Race in the 1930's

"The conditions and prospects faced by African-American and white big bands had never been equivalent, and as swing became profitable business, the disparity between the two groups increased" (Stowe, p.122). Swing was a major shift musically in that it changed the style of jazz. But it also had larger cultural ramifications, as it had previously been a predominantly black art form being produced for a predominantly white audience. Then, in the 1930's, the Great Depression came to the stage and people became more desperate to survive, which made white musicians much more prevalent in this avenue of business. This led to a period of heightened competition between black and white bands in the arena of swing, as negative economic circumstances tend to exacerbate racial tensions (Stewart). These tensions in swing came to be from a combination of factors, such as the economy it came from, the market it created, and the critics who judged it.  

            Those who were the critics of jazz were usually "young white men, typically from privileged social backgrounds [and who] exercised enormous influence in shaping America's understanding of the swing phenomenon" (Stowe, p.52). These white critics became the judges of what was good or bad in jazz, what was better or worse for jazz, and who was superior or inferior at producing it.  Black artists were forced to be the representatives for their entire ethnicity, while white artists were allowed to roam free. Some white band leaders even admitted that their bands were not as good as black bands. They did not have the need to be as good, since their white audiences did not demand it of them (Stewart). Still, some of the critics of this period were fair and were critical of all, judging on talent rather than race- but this did not change the fact that these arbiters themselves were almost exclusively white.

            Race became a much more pressing issue when swing went national in the market. Being white meant that one could obtain the best gigs, recording contracts, booking agents, and festival spots (Stewart). Being white meant that one had more opportunity. The market may have hated everyone in the 1930's due to the economy, but it hated white people the least. "The bulk of swing was controlled by... large corporate booking offices" (Stowe, p.104) who were all run by white agents. And they were, of course, predisposed to prefer booking white musicians. Though some black musicians could pierce through the veil of discrimination underlying everything in the time period, there were  many "systematic causes of racial inequality in the swing industry" (Stowe, p.64). However, swing was also something of a disruptive force in society in that it threw many of the previous ideas of race into disarray.

            Alain Locke made a claim that race is not biological, but rather the definition of one's relationship to power. If this is race, then black musicians where clearly in the disadvantaged group. The more opportunities abounded for white bands to play to white audiences, the easier it became to marginalize black bands.  Swing was something of a racial competition between black and white musicians (Stewart). Despite being a fundamentally black art form (Stowe, p.54), whites were the ones who got to take advantage of the liberties that it granted.

Commented on Leah Bleich