warrrreagl

I think what is being referred to as "retro" is more properly designated as "neo-classical," which is (by definition in any form of art) a "new" way of expressing "classical" jazz. Also, remember that jazz is almost uniquely pluralistic; it was created as music for the dance hall, but now finds itself on the concert stage and in historical accounts. For this reason, jazz will never be a museum piece; it must remain vibrant and expressive. Although many, many different threads of exploration have been uncovered in jazz since WWII, they were not remotely exhausted, and contemporary performers have the courage to push older forms to limits they never previously saw. Just because a new shaft has opened up, there's nothing wrong with going back for the diamonds still sitting there in the old one.

For example, the natural extension of be-bop was toward the jazz canon, and performers like Wynton Marsalis are savvy enough to explore new directions in be-bop canons while still paying proper homage to the old guard.

I would add to the neo-classical list Terence Blanchard (Clifford Brown), Nicholas Payton (Louis Armstrong), Jon Faddis (Dizzy Gillespie), Wallace Roney (Miles Davis), Joe Lovano (Ornette Coleman), Jane Ira Bloom (Sidney Bechet), Joshua Redman (John Coltrane), James Carter (Sonny Rollins), and Ahmad Jamal (Bill Evans).

And most importantly, it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing.

__________________
Living is easy with eyes closed.