Blog #2 Windy City Vs. The Big Apple

Which city was more important to jazz in the 1920s--Chicago or New York? What role did the particular social, economic, and racial conditions of that city play in creating the cultural conditions for jazz to triumph in that city?  Was there a Chicago or New York style of jazz (depending on which of the two cities you choose)? If so, what was it, who played it, and what distinguished it from other styles?  Whose (band or individual) art best represents the culture and community of the city you choose?  Why?  Please provide references. 

When trying to compare the differences between Chicago and New York jazz, it's equivalent to attempting to compare the flavors of apples and oranges. Both of them are delicious in their own way, but that's what makes them so great - the difference. Chicago brought together a new style of Jazz. The jazz that was formed was as close to organized chaos as it can be, with performers learning every rule they can just so they can break the rules. It wasn't unusual for someone to play out of tune, or to go out on a limb and play by themselves. That in itself was another benefit from Chicago's style of music, it was able to fully incorporate the soloist into the performance. No longer were the days of the ensemble as the main event, now there were headliners that people wanted to see perform. "Well before the middle of the decade, a large cadre of major New Orleans jazz musicians left New Orleans around 1908..." (Gioia, Pg 43). People like Louis Armstrong and Jelly Roll Morton were really able to branch out and express themselves more openly in a place that wasn't as full of hatred and segregation. 

While Chicago catered more to the development of jazz as a genre, New York brought more to the development of jazz as entertainment. New York was a breeding ground for the transport of African American music to the white ear. Everywhere from Broadway to the clubs in Harlem, high-class whites could appreciated the new style of music that becoming more prevalent on the east coast. "At the height of the Jazz Age, Harlem featured eleven nightclubs that catered to high-class whites, as well as "five hundred colored cabarets of lower ranks" (Gioia, Pg. 117). This is simply an attest to how anxious well-off white people were to watch the performance. 

While both of these locations have a strong aspect in the growth and development of jazz, I believe that Chicago was more beneficial to the growth of jazz as a musical essence. Without the birth of the soloist or the new styles that were developed in this region, it is hard for me to imagine it would reach the forefront of the Chicago entertainment industry in the same manner that it was able to do.