Tradition and revolution in the music of John Coltrane, illustrated by looking at various interpretations of “My Favorite Things”
Written for the Festschrift for Alfons Michael Dauer. Published in: Bernd Hoffmann & Helmut Rösing (Hgg.): ... Und der Jazz ist nicht von Dauer. Aspekte afro-amerikanischer Musik, Karben 1998, p. 309-332. This is a translation from the German original.John Coltrane is – not without reason – considered one of the most important and influential jazz musicians of the 1960s. His music acts as a link between the bebop-rooted styles of the 1950s and the avant-garde jazz of the 1960s. The free jazz of musicians such as Albert Ayler, Pharoah Sanders, Archie Shepp and others is generally regarded as a kind of musical “revolution”. Coltrane's enormous influence on these same musicians makes him a forerunner of the new music. Experience has shown, however, that the pioneers of revolutions are usually the greatest revolutionaries – they are the ones who break with the old and thus make the new possible. They are also the link between tradition and the avant-garde, without which a revolution would be impossible – and a musical revolution even less so.
When critics listened to musicians such as Ornette Coleman, Cecil Taylor and John Coltrane in the 1960s, they found that something new was emerging that was clearly different from the swing and bebop-influenced music. The quick verdict of the critics was that the free jazz of these musicians was the ideal example of a musical revolution, a revolution that reflected social and societal developments in America in those years or – the hopeful version – anticipated them.
Liberal American cultural theorists in particular, such as the white journalist Frank Kofsky[1] and the black poet LeRoi Jones (Amiri Baraka)[2] were among the proponents of such a theory of revolution. But musicians also acknowledged the political function of their music. Archie Shepp has often expressed himself in this direction[3]; in 1964, a festival at which some of the young avant-garde artists performed was called “October Revolution”[4]; and in 1971 there was even a trio called the Revolutionary Ensemble, which included violinist Leroy Jenkins, bassist Sirone and drummer Frank Clayton.
The political content of these developments concerned titles, the lyrics of vocal pieces, public statements by musicians, participation in political activities, but also, for example, the consistent rejection of jazz performance conventions: free jazz musicians sometimes played extremely long pieces that demanded their audience's full attention. Club owners were anything but happy about this, as it had a direct impact on their drinks sales. As a result, many musicians began organizing their own concerts or opening up new venues for their music. Musical decisions therefore had concrete results in terms of changing working and presentation conditions.
In John Coltrane's music, there are few references to a political statement in his music. Coltrane played jazz standards well into the 1960s. There were also numbers the titles of which referred to black American history – including music history – such as “Africa”, “Spiritual”, “Afro-Blue”, etc. From the mid-1960s onwards, there were more and more compositions the titles of which referred to a new mindset – to Coltrane's fascination with Far Eastern philosophy. His compositions are now called “Peace on Earth”, “Out of This World”, “Compassion”, “Love”, “Serenity”, “Meditations” and so on. At most, titles such as “Reverend King” – an allusion to Dr. Martin Luther King –, “Song of the Underground Railroad” or “Alabama” have a direct political reference[5].
Aside: USA, 1960s
In the wake of the legendary bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama, the black civil rights movement in the United States found a new and influential leader in Dr. Martin Luther King. King was a revolutionary in the sense that he aligned his political work with ideals that aimed for the peaceful coexistence of black and white in American society. The “revolutionary” aspect of King's actions and speeches was therefore to be found in his demand for constitutional civil rights for black people – non-violently, but with the highest moral standards. The assassination of Martin Luther King may very well be seen as evidence that his kind of “peaceful” revolution, which took place “on the soil of the Constitution” and did nothing other than demand this Constitution for all citizens of the United States everywhere and at all times, was far more dangerous for a reactionary and thoroughly racist America than the clear political fronts created by the propaganda of the Black Muslims or later the Black Panther Party.
The Black Muslims attempted to establish new ethical, political and cultural values – with the aim of restoring black Americans' pride in their own origins, history and skin color. The slogan of the late 1950s “Black Is Beautiful” already points to this policy of the Black Muslims. The Muslims provided an illusion-free and therefore quite radical analysis of white American society and thus played an important role in the radicalization of the civil rights movement. Malcolm X, who came from the Black Muslim community but separated from it again in the mid-1960s, became a potential leader of the black proletariat and was probably murdered for this reason. While the slogan “Black Is Beautiful” called for a growing self-confidence of black people in their skin color and their own tradition, the call for “Black Power”, which resounded in America from the mid-1960s, was an even more radical demand for power and self-determination, a demand to break out of the ghetto and thus an attack on the status quo of social conditions in the United States.
During the “hot summer” of 1964, there were "race riots" in New York, Philadelphia and Chicago. In August 1965, there were similar riots in the black neighborhood of Watts in Los Angeles. Despite checks by the federal authorities, the voting procedures in the Southern states were not carried out correctly. In 1966, the growing radicalization of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States led to the founding of the Black Panther Party, which rejected the non-violent policies of Dr. Martin Luther King and his followers and now demanded their rights through violent action. Bobby Seale, Huey P. Newton and Stokeley Carmichael claimed the right to self-arm for themselves and their Black Panthers. The Black Panthers organized their “party” very tightly and even awarded offices with titles such as “Minister of Defence”, “Minister of Information” or “Foreign Minister”[6].
The radicalization of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s subsided in the early 1970s. One reason for this was certainly the changed living conditions of black people in the United States, the causes of which were undoubtedly rooted in the actions of the Civil Rights Movement. The Vietnam trauma, which caused America's political self-confidence to shrink considerably by the end of the 1960s at the latest, also contributed to a softening of the fronts. Civil Rights groups such as the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee), CORE (Congress of Racial Equality), SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Conference), Black Muslims and Black Panthers all contributed in their own way to the fact that the situation not only of the black middle class improved to some extent in the 1970s. (The fact that in recent years there has been an increasing radicalization among blacks, especially in the big city ghettos, and that the still existing black Islamic groups (today: Nation of Islam) have recently experienced considerable growth, is certainly related to the fact that under the policies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush the gap between rich and poor – and thus automatically also the gap between white and black – has widened considerably again.[7], der trotz seiner offen antisemitischen, antifeministischen und homophoben Äußerungen dazu in der Lage war, auch die schwarzen Intellektuellen zu mobilisieren, beispielweise bei dem von der Nation of Islam organisierten „Million Man March“ im Oktober 1995.)
The revolt in jazz
When John Coltrane made a name for himself in the 1950s in various groups around Miles Davis, there was no question of a revolution in the music scene and jazz development. The Miles Davis Quintet or Sextet of the late 1950s was still rooted in what is commonly referred to as hard bop. The modal improvisation style that Davis and Coltrane cultivated together in this group was a logical attempt to further develop the harmonic achievements of bebop. At the same time, however, the formal constrictions of jazz were to be overcome, such as those resulting from the constant stringing together of countless choruses with the same structure and the same harmonic progressions. In modal playing, improvisation was based on a specific modal scale from which the musicians derived the tonal material for their solos. Ultimately, the modal playing style of Davis, Coltrane and others was an attempt to free themselves from the formal dilemma of jazz in those years – the Third Stream, the music of Charles Mingus or the early free jazz of Ornette Coleman or Cecil Taylor were other attempts, but they were started for the same reason[8].
None of this was a revolution by any means. Even Coltrane's first own groups were still musically based on what the saxophonist had made famous with the Miles Davis Quintet: on modal improvisational structures that Coltrane – just like conventional ballads or other changes compositions – combined with sound surfaces, what critics soon called “sheets of sound”[9] . These are irregular groups of notes in which the saxophonist breaks up chords so that he seems to spread out a chordal carpet of sound from his instrument. In his early bands, Coltrane developed this technique to a mastery that explains why he has been regarded as a master and innovator of his instrument since the early 1960s – and not only by younger colleagues.
With his “sheets of sound”, Coltrane went beyond the primarily harmonically oriented modal improvisation style. This was quite logical, since the breaking up of harmonic form in jazz had to be followed by the breaking up of metric form, especially when irregular tone groupings became increasingly important in the phrasing of a musician like Coltrane. Despite all this, however, Coltrane did not abandon the traditional characteristics of jazz until the mid-1960s. He continued to play standards, original compositions on changes and ballads. His sound had his own espressivity, that personal expression that plays such an important role in jazz. His bands still worked with the division of tasks into melody and rhythm section, a division that was questioned by other musicians – Taylor, Coleman.
To put it succinctly: there were far more advanced examples of improvised jazz in the early 1960s. Ornette Coleman and Cecil Taylor had ventured – each in their own way – into freer spheres. Even the Third Stream of Gunther Schuller with improvised parts by Coleman or Eric Dolphy seemed more daring and “revolutionary” than the thoroughly conventional music of Coltrane[10]. At the end of 1962 Coltrane recorded the album “Ballads”, which today could easily be played as party background music without anyone getting upset[11]. “Lush Life”, an album with singer Johnny Hartman, was released at the beginning of 1963[12]. It was not until 1964 that “A Love Supreme”[13] or “Ascension” (1965)[14] and other records that – at least in retrospect – made it possible to understand why Coltrane was considered musically revolutionary.
Im Oktober 1958 und im Juli 1960 ging John Coltrane mit einigen Musikern ins Studio, die gemeinhin der anderen Seite jener Jazzentwicklung zugerechnet werden, die wir als Free Jazz bezeichnen: mit Cecil Taylor (under dessen Namen diese Aufnahmesitzung lief) und Don Cherry. Mit Taylor und dem Trompeter Kenny Dorham entstand 1958 die Platte „Coltrane Time“[15], die an keiner Stelle das überschreitet, was im Hardbop jener Jahre üblich war – abgesehen höchstens von den stilistisch widerborstigen Klaviereinwürfen Taylors. Die Plattensitzung für „The Avant-Garde“[16] von 1960 mit Don Cherry und anderen Musikern aus dem Umfeld Ornette Colemans ist vor allem durch drei Coleman-Kompositionen geprägt sowie durch die Coleman verbundene Spielkonzeption. In beiden Fällen handelt es sich also nicht etwa um eine gleichberechtigte Begegnung Coltranes mit Musikern und Spielkonzepten der damaligen Avantgarde, sondern eher um Sessions, bei denen Coltrane wie eine Art Gaststar wirkt, der sich in das Repertoire und die Spielauffassung seiner Mitmusiker einzupassen hat. Das Ganze ermöglicht somit zwar einen Einblick, inwieweit Coltranes Spielauffassung mit dem Konzept der jungen Avantgarde kompatibel ist, zeigt aber vor allem die Anpassungsfähigkeit Coltranes in unterschiedlichen musikalischen Umgebungen. In „The Avant-Garde“ wirkt Coltrane wie ein – durchaus willkommener – Fremdkörper in der bis zum fehlenden Klavier hin durchgestalteten Ornette Coleman-Besetzung.
Ornette Coleman and Cecil Taylor never referred directly to Coltrane in order to justify their own playing concept. There were fundamental differences between the three musicians. Coltrane stood for harmonic, Taylor for tonal and Coleman for melodic/rhythmic upheavals[17]. Musicians around and after Coltrane were therefore primarily concerned with harmonic-sound innovations; the Coleman group concentrated on the development of melodic-motivic improvisation; and the musicians who gathered around Taylor were particularly interested in group sound, sound-oriented collective improvisation and thoroughly emotional musical communication.
The group around Coleman was all too easily suspected of “intellectualism”, as they had intensive contacts with the Third Streamers around Gunther Schuller and John Lewis – Coleman took part in some of the Orchestra USA concerts, with which Schuller and Lewis wanted to present their ideas to a wider public. However, this contact with a kind of “intellectual” jazz scene made them highly suspect as musical “revolutionaries”. With their idea of bringing together different traditions, didn't Schuller, Lewis and other third streamers want to soften the “Afro-American heritage” and impose an aesthetic value system on black music that had been imported from Europe?[18]?
Cecil Taylor's apparent break with many obvious traditions was no less problematic. His concept was too individual and stubborn, too little based on understanding or at least emotional empathy, for this music to have achieved the charisma of revolution. And perhaps this is precisely one reason why, instead of those who seemed to go much further musically than Coltrane, it was precisely Coltrane who had the reputation of being a revolutionary.
In the 1960s, John Coltrane was appropriated by a number of spokespeople for the black cause, not least because his music seemed to stand much more clearly in a soul and blues-influenced tradition than was the case with Taylor or Coleman. His turn to Far Eastern attitudes was also very much on the same wavelength as developments of the time. The turn to Islam, which was so popular in black society in America in those years, was nothing other than the search for a new spiritual or religious identity – a conscious rejection of Christianity, which had shaped African-American history so significantly, but was still seen by the angry black men of the 1960s primarily as a religion of the white world. Coltrane's spiritual turn to Far Eastern ways of thinking and living was far less of a political statement than the newly adopted Islamic names of Black Muslims[19]. Nevertheless, the effect of his new appearance – perhaps only because of the interpretation by the black cultural popes of the time – was a thoroughly political one.
Coltrane and the aesthetic discourse of the 1960s
The myth of the revolutionary Coltrane can really only be understood with knowledge of the aesthetic discussion of the 1960s, in which black cultural theorists such as LeRoi Jones (Amiri Baraka), Ron Karenga and others played an important role.
Karengas Auffassung von schwarzer Kunst ist schnell zusammengefaßt: „All art“, so sagt er, „must reflect and support the Black Revolution, and any art that does not discuss and contribute to the revolution is invalid“.[20]
In 1965 LeRoi Jones writes 1965 about John Coltrane's music: "Trane is a mature swan whose wing span was a whole new world. But he also showed us how to murder the popular song. To do away with weak Western forms.“[21] In his autobiography, Jones further describes this “revolutionary” element in Coltrane's music: “(...) he'd play sometimes chorus after chorus, taking the music apart before our ears, splintering the chords and sounding each note, resounding it, playing it backwards and upside down trying to get to something else. And we heard our own search and travails, our own reaching for new definition. Trane was our flag.”[22]
And Miles Davis adds: "Trane’s music and what he was playing during the last two or three years of his life represented, for many blacks, the fire and passion and rage and anger and rebellion and love that they felt, especially among the young black intellectuals and revolutionaries of that time. He was expressing through music what H. Rap Brown and Stokely Carmichael and the Black Panthers and Huey Newton were saying with their words, what the Last Poets and Amiri Baraka were saying in poetry. He was their torchbearer in jazz, now ahead of me. He played what they felt inside and were expressing through riots – 'burn, baby, burn' – that were taking place everywhere in this country during the 1960s. It was all about revolution for a lot of young black people – Afro hairdos, dashikis, black power, fists raised in the air. Coltrane was their symbol, their pride – their beautiful, black revolutionary pride."[23]
The American literary scholar William J. Harris places Coltrane in the tradition of signifyin', the coding and encoding of black tradition, which has persisted in black American popular culture right up to the present day[24]. Coltrane, he says, uses this tradition of signifyin' in relation to the white song tradition when he musically dissects a musical hit like “My Favorite Things”, seemingly creating a parody, but one that is well within the black tradition of appropriating white values (language, gestures, religion, imagery, etc.)[25]. And this kind of appropriation and simultaneous re-evaluation of a white musical aesthetic is probably what made Coltrane's music considered revolutionary by many spokespeople of the 1960s, even though the pronounced individuality of his music was completely at odds with the concept of “socialist realism” that many of the black spokespeople of those years were leaning on[26].
If one understands Coltrane's music as LeRoi Jones does, one may indeed see a parallel to the demands of the young angry theorists, the Black Nationalists, who became the spokesmen of the Black movement in the United States from the mid-1960s. But can such a concept really be found in Coltrane's music? Isn't Coltrane still firmly rooted in the tradition of jazz appropriation of musical material, even in his late recordings? Is there really a difference whether Coleman Hawkins interprets “Body and Soul”, Charlie Parker “Just Friends” or John Coltrane “My Favorite Things”? An analysis of the various versions of the latter composition recorded by Coltrane can clarify what Jones means by “taking apart” the popular song, by breaking up the formal structure for which Coltrane himself functionalizes the original composition.
“My Favorite Things”, composition
„My Favorite Things“ wurde vom Komponisten Richard Rodgers und vom Textdichter Oscar Hammerstein II. 1959 für das Musical „The Sound of Music“ verfaßt. Die Komposition hat eine relativ einfache Themenstruktur (A1-A2-A3-B) und ist auch harmonisch eher simpel konzipiert (vgl. Abbildung 1). Die Teile A1 und A2 stehen in e-Moll, A3 in der Dur-Variante E-Dur, der Teil B schließlich führt in die Dur-Parallele G-Dur. Den Teilen A2 und A3 steht jeweils ein Vamp voran – vor A2 in e-Moll, vor A3 in E-Dur. Der 3/4-Takt ergibt sich aus dem Musical-Plot, der im Österreich des Jahres 1938 angesiedelt ist.
„My Favorite Things“, 1960[27]
Coltrane's most famous recording from October 1960[28] war eine der ersten und ist sicher die bekannteste Jazz-Version des Musical-Hits. Die Grundstruktur des Arrangements arbeitet mit einer konstanten Abwechslung von thematischen Teilen und Improvisation über dem durchgehenden Dreierrhythmus von Klavier, Baß und Schlagzeug (vgl. Formschema Abbildung 2). Alle Thementeile hintereinander erklingen in korrekter Reihenfolge zum Schluß – in der ersten Hälfte unterbrochen von langen Improvisationspartien. Ausgangspunkt der modalen Improvisationsteile der Aufnahme sind jeweils die Einleitungs-vamps der einzelnen Formteile (s.o.) in e-Moll bzw. E-Dur. In der Gewichtung zwischen Thema und Improvisation allerdings entsteht dabei der Klangeindruck, das die Improvisationsteile den jeweils vorangegangenen A-Teilen folgen, nicht wie ein vamp auf die jeweils nächsten hinzielen (Vergleich des generellen Formverlaufs der Originalkomposition und der Coltrane’schen Versionen vgl. Abbildung 1). Bei der Themenvorstellung zu Beginn sind diese Improvisationsteile mit acht bzw. 16 Takten noch relativ kurz, nehmen im Klavier- bzw. Sopransaxophonsolo dann bis zu 18 Achttaktern ein. A1 und A2 des Sopransaxophonsolos sind in den Improvisationsablauf eingepaßt, A3 und ein verfremdeter B-Teil werden – ohne zwischengeschaltete Improvisation – zum thematischen Abschluß der Aufnahme. Während McCoy Tyners Solo kaum melodische Erfindung enthält und über lange Strecken wie ein ausgedehnter vamp wirkt – und damit eigentlich ganz in der Atmosphäre der Originalkomposition bleibt –, entwickelt Coltrane dynamische Steigerungspartien, die schließlich zum jeweils neuen Themenstatement zurückführen. Die stete Abwechslung thematischer und improvisierter Partien innerhalb der Struktur der zugrundeliegenden Komposition – also nicht in der im Jazz üblichen Chorusreihung – ist Programm, und so wirkt es auch ganz folgerichtig, daß der B-Teil erst am Schluß der Aufnahme erklingt. Die ganze Realisation ist damit quasi eine Erweiterung der inneren Struktur von „My Favorite Things“, wobei erst das vollständige Statement aller Teile in Sopransaxophonsolo und thematischem Abschluß beim (vorgebildeten) Hörer das Schlußerlebnis bewirkt.
“My Favorite Things”, 1962
In a live recording from the Village Vanguard from 1962[29] stößt der Flötist Eric Dolphy zum klassischen Coltrane-Quartett. Dolphy stammt nicht – wie der spätere Coltrane-Partner Pharoah Sanders – aus der Coltrane-Schule, sondern bildete seinen Stil eher aus Third-Stream-zugeneigten Erfahrungen in den Gruppen Chico Hamiltons und in der New Yorker Szene um Gunther Schuller und John Lewis. Er arbeitet in seinem Solo über „My Favorite Things“ mit motivischen Floskeln, die – an Anfang und Ende der Improvisation gesetzt – fest geformte Bestandteile seines „Favorite Things“-Solos in jener Zeit bei Coltrane zu sein scheinen. Er nutzt Überblastechniken in einem „zahmeren“ Sinne als dies bei Pharoah Sanders und späteren Free-Jazz-Musikern der Fall ist. Coltranes Sopransaxophonsolo in dieser Fassung zeichnet sich dadurch aus, daß die Intensität seiner Improvisation scheinbar mit der erreichten Tonhöhe zusammenhängt und nicht so sehr durch rhythmische oder klangliche Elemente bewirkt wird. Mitten im Solo finden sich motivisch-thematische Bezüge. Im Ablauf der Realisation aber gleicht die Aufnahme dem Ablaufkonzept von 1960.
“My Favorite Things”, 1963
Eine Live-Einspielung vom Newport Jazz Festival des Jahres 1963 läßt konzeptionelle Konstanten und bewußte Änderungen der Struktur erkennen. In der Einspielung, die auf der LP „Selflessness“ veröffentlicht wurde[30]the standardization of Coltrane's thematic statement becomes clear once again: in both the early and later interpretations, it repeatedly leads to an ecstatic climax, from which either the new beginning of the theme emerges or the stylized improvisation develops. The typical Coltrane style of playing – the breaking up of chords, the sequencing of scale fragments etc. – also plays an important role in the 1963 version. As in 1960 and 1962, but unlike in later recordings, the waltz rhythm of the theme is retained at every point in 1963, so that a thematic frame of reference exists throughout the realization – albeit broken up by extended modal phases. More than in the previous versions, Coltrane's solo before the final theme in 1963 has the effect of a long extended cadenza which is resolved in the theme – an effect which is reinforced by the fact that this final theme is immediately followed by another modal improvisation by Coltrane.
“My Favorite Things”, 1966
From May 1966[31] comes a live version, which also shows considerable conceptual differences to the versions discussed so far. Its altered concept is also repeated in other recordings from the mid-1960s[32]. In addition to Coltrane on soprano saxophone and in the dialog passages on bass clarinet, Pharoah Sanders (tenor saxophone, flute), Alice Coltrane (piano), Jimmy Garrison (bass), Rashied Ali and Emanuel Rahim (drums) play in the recording of a concert from the New York club Village Vanguard.
Coltrane himself commented on the changes to the concept of “My Favorite Things”:
"In 'My Favorite Things' my solo has been following a general path. I don’t want it to be that way because the free part in there, I wanted it to be just something where we could improvise on just the minor chord and the major chord, but it seems like it gets harder and harder to really find something different on it. I’ve got several landmarks that I know I’m going to get to, so I try to play something in between that’s different and keep hoping I hear something different on it. But it usually goes always the same way every night. I think that 3/4 has something to do with this particular thing. I find that it’s much easier for me to change and be different in a solo on 4/4 tunes because I can play some tunes I’ve been playing for five years and might hear something different, but it seems like that 3/4 has kind of got a straight jacket on us there!"[33]
Accordingly, one of the most important changes in the interpretation of the mid-60s is the abandonment of a continuous 3/4 meter in the improvisation parts as well as the abandonment of the thematic statement of A1 and A2 in the second section, in which free improvisation predominates (cf. the flow chart of this recording, figure 3).
Ein Klaviersolo, wie es in den Versionen mit McCoy Tyner immer gleich nach der Themenexposition zu finden ist, fehlt in der Fassung vom Mai 1966. Nach einem fünf-minütigen, thematisch unabhängigen – und auf der Schallplattenveröffentlichung auf die andere Plattenseite gepreßten – Baßeinleitung beginnt Coltrane mit einem langen modalen vamp, in dem er das harmonische Material ausbreitet – über geduldigen Klavierakkorden und intensivem Schlagzeugspiel. Unter dem ersten Themenstatement hält die Rhythmusgruppe die modale Atmosphäre bei, so daß die Melodie des eingängigen Themas harmonisch verfremdet scheint, damit aber zugleich der Weg geöffnet ist zu einer Improvisation, deren thematischer Zusammenhang mehr im Atmosphärischen liegt als in den vorangegangenen Fassungen. Das folgende Themenstatement ist immerhin sehr viel deutlicher – hier tritt die Themenform weit stärker in den Vordergrund.
Coltrane steps back and Pharoah Sanders begins his tenor saxophone solo in the low register – as mentioned, without a thematic statement. But Sanders' solo also seems to have far less of a direct melodic connection to the song theme than Coltrane's playing before. There is no longer a harmonic outline, tonal references can only be guessed at in places, and the metrical basis is also completely broken up. Sanders' screeching, overblown chains of sound sometimes seem like the playing of a man possessed. Coltrane can be heard in the background with driving calls on the bass clarinet. After an energetic climax, Sanders' intensity drops, only to rise again immediately afterwards in a dialog between the two saxophonists - the transition, as it were, to Coltrane's soprano saxophone solo. Coltrane works over a clearly reduced percussive ground and a modal basis that now shines through again. He uses harmonically/modally identifiable chains of motifs, scale breaks in which the pitch reached in each case indicates the intensity of the music – not rhythmic, tonal or other parameters. The whole thing has an etude-like effect over long stretches - short scales/chord breaks that chase across the entire instrument in sequences. A final thematic statement (A3 and B) seems to want to take back what has happened in between, creating an unworldly – and therefore conciliatory? – atmosphere.
It is astonishing how the familiar, chant-like theme seems to harmonize the entire 20-minute musical event almost retrospectively, how it perhaps actually seems a little as if the breaking apart of the thematic foundation – the “revolution” against the rule of chorus and harmony – is the basis of a new order, the prerequisite for a complete appropriation of the material. But all this – as must be emphasized again and again – is by no means new. Many musical concepts are ultimately based on the idea of “per aspera ad astra” – whether in the mind of the composer or in the reflections of the theorist – above all the sonata form that so defined European music of the 18th and 19th centuries, in which the initial theme is broken up and an examination of the musical material takes place, which ultimately leads to the theme appearing “purified”, as it were, in a new light in the recapitulation. Of course, Coltrane, or jazz in general, is a long way from being able to be compared with the formal models of European music history. And yet, especially with such clear and memorable themes as in “My Favorite Things”, the arguments of LeRoi Jones are quite comparable to those of the theorists of the 19th century. On a somewhat crudely defined musical terrain, they see the path described here that black art, black society, “black power” must take: in an appropriation of white music.
A comparison of the different versions of “My Favorite Things” by John Coltrane reveals the following:
Ein Grund für die Faszination Coltranes durch den relativ simplen Walzer von Rodgers und Hammerstein mag gerade darin begründet liegen, daß es sich um sehr einfache und einprägsame Harmonien handelt, um eine Melodik, die eigentlich diese Harmonik nur noch unterstützt, um eine Reihungsform (A1-A2-A3-B), in der ein Aufbrechen des Chorus einfacher ist als in der im popular song sonst üblichen Reprisenbarform. Schon Coltranes Themenstatement zeigt, welche von üblichen Chorusstrukturen abweichende Vorstellung der Saxophonist von einem optimalen Ablauf über „My Favorite Things“ hatte: Er deutet den in der ursprünglichen Komposition kurzen vamp als Hauptmoment, ja geradezu als Ziel- und Höhepunkt seiner Interpretation. Coltranes Konzept bewerkstelligt den Aufbruch der musikalischen Form damit aus der ursprünglichen Komposition heraus und mündet in einen Formverlauf, in welchem alle Bestandteile – Einleitung, thematische Partien, Soli – dem dramatischen konzipierten Gesamtverlauf untergeordnet sind, ohne das die Solisten dabei eingeschränkt wären. Wenn erst am Ende das vollständige Thema erklingt, wird dem Hörer ganz unbewußt der Zusammenhang dieser so unaufdringlich durchkonzipierten Form bewußt.
Coltrane kombiniert nebenbei meisterhaft traditionelle Elemente – ein Walzerthema, das in durchaus tänzelnder Manier formuliert wird – und freie Improvisation — wobei die Freiheit vor allem die harmonische Freiheit ist, die Coltrane in den späten 1950er Jahren durch seine Meisterschaft in der modalen Improvisation errungen hat. Coltrane ist es gelungen, diese modale Improvisationsweise auf eine Komposition des american popular song anzuwenden, nicht – wie bei Davis – auf eigens geschriebene Stücke, denen das modale Schema von vornherein zugrundelag. Und dazu entwickelt er sie auch noch aus der Komposition selbst heraus – gewiß ein Musterbeispiel für den prozeß des signifyin‘ in afro-amerikanischer Musik. Diese Art eines „revolutionären Aktes“, den Coltrane der Musik angedeihen läßt, diesen signifyin‘-Prozeß des Umdeutens eines Schlagers in genuine afro-amerikanische Musik meinte LeRoi Jones – der ja 1965 nur die frühen Aufnahmen kannte –, wenn er das Aufbrechen überkommener Strukturen in Coltranes My Favorite Things hervorhob.
Coltrane's late phase is often characterized by the fact that the saxophonist had gathered together all the musical experiences and developments he had gathered and undergone in earlier years, that he could now “draw from the full”, so to speak. Perhaps there really is something to the characterization of the “mature phase” with which various critics have tried to describe Coltrane's years 1965 to 1967. Such maturity is characterized, for example, by the fact that Coltrane did not follow any of the previously chosen paths with “blinkers”, but used the vocabulary, the musical grammar that made up his personal style, quite inconsistently – namely in the service of the music (!). Ekkehard Jost writes with reference to Coltrane's last years: “Modality was hardly used any more; and the exception, namely the recording of the old standard ‘My Favorite Things’, which is so closely linked to Coltrane's career, only confirms the rule here too.”[34] In fact, however, the recording with Pharoah Sanders shows that this modal principle is not always carried out consistently in the late years, that other moments are more prominent, whether they are called emotionality, spirituality or transcendence of the musical material – all terms that are often used in connection with Coltrane.
Conclusion
When people talk about Coltrane as a musical innovator or even a revolutionary, they are primarily referring to the influence that the saxophonist had on the musicians who followed him - on saxophonists and other instrumentalists alike. And it is not only the recordings of 1966 or 1967 that are generally meant, but also those of the Atlantic years around 1960, the Impulse records from 1961 to 1965, when one thinks of Coltrane, whose virtuosity and playing concept was so influential on the development of jazz. In “My Favorite Things” it becomes particularly clear how the concept for a piece that was taken into the repertoire as a feature for modal improvisation can change over the years to accommodate new forms of musical expression, without the free playing of the mid-1960s being understood as a complete rebellion against the fixed scheme of the early recordings. The label of the revolutionary Coltrane – however well it may characterize the new attitude – obscures those qualities that are far more to the fore in the saxophonist than the subversive: his ability to deal creatively with the musical tradition from which he came.
[1] Frank Kofsky's articles have appeared in the leading jazz magazine Down Beat as well as in other influential US magazines. See Frank Kofsky: Black Nationalism and the Revolution in Music, New York 1970, a collection of essays originally published in the mid-1960s.
[2] LeRoi Jones: Blues People. The Negro Experience in White America and the Music that Developed from It, New York 1963; ders.: Black Music, New York 1967
[3] Cf.–- representative of many similar sources – Valerie Wilmer: Jazz People, London 1977, p. 153 ff (chapter “The Fire This Time”); Archie Shepp: An Artist Speaks Bluntly, in: Down Beat, 32/26 (16.Dezember 1965), S. 11, 42
[4] Cf. Ekkehard Jost: Sozialgeschichte des Jazz in den USA, Frankfurt/Main 1982, S. 212 f; Dan Morgenstern und Martin Williams: The October Revolution. Two Views of the Avant Garde in Action, in: Down Beat, 31/30 (19.November 1964), S. 15, 33
[5] Africa auf Africa/Brass (Impulse 6); Spiritual auf Coltrane Live at the Village Vanguard (Impulse 10); Afro-Blue auf Coltrane Live at Birdland (Impulse 50); Peace on Earth auf Infinity (Impulse 9225); Out of This World auf Live in Seattle (Impulse 9202-2); Compassion, Love und Serenity auf Meditations(Impulse 9110); Reverend King auf Cosmic Music (Impulse 9148); Song of the Underground Railroad auf Africa/Brass Vol. 2 (Impulse 9273); Alabama auf Coltrane Live at Birdland (Impulse 50). Incidentally, Coltrane himself felt that the political function of his music was of secondary importance. In an interview shortly before his death, he answered the question “Quelques musiciens ont dit qu'il ya un rapport entre certaines des idées de Malcolm [X] et la nouvelle musique. Le penses-tu?": Je crois que la musique étant une expression du coeur et de l’être humain, elle exprime justement ce qui se passe, la totalité des expériences de la vie à un moment donné. Cf. Frank Kofsky: John Coltrane. Un interview inédite, in: Le Jazzophone, 16 (November 1983), S. 38.
[6] See Gene Marine: The Black Panthers, New York 1969
[7] About Louis Farrakhan cf. Henry Louis Gates: The Charmer, in: The New Yorker, 9. April & 8. Mai 1996, S. 116-131
[8] On the developments between bebop and free jazz, see Wolfram Knauer: Zwischen Bebop und Free Jazz. Komposition und Improvisation des Modern Jazz Quartet, Mainz 1990
[9] Ekkehard Jost: Free Jazz. Stilkritische Untersuchungen zum Jazz der 60er Jahre, Mainz 1975, S. 114 f
[10] On the significance of the Third Stream in those years, see Wolfram Knauer, Zwischen Bebop und Free Jazz, S. 80-82, 310-316
[11] Impulse 32
[12] Impulse 40
[13] Impulse 77
[14] Impulse 95
[15] United Artists 5638
[16] Atlantic 1451
[17] Cf. A.B. Spellman: liner notes for The Avantgarde, Atlantic 1451
[18] Cf. Gunther Schuller: Third Stream Redefined, in: Saturday Review, 44 (13. Mai 1961), S. 54 f.
[19] Among jazz musicians, examples can be found in Art Blakey (Abdullah Ibn Buhaina), Kenny Clarke (Liaquat Ali Salaam), Yusef Lateef (birth name: William Evans) and others.
[20] Ron Karenga: Black Cultural Nationalism [1968], in: Addison Gayle, Jr. (Hg.): The Black Aesthetic, New York 1971, S. 33
[21] LeRoi Jones: Black Music, New York 1967, S. 174
[22] LeRoi Jones: The Autobiography of LeRoi Jones/Amiri Baraka, New York 1974, S. 176
[23] Miles Davis & Quincy Troupe: Miles. The Autobiography, new York 1989, S. 285-286
[24] William J. Harris: The Poetry and Poetics of Amiri Baraka, Columbia 1985, S. 19 f.
[25] Henry Louis Gates also sees Coltrane's interpretation of My Favorite Things as a formal parody of the musical hit. He emphasizes: Resemblance thus can be evoked cleverly by dissemblance. Vgl. Henry Louis Gates, Jr.: The Signifying Monkey. A Theory of African-American Literary Criticism, New York 1988, S. 104
[26] In this context, LeRoi Jones/Amiri Baraka also points directly to My Favorite Things, cf. Amiri Baraka The „Blues Aesthetic“ and the „Black Aesthetic“. Aesthetics as the Continuing Political History of a Culture, in: Black Music Research Journal, 11/2 (1992), S. 106
[27] The four selected Coltrane versions of My Favorite Things are intended to illustrate the development of Coltrane's interpretation of this piece. In addition to the recordings mentioned in the text, there are several other versions that have been released on record, mainly in – often illegal – live recordings. Yasuhiro Fujioka provides an overview of all of Coltrane's recordings: John Coltrane. A Discography and Musical BiographyFuijoka alone lists 47 Coltrane versions of My FavoriteThings – although he counts both published and non-published recordings and recordings.
[28] Atlantic 1361
[29] Jazz Anthology/Musidisc 30 JA 5184. another version of My Favorite Things with Eric Dolphy comes from a live recording from November 1961 (Rhino R2 71255: John Coltrane Anthology: The Last Giant)
[30] Impulse 9161
[31] Impulse AS 9124
[32] E.g. Tokyo 1966, Impulse IMR 9036 C
[33] Quoted from Ralph J. Gleason, liner notes for John Coltrane: Olé Coltrane, Atlantic 1373
[34] Ekkehard Jost: Free Jazz. Stilkritische Untersuchungen zum Jazz der 60er Jahre, Mainz 1975, S. 111
EN 
DE