by Harold McMillan

June is Jazz in Austin

It's the first week of June and I am not up to my neck in pre-production craziness. For the first time in 10 years I am not trying to tie-up loose ends, get contracts signed, keep the bank account in the black, get everything ready for Jazz Fest.

For the last ten years, June for me has been all about joy and pain, hot fun in the summertime, good music and team work. For the last ten years for me June has been all about, first, producing the Clarksville (now Austin) Jazz and Arts Festival, then trying as best I could to recover from it. During the course of the 1990s, for me, June really has been "Jazz Month in Austin." And although we have moved the Austin Jazz and Arts Festival to September for 1999, this June still looks pretty good for jazz in Austin.

By the time you read this, Dianne Reeves, Jimmy Smith, Jack McDuff, Roy Hargrove, Jimmy McGriff, Tito Puente, Eddie Palmieri, Earl Harvin, and a host of equally stellar sidemen will have come, performed, and left Austin jazz fans all the more enriched from their passing through. Chucho Valdez is due in town soon. Tina Marsh's annual summer Creative Opportunity Orchestra concert at Laguna Gloria is on the horizon and the clubs have beefed up their jazz offerings for the month. Indeed, for 1999, June IS Jazz Month in Austin. To be very clear, for Austin these bookings, this programming is some heavy stuff for such a short time span, regardless of the month. Whether you went to or will go to these shows or not, you gotta commend the producers for bringing to Austin a taste of the international jazz scene. We don't get nearly enough of this stuff. And the real deal here is that unless these shows turn, unless these shows pay for themselves, you are not likely to see this kind of adventurous booking around here on a regular basis.

And you know what, this ain't really about being adventurous at all. In any major urban market in America these shows -- including the CO2 -- would be safe risks for the producer/promoters. Why oh why would a show with the last of the major dudes of B-3 organ be a heavy risk? Why would a Dianne Reeves concert -- an elegant-but-down-home, sit-down show in the city's premier concert hall, featuring one of the heiresses apparent to the jazz diva throne -- be a big risk in any other major American city? On the heels of her new Blue Note album, in a city that has never hosted one of her concerts, the show should be a sellout, right ? Why would the city's only contemporary big band showcase ensemble for new improvisatory works, Tina and CO2, not be able to get the attention of local media and jazz heads in its hometown?

Why oh why does Austin continue to be stuck in this place of claiming to be the live music capital of the universe, of being the cultural capital of Texas, and still be so far outside of the expectations of us folks who have some idea of what these attributions would really mean in another major market, major cultural center, major American city that actually has an urbane cultural scene? Perhaps I've answered my own questions here. Perhaps we Austinites should adopt a more realistic view of the urban reality with which we are working. The results of this month's jazz offerings will offer us some clues on this.

Is the Austin cultural scene really up to all of the hype from the Chamber of Commerce and the Convention and Visitor's Bureau? Is it just marketing hype? Or should these folks try to be more specific about their claims? Maybe Austin should claim to be the bar band capital of the universe. I ain't got the answer, I'm just a participant observer.

Maybe the folks who identify themselves (ourselves) as the jazz community ought to make sure that we are represented in all of these "official" discussions about the music scene here. Maybe, traditionally, jazzheads just ain't into that kinda political and marketing crap. Maybe that means a new tradition ought to emerge. Maybe jazzheads should realize that we need to stand up and be counted -- be counted in terms of our buying power, our influence in the local market, be counted in terms of what we will support for the commercial interests in this market. Maybe we need to show up and let the commercial sector know we are a reasonable risk, if indeed we really are. Maybe we need to make sure that those traditional funders of the classical arts -- and those others who always seem to put their money behind the myriad of Austin beer parties and rock shows -- know that jazz is a great marketing tool for their good names (and logos).

Jazz in Austin needs to more consistently demonstrate a greater potential for bankable market share in the local music scene. In short, jazz in Austin needs to make somebody (musicians at the top of the list) some money. Jazz in Austin needs to be supported, underwritten, treated like the important non-commercial entity that it is. The challenge is to do that AND make somebody some money (and yes, I do know that what I just said is really a contradiction. But maybe that is how we should try to look at this). If real and significant corporate underwriting is not happening, jazz has to do commerce. And that should not be totally offensive to us. Unless either or both becomes reality, touring jazz in Austin will be the thing we want, but can't afford.

From my perspective, much of the cure for the ailment has everything to do with proactive involvement of traditional financial supporters of the arts and cultural programs in this city. If Dell (mentioned here simply as an example of the new high tech industry arts patrons of late) gives millions of dollars to support the continuation in Austin of European classical arts traditions, why can't they do more to ensure that jazz lives in Austin? Maybe in time, this group of new Austinites will figure this one out and support a wider range of worthy cultural causes. And to be fair, those of us in the jazz business, in the nonprofit arts world need to engage these folks in dialogue that educates them on our perspective and the potential benefit of supporting diversity in this fast paced, growing market.

In the meanwhile...

This June, for the first time in recent memory, commercial promoters (Mark Collins and partners/backers of the Mercury Club) are actually stepping out there and offering us a unified package of world class jazz goods that merits the title of "festival." This is generally, at least in Austin, the province of the nonprofit cultural arts organizations. To their credit, the Mercury has for the past year done a very good job of presenting artists and shows that otherwise would have passed Austin by. With Jimmy Smith and variations of Roy Hargrove ensembles providing the consistent core of their most popular and successful touring shows, the Mercury has done much to turn new audiences on to jazz music. For the first time in years, there are actually veteran jazzheads going to Sixth Street to see shows. More importantly, there are actually Sixth Street regulars, young hipsters who are going to hear jazz. For some, the Mercury has probably been responsible for first exposure to the likes of Smith, Hargrove, et al.

As well, Collins and crew have opened their doors to other new and young producer/promoters of jazz and blues in Austin. Carl Settles' Revolution of the Bluez and Jazz Revolution shows and Noel Waggoner's first production attempts have benefited from the Mercury's open-minded approach to developing new audiences and business networks. And because of limitations of the actual physical space of the Mercury, this June's Austin Music Fest demonstrates that Collins' vision (and booking tastes) are bigger than his smallish Sixth Street club. In the festival's first outing, working arrangements with Direct Events' Back Yard and Clifford Antone's blues nightclub made possible what is essentially a new jazz festival of regional significance. And if you take a good look at the posters and ads for the Austin Music Fest, you'll notice that evidence of sponsorship support is virtually invisible -- where are the "sponsored by" logos and tags?

A night of B-3 giants at Antone's and Tito and Eddie the next day at the Back Yard, no matter how you add up the numbers, amounts to a very expensive weekend for the promoters. Since there didn't seem to be a host of advertising and money sponsors signed up to support the fest, I'm really hoping that Mark and Company got the kinds of crowds necessary to pay for the shows. Commercial promoters here in Austin have simply not put themselves out there like this. Mercury Productions deserves a positive nod for the effort, and the risk. The Austin Music Fest was a commercial, for-profit venture. And because of this it, could not be funded by grants and sponsorship support at a level that approximates underwriting. In order for a jazz production like this to survive, it has to make somebody some money. I hope it succeeded.

After all these years

Before I had any conversations with the Mercury folks about the Austin Music Fest, before I saw any press releases or posters, I first heard the rumors among the ranks of Austin's jazz scenesters. The early word on the street was that Herbie Hancock, Wayne Shorter, Jimmy Smith, Roy Hargrove, and Tito Puente were headed to town for the Mercury's new jazz festival. I repeat, this was the rumor on the street. But I gotta tell you, my first feelings were a weird mix of surprise, joyful anticipation and wonder, and way down at the bottom of my stomach was some uneasiness.

And I had to ask myself, "With such an impressive lineup of jazz stars, the kind of folks who rarely come to Austin, why was this making me feel uncomfortable?"

Well, I'll tell you. It seemed that in the instant that I'd given up on making a June jazz festival work in Austin, given up because of poor funding, poor turn out, HOT-HOT-HOT weather, sponsors not meeting their commitments, and, very honestly, not having the kind of organizational support necessary to reach the appropriate audience and funding sources for a nonprofit jazz festival, the Mercury comes along with a line up that just blows my mind. I asked myself, after all these years of trying to convince this market to support a major jazz festival, how'd they get the backing necessary to put this show up (I asked myself those questions with fresh memories of actually losing money on a great McCoy Tyner concert just a few years ago)?

I must admit that the notion made me feel like my investment in bringing jazz to Austin, the risks we've taken, the educating we've done with the Clarksville and Austin Jazz and Arts Festivals was simply never going to show a return. I moved our festival to September as a last effort to save the concept and all of the sudden June is full or touring jazz and a new festival produced in the same time frame as our traditional period. And, the headliners just happen to be two acts that I first brought to Austin, Jimmy Smith and Roy Hargrove. After deserting it, was I feeling that my turf was being invaded?

Well, yes that was the initial feeling. It passed. The truth of the matter is that Austin needs more touring jazz shows to come to town. I left June behind to seek cooler temperatures and more students. That doesn't mean that June is Jazz follows. The Mercury filled the space in a way that our nonprofit festival could not financially afford.

And since my new saying is, "Jazz in Austin has to make somebody some money," and because Austin's traditional supporters of nonprofit art and culture institutions are stepped in the European classical tradition, those of us who work in the nonprofit jazz world have to find the key to leveraging support for our efforts.

High-tech America, new Austinites, new millionaires: the Symphony needs your support. So does the Austin Jazz and Arts Festival.