Leading into the 1920s, European society had been disillusioned by the terrible destruction of the First World War. The progress they had been working for was expected to bring peace and enlightenment, not death and destruction. Returning from the Western Front, many found a need for an outlet to release the tension brought on by global upheaval. One of the ways this need was satisfied was through the escape into African American culture brought across the Atlantic in the form of jazz music.
Having been introduced to European society through France during the Great War, jazz musicians found success and improved treatment on foreign soil. However, as the jazz craze swept Europe, detractors would develop in a variety of reactionary forms. This ranged from those declaring jazz an inadequate form of non-art with inferior compositional standards to calling for all-out bans on jazz performances.
This anxiety stemmed from a number of sources. The world that came out of the first decades of the twentieth century was changing rapidly in more ways than had ever been seen before. I contend that race was ultimately the biggest factor in this. Out of the “color problem” these fears came regarding continuation of culture. The established order feared white European cultural institutions being overrun by a foreign element, or a racialized “other.”
In looking at the reaction of European society to the birth of jazz music, I will consider the works of contemporary scholars and media outlets in Europe, as well as taking into account what was coming out of America in terms of musical writings, as America was the source of this cultural export. In doing so, it becomes apparent that racial overtones colored the anti-jazz debate of the time, formed by scholars and disseminated through news outlets. For many, jazz meant not only a changing cultural landscape, but a change in such a way as to supplant traditional European forms.
The first topic to take into account when considering the reaction to jazz culture is the racial atmosphere of the intellectual community. Sir Harry Johnston presented in his book The Backward Peoples and Our Relations With Them a scale defining the degrees of civilization and culture of the peoples of the world. In an attempt to portray a seemingly empirical and unbiased system, nations are rated by their respective percentages of civilization.
First and foremost on the list is Great Britain and Ireland, as well as other nations “in which the white race predominates.”[1] They received the perfect score of 100 percent civilized. At the very bottom of the list are Dutch New Guinea, New Hebrides, Portuguese Guinea, and French Central Africa. They sit at only 75 percent, as they “still contain in their midst elements of sheer savagery.”[2] Excusing Japan for being a non-white (though termed “nearly white”[3]) member of the 100 percenters, Johnston clarifies by opining that they achieved this prestigious racial standing because of the Christian influence that had been part of Japan since missionary expeditions beginning in 1870.[4]
In this same section regarding the question, “Who Are the Backward Peoples?” Johnston points out that the foremost nations are of the world are predominantly white Christian countries. In reviewing this work, along with a few others on the topic of “The Colour Problem,” Sirt F.T. Lugard interprets this for the readers of the Edinburg Review as an objective analysis. It is a matter of grouping races “according to their standard of efficiency, irrespective of colour.”[5]
This scholarly review lends immediate credibility to the Eurocentric perspective provided by Sir Johnston and his contemporaries. Following his summary of the description of the threat posed by what Lothrop Stoddard termed “the rising tide of colour” in his book by that same name, Lugard presents Madison Grant’s belief that miscegenation between “Negro or Australoid” and “the Nordic” resulted in the dilution and extinction of the latter, because of the greater ability of blacks to transmit their genetic material.[6]
It was in this atmosphere where racial conflict was being predicted on a scale “beside which the late struggle in Europe would seem the veriest child’s play”[7] that Europeans first encountered a musical style that appeared to be the very essence of modernism, though rooted in exotic African culture. Though there were those who accepted this new form immediately, resistance was a widespread feature of European cultural theorists of the time. For those in agreement with the style, this was part of the healing process of finding relief from the recent horrors of modern warfare.
However, at least one cultural critic actually forged a link between jazz and war. Writing in the October 1929 issue of The Musical Quarterly, Paul Fritz Laubenstein starts by declaring that it would be “harsh” to draw too close a connection between war and jazz. With this seemingly absurd setup it is clear what the author is about to do. Qualifying statement out of the way, Laubenstein goes on to say that whereas war uses science to turn “products of spiritual aspiration” into weaponry that kill men, jazz takes musical genius and makes a diversion that not only wrecks youths, but damages their “moral fiber.”[8] This likening of jazz to the war—both destructors of youth—as well as the mention of its “sex-informalities and its anarchic spirit”[9] portrays the societal order pushing back at what they saw as a subversive element that was deemed worthy of keeping away from the youth. This moral corruption of the younger generation would prove to be one of the key aspects of the fight to stem the spread of jazz in Europe.
Three years before this article was published, Welsh authorities instituted a curfew to prevent such moral decay as “the act of young people of opposite sexes dancing together in a heated atmosphere” without adult supervision to restrain them.[10] The Washington Post picked up on this theme from the outset, writing in 1920 from Paris that mothers were disallowing their daughters from exposure to jazz because of its morally corrupting vices. Additionally, the piece states that it was not only unfit for the youth, but also was a cause of marital troubles, causing rattled nerves and a bad temper to get between man and wife.[11]
A 1929 listener survey by the Manchester Guardian on the BBC reveals somewhat the efficacy of impact of such reactionary sentiment on the public mindset, and helpts provide the first overt mention of race when dealing with the issue. Asked whether to ban or broadcast jazz, the majority of those in favor of a ban supported their decision “because it is of ‘negroid origin,’ ‘primitive,’ ‘uncivilized,’ ‘not music.’”[12] One respondant, J.R. Toimie, answered the question by stating that though it is a suitable art form, it is not for white society. Toimie pointed to the lower quality of life and lesser emotions of the type of people who would deem it worthy music to listen to. Suitable for those “at the negro’s level,” Toimie states that jazz “awakens primitive emotions which we have mostly outgrown, and which is injudicious to revive.”
Even those responding in favor of broadcasting jazz did so with degrading responses. The Washington Post article displays supportive quotes declaring jazz as “invigorating,” “a pleasant change after the heavier programmes.” These examples appear to be trying to lend their support to the broadcasts, but they feed directly into the degrading characterizations of jazz as being a lesser form (less heavy) that feeds into unpredictable (invigorating) behavior. This is an aspect of much of the earliest works of jazz criticism, or review.
News accounts and scientific experiments lent credibility to this latter idea that jazz leads to sporadic behavior and a sense of restlessness. In March of 1929 the Manchester Guardian ran a piece blaming an ape attack on patrons of a French diner on the “frenzied strains of negro jazz” that had upset the ape being held in the café’s cellar. This furious attack from was said to be brought upon by “the syncopated uproar” in the dining room. The Parisian waiters, who “are equal to any emergency,” matched the brute strength of the huge anthropoid ape from the African jungles and turned him back with soda water shooters.[13] The obvious undertones of this news account are that sophisticated European reaction to a primitive African beast enraged by syncopated jazz tunes were sufficient in driving this menace out of their cultural meeting spot.
This sort of unpredictability stirred by jazz was an established theme of contemporary detractors. The Los Angeles Times ran a story about a zoo experiment that tested the effects of music on different animals. Tigers were riled by jazz, while a waltz put them at ease. “Savage beasts were soothed.”[14] Another attempt at a scientific explanation, J.B. Eggen wrote in 1926 for the Psychological Review that the reaction of jazz audiences is much different than the reaction caused by classical music performances. Jazz audiences are stirred into “overt reaction, consisting of rhythmical body movements,” whereas a classical performance does not cause any outwardly apparent reaction.[15]
To return to the notion that jazz is formed by a lesser culture, Edwin J. Stringham, writing in The Musical Quarterly provides a similarly backhanded compliment to jazz music to the ones in response to the Manchester Guardian question (though this was not, it would seem, a purposeful insult, but a sign of the times). Though he states that “nothing is so absurd” as to state that jazz is immoral,[16] he goes on to clearly define jazz as an inferior counterpart to European classical music. By stating that jazz music used dominant secondary seventh chords “with as much effectiveness as serious works,”[17] Stringham slips in the implication that jazz is not a mode for so-called serious works.
Robert Goffin, credited as being the first of the three “pioneers of jazz studies” that also included Hugues Panassie and Charles Delaunay,[18] wrote that jazz required the intelligence centers to give up their control over the brain.[19] Stating that the jazz musician must not let the “superior” brain centers to be the driving force, he declares that the best jazz comes from a trance-like state where the musician neutralizes reason.
In his article on “Jazz and the Primitivist Myth,” Ted Gioia writes that this fed into the notion that jazz is an inherently lower art form of a primitive culture – an atavistic endeavor feeding off of anti-intellectualism of artists who don’t understand music, but spewed notes out from a trance. Hugues Panassie, the most prominent member of the “founding fathers of jazz studies,” though he regarded Louis Armstrong as the “Real King of Jazz” as opposed to Paul Whiteman, the accepted king of jazz, wrote that the reason for Armstrong’s success as a practitioner of “enlightened ignorance” was that he was a “full-blooded Negro.” This notion of primitive man creating beautiful jazz music was based on the notion that he was not burdened by an excess of culture. This, Pannasie stated, “atrophies inspiration” and leaves the music without its requisite vitality.[20] Here we see that even in the efforts of those trying to spread the word of jazz, the promoters hold deep-seated prejudices that assume a limited capacity for intellect and sophistication.
This serves as a reminder of how ingrained racial superiority was on members of European society in the early twentieth century. What was taken for fact was that jazz was a musical form built on so-called Negro rhythms based on improvisation. Almost universally the image that emerged was one that presented jazz as a low brow achievement, whether enjoyable or not. In the July 1925 issue of Music & Letters, Cecil Austin writes of jazz coming out of ragtime, which traces its own roots back to “ragging” on Christian spirituals.[21] In other words, taking European traditions and treating them with derision.
There was also a sense that the European classical music scene felt threatened by jazz’s popularity. Carl Nielsen, the “foremost” Danish composer of the time, was quoted in the Washington Post in 1928 claiming that the only logical reason “true” composers resort to jazz writing is the monetary draw. As Madison Grant feared the prepotency of black genes stemming the continuance of the Nordic races, Laubenstein feared that the lack of monetary support for classical music would lead to the weeding out of orchestras and, ultimately, the halting of new compositions.[22] Edwin Stringham believed this to be a problem as early as 1926, saying that monetary ends led serious arrangers into the field of jazz.[23] Consequently, this is the basis for his only defense of jazz – that it could be decent when European classical artists arranged the compositions.
The same institutional resistance of jazz could be found in the opera halls of Rome. Perhaps seeming slightly defensive about the place of Italian composition, violinist and professor Mario Corti didn’t believe any foreign element needed to be introduced into Italian music, though he said he “loved [jazz’s] vigor, its novelty, its gayety and freshness.”[24] However, in the same article, Pietro Mascagni criticized jazz’s animalistic instrumentation and the “pseudo-negro musical cacophony.” This came months after Italy began its war on “wicked hip shaking” that was taking hold of young Italian girls.[25] Worthy of note is that on the same page as the story on Corti and Mascagni is an ad for “Ed E. Daley’s black and white sensation,” a “half-white and half-colored show” in which the acts are separated by race, and a black musician is featured in a jazz band performing with “the twelve plantation dancing girls.”[26] This offers an insight into the entertainment world of the time, and the associations attributed to jazz music.
Carl Nielsen would not explicitly state that jazz music was unfavorable because of its origins outside of European traditions. He preferred to condemn it for causing men and women to gyrate with their knees pressed into one another’s while exhibiting an empty, trance-like lack of humanity.[27] In it, he heard only a “Depraving skeleton-rattling noise.”[28] Prominent English conductor, Sir Henry Coward, would make similar comments regarding jazz instrumentation. He treats each instrument as a treasure tarnished by the grime of jazz, which employs them to sound like varying degrees of vulgar animal noises. However, beyond stating simply, “Jazz is a low type of primitive music founded on crude rhythms suggested by clapping hands and stomping feet,” Coward came out and directly stated that he believed that “The popularization of jazz and the attendant immodest dances are lowering the prestige of the white races.”[29]
[1] Sir Henry Johnston, The Backward Peoples and Our Relations With Them, (Oxford University Press: London, 1920): 8-9.
[2] Johnston, 9.
[3] Johnston, 7.
[4] Johnston, 10.
[5] F.T. Lugard, “The Colour Problem,” Edinburgh Review 233, no. 476 (Apr 1921): 269.
[6] Lugard, 268.
[7] Lothrop Stoddard quoted in Lugard, 267.
[8] Paul Fritz Laubenstein, “Jazz—Debit and Credit,” The Musical Quarterly 15, no. 4 (Oct. 1929), 614.
[9] Laubenstein, 614.
[10] “Welsh Invoke Curfew Law as One Way to Stop Jazz,” New York Times, March 7, 1926, X12.
[11] “French May Ban Jazz in Dancing,” Washington Post, June 13, 1920, 59.
[12] “Wireless Notes and Programmes: ‘Why I would Broadcast (or Ban) Jazz,” Manchester Guardian, Dec 30, 1929, 8.
[13] “Ape’s Attack in a Café: Made Frantic by Jazz,” Manchester Guardian, Mar 14, 1929, 11.
[14] “Jazz Riles, Opera Soothes,” Los Angeles Times, May 27, 1924, A1.
[15] J.B. Eggen, “A Behavioristic Interpretation of Jazz,” Psychological Review 33, no. 5 (Sept 1926): 407-409.
[16] Edwin J. Stringham, “’Jazz’—An Educational Problem,” Musical Quarterly 12, no. 2 (April 1926): 190.
[17] Stringham, 194.
[18] Ted Gioia, “Jazz and the Primitivist Myth,” The Musical Quarterly 73, no. 1 (1989): 134.
[19] Robert Goffin, Jazz: From the Congo to the Metropolitan, (Da Capo Press: New York, 1972): 101.
[20] Gioia, 136-137.
[21] Cecil Austin, Music & Letters 6, no. 3 (Jul 1925): 258.
[22] Laubenstein, 620.
[23] Stringham, 193.
[24] “Italian Composers Spurn Idea of Jazz in Operatic Music,” Washington Post, April 8, 1926, 9.
[25] “Italy Wars on Jazz,” Los Angeles Daily Times, Jan 29, 1926, 2.
[26] “Gayety,” Washington Post, April 8, 1926, 9.
[27] Axel Gerfalk, “Jazz Offends Danish Master,” Washington Post, Feb 5, 1928, 4.
[28] Gerfalk, 4.
[29] “Warns White Races They Must Drop Jazz,” New York Times, Sep 20, 1927, 4.
