Blues, etc (no Who content)

[Kevin Winn <kwinn@steptech.com>]

From: mleaman@sccoast.net (Mark Leaman)
>>>
I also think that we're talking about two different things...and that   
your
definition is of Blues too broad, while your definition of Jazz is too
narrow. When I say Blues, I mean the form that is now called Blues, not   
an
acoustic Spritual from the year 1803 or something. When I say Jazz, I'm
talking about forms that were actually called Jazz at the time.
<<<

As nebulous as that last sentence is, this paragraph explains a lot.  It   
tells me that your definition of Jazz is too broad (i.e. includes all of   
Jazz's lineage), and your definition of Blues is too limited (ignores the   
fact that Blues originated from Slave songs in the early 19th century).

"...the form that is now called Blues.."

Mark, what does this mean?  Delta (Country) Blues existed a long time   
before Ragtime, coming directly out of Spirituals.  If you play that   
Spiritual from 1803 today, it would be called Delta Blues.  This form of   
Blues (and, as I pointed out before, there's more than just one) is   
relatively unchanged at least from the early '20's.  But that's not when   
it started.  Robert Johnson's sessions in San Antonio weren't the   
*beginning* of Blues, just one of the first *recordings* of that form.


re: New Orleans -
>>>
I've only been during Mardi Gras, which is of course quite a different   
animal than your everyday life in the city.
[snip accurate description of Mardi Gras]
<<<

Which only goes to show that you've never been to New Orleans, just to   
Mardi Gras.

>>>
You just have to know what you're doing...and I must assume that a Who   
fan would be
at the least somewhat intelligent...
<<<

Yeah, I know..., us non-Who fans are such *Gomers*...  d:o


OK,
KLW

"Po-jama People, Po-jama People...
 Lawd, they make yuh sleepy with the things they might say..."  - FZ