Why Blog About Early Jazz (Flowchart)

A meandering thought from a coffee shop (not a bar) that turned into a helpful realization:
Thank you for your indulgence, whoever is out there reading this post.


11 thoughts on “Why Blog About Early Jazz (Flowchart)

  1. Hal Smith says:

    I read them all, and my hat is off to you for taking the time and effort to write these great blogs!

    • Andrew J. Sammut says:

      That honestly means so much, Hal. Thank you for your encouragement as well as sharing your wealth of knowledge and experience on this website!

  2. jazzlives says:

    That’s boiling it down to its essences: share the music, talk about it, and perhaps learn more. Who would have thought a Jimmy Lytell Pathe could have led to such profound possibilities? Happy trails, O Blogger!

  3. Albert Haim says:

    The excitement of discovery.

  4. Dan DeMuth says:

    Hal’s comment is spot on.

    • Andrew J. Sammut says:

      Dan, thank you so much for reading this blog. It is always rewarding to hear who is out there reading and hopefully enjoying it. I’ll confess it’s not the only reason that I write, but it certainly helps very much!

  5. Andrew – thank you for sharing some of my own doubts and questions! And thanks for
    you and other great jazz bloggers for inspiration!

  6. pwlsax says:

    Two thoughts:

    – Why the hell not a bar? My experience of jazz’s critical community is that they are usually three drinks behind us musicians, and four or five behind some of the great eclectic collectors I learned from as a youngster.

    – In logic they say you can’t prove a negative. In the arts we say you really can’t prove anything. But it’s always seemed to me that “this is NOT good, and here’s why” carries a lot more gravitas than “this IS good, and here’s why.”

    • Andrew J. Sammut says:

      Two replies:
      -because this writer has the tolerance of a thirteen-year old intern at AA (yet another reason I could never be a professional critic).
      -I rarely discuss what I dislike, cannot prove anything I like is “good” but enjoy saying what I think is good about it (ditto about me not being a pro critic)

  7. Dan DeMuth says:

    Beauty is judged in the eye of the beholder. Music is judged by the ear of the listener. I do not necessarily dislike polkas, opera, post war blues, modern country/western or (for some odd reason and yes it includes jazz) anything that is played on an organ. I do not make a habit of putting it down to others, it is just that a little of any of those types of music goes a long way in my listening tastes. I am not a professional critic nor a trained musician although I have been known to produce a lyrical note or two while showering. I collect knowing full well that I may listen to a selection only once or twice prior to it being shelved. However, other 78’s, 45’s, LP’s, CD’s etc have been listened to multiple times. As they number over 30,000 it obviously means I do have an “ear” although perhaps not as discerning as the “musicians”. I willingly share this collection of music with others and am in the process of finding homes for all of it at the point I can no longer manage to enjoy it – “homes” being as a donated collection(s). not selling it. I have found over the years that art critics are very similar to the talking heads on radio and the political commentators in the print media. For some strange reason they have come to consider themselves as much more of an expert than we, the commoners. Like Andrew, I know what I do like and why I think it is good. If it isn’t the viewpoint of someone else, so be it. And if I’m three drinks behind, don’t worry, as I plan on catching up in the stretch.

    • Andrew J. Sammut says:

      Thanks for commenting, Dan!

      These days I don’t even really say, “X is good…” but tend to describe my tastes in terms of what I, me, Andrew pull off of the shelf. It’s my taste, not perfect, but mine. Simple but very empowering!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: