Theory Professor's Negative Review of Mark Levine's "Jazz Theory Book"

[Jazz+]

Robert Rawlins, Review

of Mark Levine's, The Jazz Theory Book.

http://www.societymusictheory.org/mto/issues/mto.00.6.1/mto.00.6.1.rawlins.rev

 

Dr. Robert Rawlins

Chair, Department of Music, Music Theory

 

Robert Rawlins is associate professor and coordinator of music theory and chair of the Department of Music at Rowan University. In addition to a Ph.D. in Musicology, he holds masters degrees in Music History & Theory, Humanities, and Public Relations. He is author of A Simple and Direct Guide to Jazz Improvisation (Hal Leonard, 1995), Classic Jazz Solos for Practice and Study (in press), Intermediate Serial Duets for Two Flutes (Southern Music, 1990), and has published more than 50 articles on various aspects of music theory and performance. Dr. Rawlins has performed extensively on flute, saxophone and clarinet in both jazz and classical venues.

[Sven Golly]

Revised link , in case the link above fails for anyone (as it did for me, because .rev corresponds to an installed app on my PC.

 

Cheers,

SG

[cnegrad]

Rawlins has a lot of valid points. But the book would still be a valuable resource for those able to see beyond it's flaws.

[stoo schultz]

Shorter Rawlins: Levine's book is for players, not theoreticians.

[cnegrad]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

Shorter Rawlins: Levine's book is for players, not theoreticians.

I agree with this statement. However, I can also see how a beginner student reading this book might make certain errors as a result of it.

[ELP71]

I don't think its a negative review. Rawlins takes exception with the title and then tees of from there. But he wraps up nicely with this:

 

The issues touched upon in this review only hint at the vast amount of material in this book. Particularly insightful are the chapters on reharmonization, which contain myriad suggestions for chord substitution, tapping the vast repository of knowledge that Levine has acquired in his career as a jazz pianist. Interlaced throughout the book, Levine gives practical advice on practicing and developing improvisational skills, while evident throughout is his genuine love for the music and his vast listening and performing experience. If one's interest in jazz theory leans toward procedures and methods, this book fits the bill perfectly. Although those with an interest in theoretical explanations will not find their wishes gratified by this volume, they will nevertheless find in it an invaluable cache of information regarding some of the most significant harmonic procedures of jazz theory.

[kad]

Just a quick correction - the review is of Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book". This book was written after "The Jazz Piano Book".

 

Having said that, I think this review is RIDICULOUS! All throughout the review, Rawlings basically criticizes Levine's book for not being tradition tonal theory book. He gripes incessantly about the omission of discussions on preparation and resolution of dissonance, tendency tones, triadic root movement, functional harmony, etc... There is a very obvious reason for these omissions - the rudimentary elements of tonality have already been covered ad-nauseam by countless other books.

 

If you want to learn the fundamentals of tonality (which I would highly recommend before tackling jazz theory), buy Kennen's book or Piston's book or Schoenbergs book. The intention of Levine's book is to highlight the elements of Jazz harmony that make it a unique art form, not to rehash the countless existing volumes on tonal theory. I think Levine did a great job delivering this objective...

 

Kirk

[Analogaddict]

Originally posted by kad:

Just a quick correction - the review is of Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book". This book was written after "The Jazz Piano Book".

Thanks for clearing that up, I always thought the Jazz Piano Book was a great resource. There´s always a whiner somewhere...

[Dan South]

Does the reviewer offer alternative titles for study?

[Dave Horne]

I have not read the book in question so what I am going to add might not have any relevance.

 

I personally look at music as a language, a well defined, mature language with correct grammatical (though debatable) constructions if you will. In jazz we have many dialects but those dialects are based on the basic language itself.

 

Sometimes I feel that 'jazzers' tend to look at a jazz dialect as a language unto itself forgetting the original language from which it has evolved and on which it is based. I feel any theory text book whether traditional or jazz should touch upon the basics and assume nothing.

 

The very best jazz improvisers have a solid foundation in traditional theory and harmony. They speak the language very well and can speak in dialect if they choose.

[MikeT156]

Well said KAD:

 

A number of players on this site recommended the book, I bought it, and its great. If you already know you want to learn "Jazz Theory" I'd have to assume that you know enough of the basics to have a desire for musical growth in the study of Jazz. He was nit pickin somewhat. My investment in that book was money well spent.

 

Edit: I have the "Jazz Piano Book", not the Jazz Theory Book, so disregard my comments about the review. However, the Jazz Piano Book is structured enough so I get the drift of the examples he gives, and I've learned a lot from it.

 

Mike T.

[CP]

I bought the book after several people recommended it on this site. I think the book may have its uses, but not for anyone who is looking for structured lessons. I thought that this book would provide me with the steps needed to become a better jazz player. However it does not. It is a very good reference book. The best benefit I have received from it is when my piano teacher uses it and makes exercises from some of the sections.

 

Like every other book, it's not what's inside, but how you use it.