Origin of "jazz"--Hickman is unreliable

[Gerald Cohen]

    Yesterday John Baker wrote in part:
>
>         Gerald Cohen has been kind enough to share with me a copy of his
>paper, "Jazz Revisited:  On the Origin of the Term," which reprints many of
>the original sources.  These show that Art Hickman was indeed reliable, but
>that his information was less significant than I had supposed.

        The attribution of reliability to Art Hickman's 1919 hazy
recollections about events six years earlier calls for a look at just
what the 1919 article says (_San Francisco Chronicle_, 9 November,
1919, pg.B7, col. 1; title: 'Band Leader Says Jazz Is [In] Public
Demand'):

'... As a result, jazz is considered slang.  Most likely "pep" may be
classified in a similar manner.  However, both words are used to
advantage by persons who wish to express ginger and snap.
        'Art Hickman, of the St. Francis orchestra, once said that
the word jazz originated some time ago when the San Francisco Seals
were training at Boyes Springs.  One member of the ball-tossing team
commented on a stream of water bubbling from the side of a bank,
casting upon it the then unknown word, "jazz" water. Then, as the
little old world slowly moved around, one unit of the nine urged a
friend:
        "Come on, George, show some jazz, willya!"
        'Then "jazz" sprang into being.  At least, Hickman believes
so.  It cannot be proven, however, so the argument on that score
ends....'

****
      That's the 1919 treatment. A few thoughts now come to mind:

1) The overriding impression I get from Hickman's treatment is
haziness. "Art Hickman...once said the the word jazz originated some
time ago..." --- Make that specifically 1913. Gleeson, recollecting
25 years later, missed by only one year (1912), but Hickman, only 6
years after the fact, places the origin in the indeterminate past.
        "Then, as the little old world slowly moved around, one unit
of the nine urged a friend: ..." --- As the little old world moved
around? What does this mean? Two days? A month? Half the season?
Actually, the time frame would have been very compressed. The S.F.
Seals played their first spring-training game on Feb. 28.
Sportswriter Gleeson used "jazz" in print for the first time on March
3. There was very little time for the little old world to move around.
     As for Hickman's statement "one unit of the nine urged a
friend:...", which unit of the nine did this? Remember, Hickman knew
all the players, since his band played for them at dances that he
arranged. Why not specify who that immortal figure was? Why the
haziness?

2) Note too the total absence of any mention of Scoop Gleeson in the
popularization of the term "jazz." This popularization is directly
attested in the 1913 baseball columns of the _S.F. Bulletin_. Answer:
Hickman was unaware of this critical piece of information, which
means he probably had no special interest in the origin of the
term--a term which he did not use in his own newspaper articles a few
years later and which he reportedly did not like.

3) At the end of the 1919 Hickman item  even the sympathetic reporter
was less than convinced by Hickman's account: "Then 'jazz' sprang
into being.  At least, Hickman believes so.  It cannot be proven
however, so the argument on that score ends...."

     Contrast this lack of interest in the term "jazz" and the
ballfield activities of the S. F. Seals with the intense interest of
Gleeson in both topics. For Gleeson and the other sportswriters,
there was an enormous emotional investment in the doings of the
Seals.  When the Seals did well, there was elation, and when they did
poorly there was gloom. Also, Gleeson was the first person to use
"jazz" in print and to do so repeatedly.

      Now, who has the greater credibility in a matter such as this:
Gleeson, whose emotional highs and lows were tied to the fortunes of
the Seals and who did his best to promote those fortunes by
repeatedly using "jazz" as a sort of talisman? (The Seals might not
have much talent, but the old jazz--their vim , vigor, fighting
spirit--would carry them forward to victory). Or Art Hickman,
whose presence at the games was evidently not continuous and who
didn't give the proverbial rat's patoot about the term "jazz"? My
vote goes to Gleeson.

    His heart and soul were in the Seals, and he no doubt had thought
many times over the years about the term "jazz," the term that HE
popularized in writing in 1913. And as for his memory in 1938 about
events 25 years earlier, we must bear in mind that some extraordinary
events in our lives do stick with us reliably in memory for decades.
Everyone in their adult years at the time remembers where they were
and what they were doing at the time President Kennedy was shot. On
the Oprah Winfrey show someone mentioned that children of divorced
parents often remember absolutely everything about circumstances when
their parents told them that they would get a divorce (who was
wearing what, etc.). Gleeson's only evident flaw in his account was
saying 1912 instead of 1913--not a terribly important detail in the
story and actually remarkable for coming so close.

        In any case, the methodical reading of the baseball columns
of the _S.F. Bulletin_ continues. Maybe a 1910's smoking gun will
turn up.

---Gerald Cohen