Academic jazz game

[Human Mint]

I invite you to watch this Instagram reel about the reality of being a jazz musician. In a certain sense this is the same hierarchy game as science academy, which is extensively talked in here. So you will inmediately draw a connection. This Instagramer in particular is quite honest in his views.

I always wondered how the jazz world is similar to the science world, because jazz is where I am investing my life into. And so I finally found someone expressing this kind of perspective. A meta-perspective.

I am really liking the jazz music world, it suits my personality soo well. So this is not about trashing that life-style. I think you can be really happy in that environment, o really hate it.

 

 

[Ulax]

I'm curious what you think of the movie Whiplash

[Joseph Maynor]

I'm not in the Jazz world anymore as an amateur musician for this reason.  I'll play Jazz, but I can play anything.  

[aurum]

Good take.

In general, people tend to underestimate all the bullshit that comes with being a professional musician.

[Rigel]

Whiplash is not good or representative of jazz at all lol. But yeah jazz is conformist and dogmatic like everyone.

edit:

I love jazz to death but the people are pretentious and annoying(most, not all). A little bit like this forum. That’s a given for young foolish students but even teachers(not all of them) were annoying and close minded in my experience studying it. Few of them want jazz to evolve and change, they are stuck in defending an aesthetic that other people invented last century. Which is fine I guess it does sound good and it does require a lot of effort to learn that already prehestablished style so I understand why someone that mastered the style would get bitchy about a kid wanting to reinvent the wheel but I still felt imprisoned and limited by it.

I have met immensely interesting and talented friends in jazz school but overall jazz school sucks. It’s so insufficient and rigid.

Edited Thursday at 11:08 AM by Rigel

[Rigel]

I changed my mind. A lot of jazz cats are definitely more pretentious than people here. 

[Human Mint]

23 hours ago, Ulax said:

I'm curious what you think of the movie Whiplash

Very fun movie. It has lots of good scenes, like the chair one.

In my school they have plastic chairs so teachers don't break skulls when they throw them.

[Human Mint]

On the other hand I am not making my mind about anything when it comes to the jazz world, I didn't spend even 3 years. I am learning a lot.

[Joseph Maynor]

9 hours ago, Rigel said:

 jazz is conformist and dogmatic like everyone.

Yes.  Artforms are created around shared tropes.  

[Carl-Richard]

Bro hierarchy and survival is not some special thing. All social systems have them. Politics, ballet, NASCAR. The guy in the reel even says this. "Science" is a special pony only because Leo has a fixation on taking a dump on it because that is how he feels special.

[Human Mint]

12 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Bro hierarchy and survival is not some special thing. All social systems have them. Politics, ballet, NASCAR. The guy in the reel even says this. "Science" is a special pony only because Leo has a fixation on taking a dump on it because that is how he feels special.

Well I know, but no one talks about this stuff inside those circles that would be like shooting your own foot and that of your peers.

But science is not just special because of Leo talks a bunch about it, society at large literally values more science than art and most people secretly believe that. It doesn't matter because society is so large that the music game exists anyway.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Human Mint said:

Well I know, but no one talks about this stuff inside those circles that would be like shooting your own foot and that of your peers.

There are thousands of articles on such things. The reason Leo can talk about it is most definitely because he has heard somebody else, not unlikely from academia, talk about it.

"The PhD factory": https://www.nature.com/articles/472276a

Of course most scientists just focus on doing their science, but to think there wouldn't be people doing science on how science works, that's truly naive.

As for more examples of "shooting oneself in one's own foot", try "the replication crisis", "questionable research practices". Thousands of articles on these things.

Leo doesn't go far enough in critiquing science. He hasn't (to my eyes) read the scientists' own critiques of science, which go far beyond what he is talking about (partially because it often requires technical knowledge of science to engage with). Try for example "the generalizibility crisis": https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10681374/

Edited 11 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Human Mint]

 

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

The reason Leo can talk about it is most definitely because he has heard somebody else, not unlikely from academia, talk about it.

Of course man, that's not a mistake. But you still need to do the understanding. That's not guaranteed even reading a thousand research papers.

 

13 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Leo doesn't go far enough in critiquing science. He hasn't seemed to have read the scientists' own critiques of science,

Leo goes meta as fuck in case you haven't pick that up yet, lol. Meaning his views are not only from the scienific one.

Heck, I was part of it, I studied biology and had to asist a lot of lab classes. Yet clueless about any of this.