The NEA Arts Participation Summary: Jazz Breakdown

I’ve been meaning to discuss the recent brochure published by the National Endowment for the Arts for awhile now; finally, Ted Gioia’s thoughtful post at jazz.com has provided me with the inspiration to chime in.

I disagreed somewhat with Mr. Gioia’s Chicken Little take on the state of jazz today, but this time I can’t argue with the fact that the NEA findings are indeed ugly news for the jazz community.

The report lists 11 key findings, nine of which have something specific to say about the state of the jazz audience (findings 3 and 4 are somewhat tangential to jazz specifically.)  After the jump, I’ll take a look at what each one means for the (un)changing demographics of the jazz audience.

1 ) One in three adults attended an art museum or an arts performance in the 12-month survey period

Interestingly, jazz was put into the same category as classical music for their breakdown, but separate from “Latin, Spanish or Salsa.”  The former pulled in over 31 million attendees in the past year, while the latter had an audience of about 11 million.  Plays, musicals and art museums were all more popular with the general public.

I was surprised and somewhat dismayed to see jazz being paired with classical music for this study.  Fortunately, this is the only part where the two are linked.  I’ve always believed that once jazz is treated in the same way as classical music — as an essentially dead music written by dead people — then we’re really in trouble.  When the Federal Government is buying into that categorization, I think that’s a pretty good sign that the idea has caught hold.

2 ) Smaller percentages of adults attended performing arts events than in previous years

Between 2002 and 2008, jazz experienced a decrease in audience attendance for the first time since the NEA has been publishing this survey.  That by itself is no good, obviously, and it’s worse when you consider that the rate of decline appears to be accelerating.  This is due in large part to the fact that jazz is not attracting new listeners, which takes us to the next finding:

5 ) Long term trends suggest fundamental shifts in the relationship between age and arts attendance.

This is the one that stood out the most in terms of jazz participation.  The median age for the US population increased from 39 to 45 between 1982 and 2008; the median age for those who listen to jazz increased from 29 to 46 during that same time.  That’s a 17 year increase in median age over the past 26 years, meaning that very, very few younger people are joining the ranks of jazz fans.  Percentage-wise, the overall size of the jazz audience between the age of 18 and 24 decreased by over ten percentage points, a rate of decline of nearly 60%!  There are simply not very many people my age or younger who care about jazz anymore.  Not a good sign for the music to continue to have an audience.  As a comparison, the classical music audience only increased in median age by nine years in the same time span.

Jazz was once a hip thing where you’d show off your LPs with your buddies and eagerly await the next Wayne Shorter release.  Today, the dynamic has changed.  I first noticed this trend when I ran a jazz show for my college radio station a few years ago: all of the really cool stuff was back in the LP section, where students had collected a bunch of really neat and varied stuff to play on their numerous jazz shows.  In my time, there were a bunch of weak promo CDs that nobody had listened to (nor should they have); the station’s music budget had completely shifted to indie rock.  At one point, I was the station’s only jazz DJ.

6 ) Arts activity rises with education level.  Yet even the most educated Americans are participating less than before.

This is another interesting point that shows how the jazz audience has changed.  Among college-educated arts-goers, jazz didn’t take nearly as bad of a hit as classical music, opera, ballet or non-musical plays.  I believe this has to do with the fact that many of those youngsters listening to jazz in the 80s have since received college degrees.  As a result, jazz is catching up to the other art forms mentioned as a music that is appreciated more by better-educated Americans.  This is also consistent with the growth of jazz as a field of academic discourse since the mid-1970s.

7 ) Adults generally are creating or performing at lower rates — despite opportunities for displaying their work online.

Here’s where the silver lining for jazz starts to appear in the NEA findings.  While every other category of performing arts saw statistically significant declines, jazz has held steady in terms of adult participation in performance.  That also speaks to my general perception of jazz today: most of the people I know who dig it can play it to some degree.

I would posit that this is especially true among the younger generation of jazz fans.  I believe this because our exposure to the music is very different from that of the older generation of jazz enthusiasts.  Ted Gioia, for example, posted a very enjoyable read about his coming of age as a jazz fan: he found out about it through books and magazines.  Of course, it’s almost becoming redundant to talk about the demise of the jazz print media these days …

8 ) Most Americans who enjoy artwork and performances on the Internet do so frequently

Again, good news for jazz, as so much energy is being put into figuring out how to make the music viable online.  I don’t think it’s particularly revolutionary to suggest that the Internet holds the key to the future of jazz as far as distribution, marketing and audience goes.

9 ) As in prior years, more Americans view or listen to broadcasts and recordings of arts events than attend them live

No surprise here — however, as we consider the changing demographic of the new generation of jazz fans, it is important to reconsider the aesthetic of jazz recordings.  We’re well past the LP glory days of Kind of Blue and A Love Supreme.  Today, jazz remains relevant because of the nature of the improvised performance and the virtuosity and expressivity of acoustic instrumentalists.  How that translates to the digital age remains to be seen.

10 ) Schools and religious institutions engage many adults in live arts events

Most of my peers came into the music through either their family or through school.  I was incredibly fortunate to learn from Ben Medler, a hip 25-year-old at the time who turned me onto Miles Davis and Sonny Rollins while teaching me the basics of jazz trombone.  Many others today are being taught about jazz through their schools, and I believe that is slowly becoming the main source of “market share” as far as jazz exposure in adolescence goes.  This shift is having an important effect on the tastes of the new generation of jazz fans.

11 ) School-aged children often attend performances outside school, according to their parents

This reinforces the emerging power of our educational institutions to shape the tastes of the next generation of the musical audience.  Of particular import, I believe, is the emphasis on helping kids understand the beauty and power of musical expressivity through acoustic instruments and one’s own voice, to contrast with the exclusively digital interface that most young people now encounter with regards to their musical experience.

Overall, the news is pretty dire.  The audience is shrinking.  New fans aren’t finding the music.  Avenues that have brought thousands of jazz fans into the fold in the past are dying.  The educational establishment lacks a central purpose with regards to jazz education.  However, I believe that the way forward can also be found inside the numbers.  The NEA survey reflects the inevitable trending of the jazz audience; the key will be how those who care about the future of jazz work together to adapt to the changing reality.

About arodjazz

Writer, trombonist, and PhD Candidate in Ethnomusicology exploring the complexity of today's jazz world
This entry was posted in Education and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The NEA Arts Participation Summary: Jazz Breakdown

  1. Chris Rich says:

    Nice work Alex, The NEA also has a 3 volume pdf survey and useful stuff in their annual report.

    Now as regards classical. I have a piece in mind on that problem. Think of classical as of a piece with the general looting done by the wealthiest 5 percent in America, the rentier class.

    Here in Boston, the stodgy BSO has an annual running budget of 79 million dollars and is always a loser. They gave James Worthless Taylor 700 grand for a single event out at Tanglewood, a half hour’s bike peddle from his doorstep..sweet, huh?

    BSO also pays their CEO, Mark Volpe a princely salary of 900 plus grand while the CEO of the Syracuse SO makes due with 90 grand a year and isn”t 90 percent less proficient or interesting than BSO.

    Volpe is the son of a former GOP Governor here so it is like class welfare for the rich here.

    BSO’s endowment is around 350 million. Yes the pig looters do take care of their own. Starting pay is 118, 000 a year for ate lamest section violinist.

    My point is that Jazz peeps are overdue for the better compensation and benefits but its characteristics as an idiom want a different framework. Don’t conflate the apples of presentation context with the oranges of basic compensation.

    It is a microcosm of other problems with the rich. Attempts to role their tax rate back to what it was when their god, Reagan was prez are fought furiously. They have wrecked america, pauperized the middle class with a huge debt burden and grand mal looting.

    Classical music is their expensive over compensated and under performing toy. The BSO is a cute little counterpart to Citicorp and AIG.

    Lets give classical budgets a fat haircut and reallocate the loot to those who actually redeem the nation from an otherwise unspectacular and childish emulation of the euromutt homeland.

    • arodjazz says:

      Isn’t that exactly what is happening, though, with organizations like Jazz @ Lincoln Center and SFJazz? In fact, I remember a conversation with the director of SFJazz in which he explicitly stated that he was trying to run a jazz organization modeled after the symphony.

      Is it really in our best interest for jazz to become the symphony-ized dead little brother of classical music? I’m not sure. Regardless, there’s a lot of momentum taking things in that direction. Our current educational paradigm supports this as well.

      My hope is that the “grassroots” members of the jazz community will take what they need from the behemoth non-profit presenting organizations without allowing them to monopolize the public’s sense of what jazz is (or more importantly, ISN’T.) I don’t want Wynton or anyone else to be the sole arbiter of what matters for jazz. I believe that the seeds of that solution are being planted today.

  2. Chris Rich says:

    Of course it isn’t and can’t possibly be. I’m just saying, lets work toward an even field regarding compensation.

    If the idioms have comparable roles in the arts world and comparable merit than compensation should be comparable.

    And the education system is another realm for work opportunities that don’t compromise relations. A school just becomes a sponsor of lineage. It provides the artist a place to pass along lore that is more congenial than alternatives.

    Lewis is a bona fide artist who is also a scholar. I saw him when he was last up here and was impressed with the way these two aspects meet in his pianistics. Rutgers gives him a place to meet you and pass along his lore as you too will one day do.

    It is impossible to make an Ellington orchestra in every place with a Juan Tizol and Sam Nanton chair for repertoire imitators. Those old long gone guys are reborn in you in how you incorporate elements of their contributions into your own, Jazz extends. Classical contains, apples and oranges.

    The huge problem with much of jazz ed is the teachers are paint by numbers types who lack lineage. They took classes in some school from some pedagogue who never had much of a real connection to the core of working artists. Nor did any of them show much initiative at inviting artists into their bailiwicks to share there lore with students.

    You have happy coincidences like Roy Campbell meeting Dick Vance from the Henderson Orchestra at a public school Roy attended where Dick was employed. The school provided a setting or the continuation of lineage.

    • arodjazz says:

      I think you’re onto something with the idea of lineage. I’m still conflicted, however, about whether or not jazz and classical music ought to have “comparable roles in the arts world.”

  3. Chris Rich says:

    It isn’t roles per se. In the us at this time we have several idioms existing in different relations to compensation and support. There is folkloric or so called world music. It’s scholars have a secure living and its practitioners are quietly embedded in their communities.

    Then we have jazz and classical. Both have evolved into art music both began as folkloric music. The former is still generally regarded as as a form of pop music and the latter is important and gets tons of money.

    The role jazz has is schizoid where it gets a lot of lip service without corresponding support. Imagine a world where the artists get basic jobs to do what they are doing anyway at the same compensation security as any high school music teacher.

    I think the confusion is in the presentation context. I am trying to maintain that the context will be the same only the pay will change. I have a working space in a building with a gallery that has concerts. They are charming and informal with a jar for donations. You can play here if you end up in boston.

    It doesn’t have the stuffiness of Symphony hall and neither would any other appropriate place for living flowing music. All I care about is the money getting better so my friends won’t have to busk in subways when they are old unless they want to.

    The repertoire ensemble that rightly makes you wary was tried a few years ago and more or less failed as it is stiff and sounds it like the difference between real Bulgarian singer Tatiana Srbinska and a buncha college glee club types trying to do Bulgarian singing, (I’ve witnessed this).

    Tatiana saw she was in some sort of bar and did what she does at home, belts her stuff out like Bessie Smith. The glee club crew sponsors were timid and affected and nearly goofy. It isn’t their culture and so they were precious about it. It is Tatiana’s so she had fun.

    The only difference is Jazz is anyone can join it by connecting to its community and building from there. No License is required. You may find it useful to study all the horrid aspects of classical presentation and preparation from the ultra stressful recital competitions to the ridiculous performance rituals.

    No authentic Jazz person in their right mind, artist or audience is going to put up with that for long. Much of what disturbs you is a childish america trying to emulate its euro parents in the way kids wear mom and dad’s shoes to play ‘dress up’.

  4. Pingback: My Jazz Times Confession « Lubricity

  5. Pingback: Canada, and Beyond! « Lubricity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s