I thought that two Saturdays ago at Amherst's Harlem Renaissance, I would get to listen to a live jazz orchestra and appreciate a musician who has played with some of the most famous jazzers. No.
It was billed as an educational program on the Renaissance. Fine. It's an interesting period in history. Class levels seemed traversable, the NAACP had been publishing since 1909, white New Yorkers started going uptown on Saturday nights, the country was experiencing economic boom, people had cars, everyone drank. The roaring twenties had hit Harlem.
Surprisingly, I found there to be no mention of the development of jazz music-no explanation of what occurred when black Americans of the early teens first combined their African melodies with slave songs, with instruments like the guitar, the piano and the trumpet, and with classical methods in writing music. There was no explanation of why the boom was possible-that is, why it happened to take place in the '20s in New York. This was supposed to be educational. All I learned was that there were talented kids in the Black Students Union (BSU). The night proved to be more like a BSU talent show than anything else, which I would have been pleased to attend under its own auspices, but not those of the Harlem Renaissance.
The evening's band, the performers who were to educate us, spoke of the black population of the time in terms of what it meant to be an American. They turned an artistic and cultural urban movement into a patriotic expression. It was the NAACP's version of the significance of the art of the time.
We looked at Langston Hughes in terms of the patriotic significance he gave his writing instead of referring to his writing style and poetry of words. The event put words were put into the mouths of Harlem writers. Their lines were used to express the "American dream story" of the black man, instead of being appreciated as honest accounts of their inner thoughts.
We were shown great photographs of jazz clubs and musicians, and images of a roaring New York City. There was a promotional shot of jazz great Duke Ellington, who was responsible for much of the big band movement, with a woman seated across his lap. A great man in the world of music was promoted, his greatness demonstrated, by the adornment of a woman.
This is interesting, I thought. One could definitely go into a discussion of the role of black women in the Renaissance and their use in propaganda. Instead no mention was made of this topic, but later in the show we watched a skit addressing the dual burden of being female and black. Maybe it was a lack of coordination that allowed for such contradiction. I don't know.
Interestingly enough, a few slides later, we were presented with some photographs of female performers, pictures of can-can girls and singers. Here again was the opportunity to discuss the role of the female entertainer and the fact that many female singers or performers were in fact prostitutes. They were much like opera singers of the 19th century, supported by lovers who provided housing and jewels, in exchange for weekly visits. In the meantime, a male performer could just sell his musical talent. The double standard is striking. No mention was made of it.
Finally, the complementary features of black music and jazz and the black culture of Harlem were highlighted only in comparison to the white community. The sensuality and force of the music were described as something the white population lacked, and because they lacked it was it a superior trait. This type of "analysis of worth" comes right out of popular racist beliefs about black people. White America had always been inundated with images of black people lacking the great qualities that were exclusive to white culture.
From here spun the insecurities of the black population, whose members were forced to constantly be aware of their supposed lack of positive, beautiful, intelligent qualities. Saying the white population lacked something in a description of that thing's importance or beauty is the same as calling straight hair the only beautiful alternative. It is necessary and just to celebrate all things black. It aids in creating one's ideas of sense of self, and a culture's ego. Yet celebrating all things black by slighting another community is quite ineffective, because it promotes hatred alongside admiration.
It could have been a very nice night. I would have loved to hear a piano solo and been overjoyed at some new insights into the Renaissance. I would have enjoyed dancing with everyone in suits in an attempted simulation of the Cotton Club. I would have been overjoyed to hear Duke Ellington and Billie Holiday coming out of the piano and drums. Instead, I sat through a third-grade history project on Harlem in the twenties, and watched well-choreographed and well-sung pieces that had nothing to do with the Renaissance but demonstrated the talents of BSU members. Perhaps next year.
Tamara Rosenblum is a member of the Class of 2004.