Ok, for those of you who weren’t quite sure how to take that diatribe, let me remove my tongue from my cheek for a moment.
I personally don’t “get” jazz. I find almost all of it boring or incomprehensible. I can tell as well as anyone else that the best jazz musicians are the technical equals of the best classical musicians. Quite a few are accomplished in both genres; Wynton Marsalis is one. On that basis I have to conclude that I’m missing something. In fact, my usual reaction to a jazz piece is, “those guys obviously know what they’re doing, but I don’t have a clue.”
I don’t think that any form of jazz has the same expressive power, in terms of the range of emotional responses it can elicit from its listeners, as certain other forms of music. Of course, I am not in the best position to make this judgment. However, I would say that the classical style of Haydn and Mozart, which I do appreciate and enjoy, is inferior to, say, romanticism, and for the same reason. (I’m aware that I’m going to piss off a whole new bunch of people here.) I feel the same way about individual instruments. I think the violin, for example, is superior to the clarinet, simply because you can do so much with the violin, while the clarinet is pretty much a one-trick pony. (I played clarinet for years; never touched the violin.)
The quasi-religious fervor of jazz aficianados may be warranted; once again, I’m not in a position to judge. But I do feel there is a lot of affectation in jazz culture. Why is everyone involved with jazz so damned cool, to the point of near-catatonia? You never hear a bubbly jazz deejay, any more than you hear a laid-back classic rock deejay.
SaxFace, you’re an excellent apologist for your music. You have certainly increased my intellectual, if not my visceral, apprecation of jazz. Feel free to elaborate even further.
Finally, I hate to have to say this, but the OP was intended mainly as humor. Guess I better not quit my day job.