (usually) here to discuss.
Truth be told, Chris, I didn't like that part of your post myself. But I liked the rest of it so I thumbed it up. Thing is, while there's certainly some truth in that contentious part of the comment, first we need to keep it mind that this atmosphere, often oversensitive, came about following the initiatives that were well and way overdue. Like, decades and in some cases centuries. At least here in the states.
Buco, what part of my post are you referring to?
There was certainly no offence intended anywhere (except a light-hearted dig at snowflakes in general, y'know, the ones that WANT to be offended).
My point is solely that as some people choose to rewrite their own version of what a word in the English language means, that does not mean we all have to bow down to their wishes. By that logic, we could all attach our own meanings to any word or expression and then claim to be offended.
Yes, language does evolve, it always has, probably always will (see my comment re Shakespeare) but how are we all supposed to be on the same page when people are changing things daily.
Examples of linguistic quirks:
On every episode of American Pickers Mike finds something is either "cool" or if it is rated better than that it is "awesome". These are terms most non-Americans would use sparingly if at all, there are other adjectives in the dictionary.
Then there is the shorthand and acronyms that have grown from the texting generation, AFAIK, FYI, to which I might LMAO.
Yes of course the word gay has long been accepted as a term for someone of a certain sexual orientation, but even so it has not cancelled out its original meaning ; light-hearted or showy.
And how and where did the totally redundant word 'kinda' creep into such everyday use?
I only quote these examples to show how one man's version of the English language can be far removed from another's and there is no way that every English speaking person around the world can be up to date on another's intended meaning.
Given that is the case, what gives someone else the right to hurl insults just because he has read an alternate meaning into something I posted? And if by chance, someone really does take offence, surely the first course of action would be send a PM to question what was meant by whatever they do not like or understand.
'The problem is as I said, the 'snowflakes' who actively look for offence and then claim some moral stand to try to score some points. What gives anyone the right to call me 'right wing' and make assumptions about my politics based solely on their own paranoia?
I understand people in your country may still be over-sensitive to such politics having only recently lived through the Trump debacle but the rest of us in the free world do not have to be so prickly.
However, in the interests of not stirring up any further political arguments I will not poke that hornet's nest.
I just re-read this thread and can't resist a handful of semi-coherent comments, because as a former academic married to a still-practicing university professor, some of the cultural-sensitivity, language, and identity issues are quite hot in my neck of the woods.
From that video with Fapy and company: "branding" is an interesting term for the naming, and Fapy's comments are interesting in that he is recalling the history of the music and its labeling as he lived through a part of it.
As a non-member of the culture(s) involved, my way of understanding is historical and rather academic. I listen to the music--its recorded history is reasonably well documented. I notice what it sounds like--what its musical/stylistic relatives are. Then I notice what it's been called *in public* across its long history. Then: who played it and for what audiences and in what contexts/environments? How and when did the *naming* change?
By the time Django moved from the musette environment to what we now recognize as jazz and swing, the term "le jazz hot" was a descriptor in France (there was a magazine by this name in 1935), and his band name echoes that phrase. (And, as Fapy suggests, it was not Django who came up with it as the band name. See Michael Dregni's book for an account of the band's naming and of the Hot Club itself.)
Who preserved Djangoesque music after Django died? Segments of the ethno-cultural groups outsiders call "gypsies" (though those people have their own names for their groups). It seems pretty clear that after Django's death, his style of music--particularly in its earlier forms--passed into the traditions of "gypsy" players, where it became a kind of folk music.
Django's own music never vanished from the awareness of musicians--particularly guitarists, but also, say, western swing dance bands--but at some point the QHCF material worked its way back into other parts of the jazz world. I think that the first North American examples of what might be called the QHCF-style revival was the Hot Club of San Francisco, though before that I'd discovered Schnuckenack Reinhardt and some early Ferre Brothers LPs and also went looking for artists mentioned in Ian Cruickshank's books, which explicitly linked Django's music to gypsies and gypsy culture.
I am aware of similar musicological/cultural/linguistic puzzles in other traditions, particularly Hawaiian music, where various peoples and their musics mixed and merged and produced new musics, which continued to change and absorb influences and attract audiences beyond their original contexts. There remain discussions of what constitutes genuinely "Hawaiian" music even now--though most of the Hawaiian slack-key players I've encountered don't get all that bothered by it. There's a new academic book on slack key, emphasizing matters of identity, cultural appropriation, and such that sounds a bit like Siv B. Lie's Django Generations, so maybe I'll get an update on the socio-cultural-political state of play.
Chris, yes the part with snowflakes etc...
I'll ask this; who is it that we're talking about when we're discussing potential sensitivities surrounding this term? Is it the people that the term gypsy jazz is referring to (which I hope so is the case) or the general public? If it's former then this little heat that happened is missing the subject. Something you, Chris, sometimes like to point out. And if stay on it we're all going to get along just fine.
Gotcha.. I just find the irony that snowflakes get so upset at being called snowflakes thus proving that they are, rather amusing now we think about it.
But yes, back to topic, I very much doubt the European Gypsies while having much cause for complaint in the way they are, and historically have been treated, would qualify. I once witnessed a knife fight in a bar in Arles where butchers knives were brandished like swords; I wasn't going to hang around and call those guys snowflakes!