1920's Jazz: Chicago vs. New York

      Although Chicago and New York were both integral to the advancement of jazz music in the 1920’s, I would like to argue that Chicago contributed more overall to the progression of this genre. While Harlem was a major hub for jazz, the initial rise of the genre there was met with deep divisions among the social classes of blacks. There existed two Harlems, one where high-brow African Americans lived and originally did not listen to jazz artists and one where “working-class” blacks lived and thrived off of jazz as a major pillar of their culture (Gioia, 90). While this separation of cultures was occurring in Harlem, Chicago was experiencing an intertwining of the many cultures present there. The dialogue between these various cultures and the jazz musicians of Chicago led to the molding of jazz into something more than it had been in New Orleans: jazz with a “Chicago Style.”

       From New Orleans, however, came many influential jazz musicians to Chicago. Artists like Armstrong, Hines, Morton, Oliver, Noone, and Dodds made this migration in the 1920’s. Among their reasons for migrating was the incentive of financial opportunities: in New Orleans, jazz artists typically earned a few dollars per show, while in Chicago they could earn a hefty forty dollars per week (Gioia, 72). Apart from musicians, many others fled to Chicago in search of prosperity. The city experienced a large influx of roughly fifty thousand blacks who came to work in the country’s factories and mills (“King Oliver,” 37). These blacks were met with fierce competition for jobs; however, they all found their common ground by patronizing local jazz musicians after a long day’s work (Lecture, 1/29/13). The promise of a more successful life not only brought the most influential jazz musicians to Chicago, it also brought the audience these musicians needed to flourish.

       With plenty of talented musicians now in Chicago and a vast audience brought before them, a dialogue opened up between these two groups that took the reins of jazz’s formation and infused with it what is called “Chicago Style.” Gioia writes that this evolution was not explicitly noticed or discussed by musicians, but that this change occurred as a result of changing interests of the genre’s audience (73). This dialogue became more apparent as blacks began to let themselves assimilate more and more into American mass culture. As Liz Cohen states, “by participating in mainstream commercial life, which black Chicagoans did more than their ethnic co-workers, blacks came to feel more independent and influential as a race,” (147-148). This newfound individualism could also be seen in Chicago Style jazz. Part of this style was a focus on the individual – the soloist. Perhaps the greatest soloist of this time was Louis Armstrong, whose hot, driving rhythms and advanced syncopations were wholly unrivaled (Gioia, 58). While Harlem may have had exceptional soloists such as stride piano player James P. Johnson, these musicians did not receive the same level of attention that soloists like Armstrong garnered in Chicago, putting Chicago’s jazz above Harlem’s in terms of broad influence.

       While King Oliver and Armstrong may have been among the most talented jazz artists in 1920’s Chicago, I contend that Bix Beiderbecke and the Austin High School Band were among the most influential jazz artists in the city. The recording of “Nobody’s Sweetheart” that Bix did with the Austin High School Band is referred to in “The Chicagoans” as the epitome of Chicago Style (157). As Eddie Condon mentioned, this recording was largely a response to differing interests of Chicago’s musical audience (“The Chicagoans, 156). This song aimed to satisfy all of these interests at once, further proving that there was a dialogue between the audience and performers that molded jazz into its new Chicago Style. Altogether, jazz in Chicago was thriving in the 1920’s, perpetuated by many different musicians, both black and white.