Steve Earle: 'The blues was originally a sophisticated notated form of music that was developed largely in Memphis and New Orleans and the people who played it read and wrote music.....part of the tradition is how musically literate they are, and how literate they are—that's part of African-American culture in New Orleans, because there were more free people of colour in New Orleans before the Louisiana Purchase than any other place in North America. That's part of where blues comes from. The primitive version of the blues that we know comes from people hearing that music.'
In the words of the big Lebowsky: 'well, that's just your opinion, man'
But hey, what would I know. The origin of the blues was a long time ago in a country far, far away...
I'd be interested in some opinions, though (especially from our learned prof).
This is a guy who hates our government but thinks tax money should be used for specialized very expensive schooling for autistic kids( Earle of course has an autistic kid)
I think what he means to say is WC Handy-- a trained musician codified the blues and wrote in that format.
However Handy heard that blues from the Delta guys-- not the more musically literate professionals
Cripey ... you may be interested in Adams Blues Talk. I learned alot from it. I would like him to do more actually. I put them on at work and burned right thru em. Listened to them a few times thru since. I recommend it.
Really gets deep into the blues history. Different points of view. It's very good. Especially if you know little to nothing about blues history ... like me. ---------- "Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Mar 26, 2016 7:05 AM
Killa, yep they're excellent lectures; I listened to them as soon as they came out. That's why I found Steve Earles comments surprising. ---------- Lucky Lester
Oh ... sorry. I got ADD bro. As soon as it said "sophisticated notated" ... all i read was WHOMP WHOMP WHOMP charlie browns teacher style. Kinda skimmed thru it. Lol. I totally missed the point. I got you now. Yea that makes no sence ---------- "Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
In the creation sound naturally has flat 7th,5th,3rd,in the overtone series.[blues scale]So in a natural folk music of the African folks the music developed...
The more granular you go into exploring the origin of the blues, the less clear the story becomes.
In I'D RATHER BE THE DEVIL, his biography of Skip James, Stephen Calt argues that the foundation of the blues--a 10 beat vocal phrase followed by a 6 beat fill, three times in a row--was "Roll, Jordan," a white spiritual that black southerners all knew after the Great Revival blew through. That song had solo singer alternating with chorus; in the blues, the instrumental fill replaces the chorus.
No other scholar has ever made this particular argument; Calt makes it in detail, with absolute confidence.
In LONG LOST BLUES: POPULAR BLUES IN AMERICA, 1850 - 1920, Peter Muir looks at sheet music blues from the era before recorded blues--LONG before recorded blues--and insists that composed sheet music blues songs, most of them written and performed by whites, critically impacted the black folk blues form in its earliest days.
Scholar Harriett Ottenheimer looked at all of the folkloristic accounts of the blues set BEFORE 1900, and not one of them was set in Mississippi. Most of them were in southern Illinois, Kentucky, and Indiana. That doesn't mean that the blues was "born" in Indiana--the player observed there might well have been a rambling Mississippian--but it's still an important detail.
In ESCAPING THE DELTA, Elijah Wald makes the point that blues, in the years between 1900 and 1910, was an extremely new thing--a weird new sound--and it ended up becoming popular in the Delta because the Delta was filling, and then full, of black migrants from other places, especially the Mississippi hill country. People in settled districts, so to speak, tend to stick with the traditional music they've long known. It's when everybody is from somewhere else that there's a lot of churn, ferment, and invention, and the new thing tends to spread quickly in such places. Lots of freshly laid train-track in the Delta, put down in the 1880s, facilitated that spread.
Some have argued that the blues began in New Orleans bordellos. A woman named Mamie Desdoumes played piano and sang blues in 1902 or 3, according to Jelly Roll Morton.
I don't have any firm answers.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Mar 28, 2016 5:08 AM
Ha! I'm going to remember what Adam wrote above, every time I feel myself about to get sucked into the never ending "who has a right to play/feel the blues" argument. That perfectly encapsulates why, at least for me, it's pointless to waste time arguing about it.
I had a similar experience a while back on this forum regarding the never ending argument about which harp (custom, off the shelf, Hohner, Lee Oskar, Seydel) was correct for producing the absolute perfect sound/tone etc. One of the forum's members (I wish I could remember who so I could credit him) played a piece using different harps and asked the membership to try to ID which harp was which. No one got it right (including our Major Domo), and all the examples sounded pretty good to these ears. That solidified for me the idea that 80-85-90 % ? of what makes you sound good on a harp is YOU not the harp. From that point on I confidently just ignored the custom/off-the shelf debates.
Sometimes I love this forum.
Last Edited by Honkin On Bobo on Mar 30, 2016 5:29 AM
the blues goes way back ...way way back.......... charlie patton may sound primitive, but this music was handed down, generation after generation. it did not start in the delta. perhaps it did, the nile delta!
Last Edited by 1847 on Mar 30, 2016 9:05 AM
In "Escaping the Delta: Robert Johnson and the Invention of the Blues" Elijah Wald theorizes that the country blues players were imitating more polished star performers such as Lonnie Johnson and the classic blues ladies, using the tools they had. I have no idea if he is correct, but the book is a good read and he makes a convincing argument. ---------- For every moment of triumph, every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled. HST
If I didn't know better, Goldbrick, I'd think you were trying to tweak me with that line about "who has an academic reputation to embellish." But I know better.
To be honest, though, I have no idea what point you're trying to make by juxtaposing early recordings by Lonnie Johnson and Sylvester Weaver. Please explain.
Lonnie being in the more " jazzy blues tradition and Weaver in what we might consider a more country blues style.
I guess I am for the under dog-- Everybody knows Lonnie Johnson ( especially interesting because he played in open tunings)
Weaver is pretty under the radar- I only know him because I am a Bob Wills fan and he did weaver's guitar rag ( talk blues influences)
My point being I am somewhat less enamoured with the " trickle down from the more " mainstream " players-ie the Vaudeville turned blues singers cum all popular music of the day" vs the trickle up influence from the field hollar guys
By academics I mean authors like Wald who delight in jousting with the myth ( when much of their info is conjecture as well)
I find all of the theories interesting and we know there is no real answer to how this style of music began
I love the twists and turns of the blues story and listening to old music and seeing it influence later players.
