New York Is Now: The New Wave of Free Jazz Phil Freeman The Telegraph Company 224 pp. Available from Amazon

Soon after starting Phil Freeman's polemical New York is Now!, my sympathies were on his side. The first merciless crack he took at Wynton Marsalis and his repertory jazz movement was enough to win me over. I heartily agree with Freeman that the worst thing to happen to jazz ever has been Mr. Marsalis' narrow, provincial view of it. Yes, the mainstream media sings his praises -- how he's the savior of jazz, etc. -- but his definition of jazz is far too limited to allow it to move past 1960, much less into the 21st Century.

I also see Freeman's point when he says that for jazz to survive it needs to expand its audience. I've seen the dwindling interest in jazz for years as jazz radio station after jazz radio station shuts down to make way for more commercial-friendly formats. I am keenly aware, as Freeman is, that whatever new listeners mainstream jazz attracts, tend to come from institutional backgrounds (e.g. high school or college jazz programs) and are easily duped by the traditionalist rhetoric, tuning out less well-known work. So, yes, jazz needs a new, vibrant audience to help propel it forward into the new century.

Those things being said, I still find New York is Now! to be a bit off-putting. Freeman's main assertion seems to be that the only viable jazz savior at this point and time is this particular, tight-knit community of free jazz artists that trace their lineage back to Ornette Coleman, Cecil Taylor and Albert Ayler. The group includes David Ware, Matthew Shipp, William Parker, Roy Campbell, Charles Gayle, Joe Morris and Daniel Carter (each of these players gets a chapter in the book). While I agree that much of this music is admirable and that all of it is preferable to the uninspired pablum of the traditionalist camp, I just can't summon Freeman's singular vigor in extolling its virtue. Often sheer hyperbole, his prose is very much that of a rabid fan. He is unabashedly passionate about his topic and anxious for the reader to feel the same. This results in an undeniably energetic approach, but one which lacks objectivity. Some of the albums he so glowingly describes I have found to be mixed bags (e.g. Shipp's Pastoral Composure) while others are indeed as good as he says they are.

I realize that Mr. Freeman's scope in this book is intentionally narrow. He's covering this particular scene alone, not jazz at large. Furthermore he never explicitly says, "These guys are the only future of jazz." But more often than not, when he mentions an artist outside the purview of his book, it is to heap on the criticism. He is particularly harsh on the Zorn school, seeing them as usurpers of sorts -- as if they aren't legitimate jazzers because they can't provide the correct musical pedigree. In his discussion of guitarist Joe Morris, he mentions guys like Sonny Sharrock, Derek Bailey and Blood Ulmer, and for historical perspective Django Rheinhardt, but misses out on folks like Pat Metheny, Bill Frisell (and others), who can also legitimately claim to have moved jazz in interesting directions over the years. The fact is, I think that both Zorn and many of the guitar-oriented, jazz-something fusion projects are also struggling against the tyranny of Marsalis' past-looking, Afro-centric take on jazz. I wish Freeman was more open to solutions for the jazz viability problem outside the one he's discussing.

In the end, however, I'm glad Freeman's book is out there. I think his main assertions are well-taken, even if his world view is a bit narrow. Jazz does need new blood, and certainly the New York free jazz scene will be a vital part of whatever renaissance takes place. Here's hoping so... We can't afford to have this distinctly American music become the museum piece its "champions" would have it do.

-- Noah Wane