Gershwin- Classical or Jazz?

I personally am cautious of using the word "jazz" to describe Gershwin's music. It might have been "jazzy" in the '20s and '30s, but jazz has changed a lot since its influence appeared in Gershwin's music. Regardless, his music is definitely infused with bits of the other genres of music he was interested in throughout his life, and the big band music of the 20's and 30's is one of the things that helped shape his musical language. It can be strongly heard in pieces like the overture to "Lady be good" and the famous Rhapsody in Blue.

Then you get pieces like his piano concerto.

Gershwin's piano concerto in f is one of the more classically-influenced pieces of his output, and has the traditional concerto's fast-slow-fast tempo set up. In it, you can hear things that you might hear out of Rachmaninoff, or Tchaikovsky. After that, he turns around and goes into long sections of jazzy melody and harmony.

So, what was Gershwin? Was he a jazz musician at heart who wrote pieces with classical forms, or did he lean towards the trends in the art music of his time? Or, as I've been convinced, was he a little bit of both? A man who wasn't one or the other, but used both classical and jazz influence to shape the music he wrote?

What do you think?

He was both. Listening to his music you can tell there is a lot of classical aspects to it. His concerto in F is heavily Debussy, and his American in Paris is the epitomizes his journey through French music.

At the same time, Ella Fitzgerald took some of his songs and recorded them. He took many jazz aspects sliced them up and mixed them into something the general public could enjoy.

Instead of discussing that here, why don't you read what Gershwin himself said, and read about Gershwin's own musical experiences?

Obviously, diehard jazz musicians are going to say it's not "real jazz", and likewise, strict classical people are going to say it's not "real classical".

You realize, I hope, that the vast majority of Gershwin's musical output was in the form of broadway shows? Meaning he was a composer who dedicated a large amount of energy to writing popular music.

I think he was "unique" in his approach. Never a "pure" jazz man, and with not quite the right background to be a classical composer per se.

The piano concerto, his single largest concert work, is one of the most piecemeal concertos in the repertoire. While it's a really fun piece to play (I have), there is something fundamentally unsatisfying about the form.

On the other hand, his opera "Porgy and Bess" is considerably more interesting and coherant. However, while the music requires strong singers, there is always a quality about it that is more Broadway than Met.

There you go: Gershwin, the musical contradiction.

Clazz? Jazzsical?

Jazzsicle

:shifty:

Gershwin tunes (adapted from the musicals) have long been standard jam session fare...I'm not too familiar with his extra-jazzsicle work. Recommend me something.

I always call his songs, meaning all the Broadway stuff, jazz and his concert works, like Rhapsody in Blue and American in Paris, classical. I don't really see why a diehard jazz person wouldn't call the bulk of his music jazz. I mean, he even wrote rags, how can that ever be conceived as something that's not real jazz? I have to admit though, I will never understand why Porgy and Bess is considered an opera and not a musical.

I guess either way the best way to look at his music would be as music. It doesn't really matter what you call it as long as you like it, right?

...I will never understand why Porgy and Bess is considered an opera and not a musical.

...because originally, there was no spoken dialogue.

Really, Porgy and Bess is a jazz opera. It's an opera, there's no doubt about it. But the music is structured undoubtedly jazz. Songs like "Porgy, I's Your Woman Now" have such a jazz sound, even [especially] when sung by trained classical singers.

We have rock operas and rap operas now, and we call them what they are. Porgy and Bess is a jazz opera. One of the reasons it's probably a little more confusing is that this comes from a composer who obviously knew and was well-versed in classical, and chose to use jazz as his style for dramatic purposes.

My vote goes to the jazzsicle. But it all sounds good.

Gershwin is like Beethoven, i think he was both.

Gershwin is like Beethoven, i think he was both.

Explain, please.

Beethoven was both Classical and Romanic.

Well people are always saying well Beethoven was romantic or classical and really he was both. He was the brige between both. With Gershwin I feel he is both "jazz" and classical. I mean he had a jazz background but he also had a classical background, and in his music you can find hints of both. It almost as if he merged them together in a very harmonious way. I mean listen to Porgy... so jazzy, yet it has its classical appeal, thats why people debate that as a musical or an opera.

Enough?

Well people are always saying well Beethoven was romantic or classical and really he was both. He was the brige between both. With Gershwin I feel he is both "jazz" and classical. I mean he had a jazz background but he also had a classical background, and in his music you can find hints of both. It almost as if he merged them together in a very harmonious way. I mean listen to Porgy... so jazzy, yet it has its classical appeal, thats why people debate that as a musical or an opera.

Enough?

Okay....because for a second there, I thought you were saying Beethoven was Classical and Jazz.

;)

As far as I know, the ONLY spoken dialogue in Porgy and Bess is that spoken by the white people (policemen). And just as a FYI, the inclusion of spoken dialogue doesn't mean that a piece is not an opera. Carmen has LOADS of spoken dialogue in it.

As far as I know, the ONLY spoken dialogue in Porgy and Bess is that spoken by the white people (policemen). And just as a FYI, the inclusion of spoken dialogue doesn't mean that a piece is not an opera. Carmen has LOADS of spoken dialogue in it.

Same with Die Zauberflote.

Musical theatre history follows this order:

opera -> operetta -> musical play -> musical comedy -> the musical

The operetta has spoken dialogue, but the music is still the most important thing. If we want to get really specific, Carmen is an operetta, Die Zauberflote is an operetta or singspiel.

I know the difference between opera and what not, but even so there is still debate about the "jazz opera" Porgy and Bess.

ok?

the amount of spoken dialogue in Porgy and Bess is so minimal as to have no sway what so ever on the definition one would apply to it - opera or musical or operetta.

As a matter of fact, the spoken dialogue in Porgy is there for a very specific effect: only the black people sing. The white people speak. It's what differentiates the two very different worlds.

I can't say off-hand since I don't have a scor handy, but there may be no more than a dozen spoken lines in Porgy.

What divides an opera from an operetta is considerably more than the inclusion/exclusion of dialogue. The depth/topic of the story, and the over-all structure of the work are far greater issues in defining between the two.

As for Magic Flute being a "singspiel", I happen to believe that THAT was considerably more a question of marketing than a reference to any actual form. Magic Flute is as complex and demanding as any "opera". In essence, it IS an opera. Mozart's "modesty" is more liable to be the instigator of the "singspiel" label.

I tend to think of Sondheim's "musicals" as a sort of hybrid form. The music is highly complex, and generally heavily cyclical. The vocal lines are quite demanding. Even when his works are divided into "numbers", there's a certain ambiguity as to where exactly the number starts and finishes. Surely more the hallmark of an opera than of a musical.

Very few musicals are cyclical in their treatment of thematic material. Generally, it would be safe to presume the same for operettas.

We DO come into more complicated territory when trying to apply the opposite definitions we've just applied to musicals as pertains to opera. Not ALL operas are cyclical. Some even eschew completely any thematic links between sections of the work. Some operas have extremely frivolous and superficial subject matter.

So, see? it's all still pretty vague.

Yea its all really confusing... i mean some people make their living researching this and debating it. There are ways to go either way but I think we can call as what we know. Magic Flute is an opera, thats how we were taught. Porgy and Bess an opera. Sondheim writes "musicals". Its just all in the medium its released in you know?

anyway......whatever we'll live.

You could say that Sweeney Todd is a musical because Sondheim chose to write it for the Broadway stage. And yet, it has been performed in opera houses. Les Miz ran for years on Broadway and the West End and has hardly any spoken dialogue. It has, to my knowledge, never been performed in an opera house.

I worked at the York Theatre Company at the time they were producing a new musical called Asylum: the Strange Case of Mary Lincoln, and the opera crowd ate it up. In terms of book to score ratio, it was about even, and the dialogue was wonderful and plentiful. But something about the score and the epic nature of this woman's struggle to prove her own sanity while her money was wasted away to pay for her imprisonment felt very operatic. We even had opera diva Carolann Page in the lead role of Mary Todd Lincoln, and she was brilliant!

Nor does the exclusion of spoken dialogue render a piece an opera. Les Miserables is still a musical, though its three spoken lines are written in rhythmic notation in the score.

...because originally, there was no spoken dialogue.

Dern, my lack of a deep knowledge of Porgy and Bess has been revealed. The only version I've ever seen was the film version with Sammy Davis Jr in it. That version has tons of dialogue.

Dern, my lack of a deep knowledge of Porgy and Bess has been revealed. The only version I've ever seen was the film version with Sammy Davis Jr in it. That version has tons of dialogue.

Don't worry, I was off base a bit too - much discussion ensued.

;)

Nor does the exclusion of spoken dialogue render a piece an opera. Les Miserables is still a musical, though its three spoken lines are written in rhythmic notation in the score.

And not a very good one, at that. But that's generally what happens to musicals that wish they were operas written by pop composers who want to pretend they're better than they are.

I'm sorry, Les Miserables is way overblown for what it actually is... a poorly paced theatre piece attempting to be an opera.

I love Les Miz.