Ragtime

A Musical and Cultural History

Edward Berlin

To

Andrée, Michèle

Stephanie, and Kim

Preface

The resurrection of ragtime in the 1970s is a phenomenon unprecedented in America’s musical history; never before has a long-buried style been so widely and eagerly embraced by a mass public. For some this has been, at least partially, a nostalgic trip to the “simplicity and charm” of the past, but for the majority, indifferent or oblivious to ragtime’s historicity, this enthusiastic reception has been in response to the same musical qualities that so intrigued Americans seventy years ago: ragtime’s direct melodic and harmonic message, its irresistible, foot-tapping, rhythmic impulse.

At the time of this writing, the ragtime fervor has peaked; it is no longer in (and on) the air so unremittingly as it was three and four years ago; it is no longer in such incessant demand. But neither is it returning to its former niche of historical obscurity. Madison Avenue ad agencies continue to milk ragtime for its cheerful ebullience; piano (also harpsichord and organ) recitalists are still “daring” to program Joplin, Scott, and Lamb in the rarified company of Chopin, Mozart, and Scarlatti. And although many of those whose conviction and actions brought about the revival—among those most prominent, Joshua Rifkin, William Bolcomb, Vera Brodsky Lawrence, Gunther Schuller—are now occupied with new concerns, others—Max Morath, Rudi Blesh, and the small coterie of dedicated, hard-line ragtimers who kept the music alive during its leaner years—remain faithful to the cause, and are now buttressed by a greatly enlarged corps of fans and scholars who are both demanding and bringing to ragtime studies a new intensity and perspective.

Much of the literature that has accompanied and followed the ragtime revival has been blatantly exploitative, works promising to fulfill the thirst for information created by the revival but offering only reruns of earlier writings, works which have the further pernicious effect of uncritically perpetuating—often in defiance of simple logic—worn-out myths and unsupported truisms. One can, of course, also find among recent literature a few works of true merit, sincere efforts that reflect original research and insight. The main emphasis in both categories, though, has been on personalities, especially on Scott Joplin—the revival’s main focus—and others touched by his influence. This emphasis, in itself unobjectionable, has brought to light what may be the best in ragtime and has stimulated investigation into peripheral areas. What the critical reader misses, and what is available in the scholarship of most other styles, is substantive discussion, in musical terms, of the genre and its evolution, and of its position in the panorama of American music and culture. It is with a recognition of these deficiencies that the present book was begun.

Initially, my intent was to make a stylistic study, to take a broad look at the scope of ragtime music and to fill in the background required for a historical understanding and evaluation of the music. To this end I examined over 1,000 piano rags, analyzing each piece individually and statistically, as well as an uncounted number of vocal rags and other related music. From this accumulated data emerged the course of ragtime’s evolution and its relationship to other music of the period.

A major question that emerged in the course of this musical survey was how to determine what music could reasonably be considered ragtime. Along with the hundreds of unproblematic examples that possess the musical traits of ragtime (or more properly, my conception at that time of what these traits should have been) and are clearly labeled as such, are numerous pieces that, while failing to match these criteria, could not automatically be discarded: works that display ragtime characteristics but are without the proper label; works designated as rags but lacking the expected musical traits; works that have neither the expected traits nor a specific label, but which were apparently considered by contemporaries to be rags. In an attempt to sort out these various categories and to learn how ragtime was viewed sixty to eighty years ago (and disregarding the advice of a prominent ragtime authority who insists that the public of that time had no understanding of ragtime), I consulted the books, magazines, and newspapers of the period. The abundance and breadth of literature was totally unanticipated: hundreds of articles discussed ragtime in relation to a broad scope of musical, aesthetic, and social issues. My original search for a working definition of ragtime was almost dwarfed as I became immersed in the conflicts of its day concerning ragtime’s origins, racial content, relevance to American music, innovative features, potential for “artistic” development, effects on cultural, moral, and physical well-being, and the like. What had begun as a preliminary, minor investigation gradually assumed major proportions, adding perspective to an understanding of the music as well as significant insights into aesthetic and sociological issues transcending the immediate concerns of ragtime.

The realization of how greatly the original conceptions of ragtime differ from those of the present day prompted yet another area of investigation. This inquiry, the final third of the study, traces commentary to the present in an effort to detect the reasons for the altered attitudes and the means by which these changes were effected.

This book presents views that differ markedly from those expressed in other histories of ragtime, and it will undoubtedly disturb a few partisans who find their cherished beliefs without support. My intent has been to permit the investigation to unfold without prejudice, to reflect the available evidence and documents, and to depict, as closely as possible, what actually was rather than what some wish might have been. I do not expect (or even desire) complete agreement with my ideas, and I readily admit the plausibility of alternative interpretations of some of the data. But I do hope, most fervently, that my efforts will help remove ragtime studies from the domain of vague intuition and romantic fantasy, and direct it toward a path of greater critical scrutiny.

Part One

The Ragtime Era: Perceptions of the Music

In 1974, seventy-two years after its publication, Scott Joplin’s piano rag The Entertainer swept the country, reaching the number three spot in Billboard’s survey of best-selling recorded singles. Promoted by the award-winning film score for The Sting, this piece led the return of ragtime to a prominence in American popular culture unequaled since the first two decades of the century.

The present interest does not quite parallel the original ragtime phenomenon, for the musical emphasis has shifted. Had Billboard made a survey of favorite rags in 1902, the list probably would have included Mister Johnson Turn Me Loose, All Coons Look Alike to Me, My Coal Black Lady, Hello! Ma Baby, and Under the Bamboo Tree. All songs! Today, in contrast, ragtime is generally thought of as piano music, especially that of Scott Joplin, Joe Lamb, James Scott, and a few others. While such recorded ensemble versions as The Red Back Book have demonstrated how vibrant ragtime can be in other media,¹ the keyboard remains at the center of the present-day conception of the genre.

Clearly, if the contemporaries of that past period perceived ragtime as primarily a vocal form, then ours is an altered view. Nor is the view of ragtime as predominantly a music for piano held only by an uninformed lay public; it is expressed also in respected studies of American music:

It is noteworthy that from the time of its origin rag music seems to have been associated primarily with the piano.²

… ragtime is essentially music for the piano. Ragtime may be described as the application of systematic syncopation to piano playing and composition.³

Even ragtime specialists, unquestionably familiar with the ragtime song, tend to deny its legitimacy. It is not considered at all in the discography Recorded Ragtime, 1897–1958,⁴ and in Rags and Ragtime the term “ragtime song” is called “a contradiction in terms.”⁵

In contrast, writings from the ragtime era—the years from about 1896 to 1920—reveal far less interest in ragtime as piano music. In a sampling of 230 ragtime-related articles and books from that period, only 21 refer to piano music, with a mere 16 citing specific piano rags. The number of items referring to ragtime played by bands or instrumental ensembles is smaller—15—but ragtime songs have a higher representation—40. While the remaining writings make no reference to performing media, the contexts in most clearly imply that the concern is with songs.

These statistics underline an important requirement for a comprehensive historical study of ragtime: since piano ragtime accounted for only a small part, perhaps less than 10 percent, of what the music’s contemporaries understood by the term “ragtime,” it is necessary to consider the other forms as well. Only in this way can piano ragtime be perceived in a valid historical and cultural perspective. Such consideration, while broadening the scope of our study, does not detract from the significance of the piano music, which remains the focus of this book. Vocal and piano ragtime are, for the most part, two different types of music: the former belongs in the realm of popular song, while the latter is a unique body of instrumental music which by virtue of its rhythmic impulse and historical influence is most properly considered within the sphere of instrumental jazz. These two categories, despite their differences, are not mutually exclusive; there are important overlappings between the two, overlappings that become apparent when viewed in the broad context advocated here.

Part One of the present study examines how the contemporaries of the ragtime era perceived the various aspects of ragtime. The main issues considered are: (1) the contemporary understanding and identification of ragtime; (2) the contemporary conception of the origins of both the music and the term; and (3) the reactions to the music and the underlying causes of these reactions.

Notes

1. Angel S-36060.

2. Eileen Southern, The Music of Black Americans: A History (New York: W. W. Norton, 1971), p. 312.

3. Gilbert Chase, America’s Music from the Pilgrims to the Present (2d ed., rev., New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), p. 434.

4. David A. Jasen, Recorded Ragtime, 1897–1958 (Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, Shoe String Press, 1973).

5. David A. Jasen and Trebor Jay Tichenor, Rags and Ragtime (New York: Seabury Press, 1978), p. 7.

Part Two

Piano Ragtime

In popular music it is only the rare instrumental work that commands the attention or following generated by songs. Instrumental music, more abstract than music with words, presents greater difficulties of portrayal to most commentators. It is not surprising, then, that piano ragtime received less press and magazine coverage than vocal ragtime.

This relative lack of attention by journalists should not be mistaken for an absence of appreciation on the part of a substantial portion of the musical public. The thousands of ragtime publications for piano testify to a strongly supportive public. There is also indication from a few writers of an awareness of the distinct qualities of piano ragtime. One such writer, in proposing that ragtime be used to awaken and stimulate “higher” musical interests in piano students, suggested that true ragtime was piano music, and that it was only a superficial view that packaged all of popular music into the single category of ragtime.¹

This writer’s perception of ragtime coincides with the modern view whereby the term, rather than being a coverall for popular music, refers primarily to a restricted body of piano music. It is evident, viewing the style historically, that despite the ties existing between vocal and piano strains of ragtime, a split occurred; vocal ragtime merged with the mainstream of popular music, while piano ragtime inclined toward what became known as jazz.

Against the background established in Part One, in which ragtime is considered in its most inclusive and multifaceted sense, it is now possible to focus more restrictively on ragtime for piano and appreciate more fully how it developed within this musical and cultural context.

Note

1. Zarh Myron Bickford, “Ragtime as an Introduction and Aid to Better Music,” Melody 2 (January 1918): 7.

Part Three

The Historical Perspective

The various ways in which ragtime has been perceived in the past eighty years are revealed in the literature about it. Part One surveyed the attitudes expressed about ragtime by its contemporaries and established that, for the public, this genre was represented primarily by the song. Part Three will examine how these attitudes have changed since the ragtime era: Chapter Nine traces the views as they evolved from 1930 to the present and Chapter Ten evaluates how modern writers have approached a major theoretical issue, that of the subdivision of piano ragtime into several stylistic categories.

Contents

Preface

Part One

THE RAGTIME ERA: PERCEPTIONS OF THE MUSIC

I. The Scope of Ragtime

Ragtime as Popular Song

The Ragtime Band

Ragtime for Other Instrumental Combinations

Syncopation

Ragtime Dance

Jazz and the Close of the Ragtime Era

Notes

II. Origins and Early Manifestations

Origins of the Music

Origins of the Term

Notes

III. The Ragtime Debate

Ragtime Texts

Lowering of Musical Tastes

The Attack

The Counterattack

Notes

Part Two

PIANO RAGTIME

IV. The Varieties of Piano Ragtime

Piano Renditions of Ragtime Songs

Ragging Unsyncopated Music

Original Ragtime Compositions for Piano

The Score versus Performance

Notes

V. Early Piano Ragtime

Early Rags

Ragtime Syncopation

Ragtime Melodies

Form

Notes

VI. Musical Sources of Early Ragtime

The March

The Cakewalk

Black Character Pieces and Patrols

Coon Songs

Caribbean Dance Rhythms

Other Source Attributions

Notes

VII. A Cohesive Style Develops

Loss of Ethnic Identity

Rhythmic Changes

Secondary Ragtime

Form

Unifying Relationships

Development of “Measure 13” Conventions

Notes

VIII. The Erosion of a Distinctive Style

Dotted Rhythms

Other Expansions of the Ragtime Language

Bluesy Rags and Raggy Blues

Jazz

Novelty Piano

Other Applications and Misapplications

Notes

Part Three

THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

IX. The Historiography of Ragtime

Vocal Ragtime versus Piano Ragtime

The Ragtime Revival

Notes

X. A Consideration of Style

The Perception of Style

Classic Ragtime: Stark and Joplin

Classic Ragtime: Blesh and Janis

Classic Ragtime: Schafer and Riedel

Toward a Definition of Classic Ragtime

Other Ragtime Classifications

Notes

Selected Bibliography

Acknowledgments

CHAPTER I

The Scope of Ragtime

Ragtime as Popular Song

The earliest kind of popular song identified as ragtime is the “coon song,” a Negro dialect song frequently, but not always, of an offensively denigrating nature.¹ Although the coon song had a long prior existence in the American minstrel and vaudeville traditions, in the 1890s it acquired the additional label of “ragtime.”

“Rag time” is a term applied to the peculiar, broken rhythmic features of the popular “coon song.”²

A hopper is fitted onto the press and into it are poured jerky note groups by the million, “coon poetry” by the ream, colored inks by the ton, and out of the other end of the press comes a flood of “rag-time” abominations, that sweeps over the country.³

The coon songs which are cited most often (indicating a degree of popularity and currency) are Ernest Hogan’s All Coons Look Alike to Me (1896), Joseph Howard and Ida Emerson’s Hello! Ma Baby (1899), and Theodore Metz’s A Hot Time in the Old Town (1896).⁴

By 1906 the popularity of the more flagrantly abusive form of coon song had faded, but popular vocal music retained the ragtime label. Some song hits, such as Lewis Muir’s Waiting for the Robert E. Lee (1912), still presented Southern imagery, but even songs totally devoid of regional or racial implications, such as Alexander’s Ragtime Band (1911) and Everybody’s Doin’ It (1911), fell within the scope of ragtime. This deracialization of ragtime songs was, in fact, viewed by James Weldon Johnson (1871–1938), a prominent writer on black culture, as a theft from the black man:

The first of the so-called Ragtime songs to be published were actually Negro secular folk songs that were set down by white men, who affixed their own names as composers. In fact, before the Negro succeeded fully in establishing his title as creator of his secular music the form was taken away from him and made national instead of racial. It has been developed into the distinct musical idiom by which America expresses itself popularly, and by which it is known universally. For a long while the vocal form was almost absolutely divorced from the Negro; the separation being brought about largely through the elimination of dialect from the texts of the songs.⁵

A controversial article appearing in the London Times includes a rhythmic analysis of Waiting for the Robert E. Lee and cites as other examples of ragtime Oh, You Beautiful Doll, Going Back to Dixie, and How Are You Miss Rag-Time?⁶ Although the article was widely quoted and discussed, both in praise and criticism,⁷ there was no disagreement on the choice of music cited as ragtime. Similarly, in a pair of articles by Hiram K. Moderwell, a prominent music critic, ragtime is portrayed almost exclusively in its vocal forms:

I remember hearing a negro quartet singing “Waiting for the Robert E. Lee,” in a café, and I felt my blood thumping in time, my muscles twitching to the rhythm.…

I think of the rollicking fun of “The International Rag,” the playful delicacy of “Everybody’s Doing It,” the bristling laziness of “Waiting for the Robert E. Lee,” the sensual poignancy of “La Seduction” tango, and the tender pathos of “The Memphis Blues.”⁸

In proposing that ragtime be taken out of the cafés and put into the concert halls, he writes:

I firmly believe that a ragtime programme, well organized and well sung, would be delightful and stimulating to the best audience the community could muster.⁹

The novelist, critic, and essayist Carl Van Vechten (1880–1964), while disputing the advisability of some of Moderwell’s proposals, nevertheless agrees that ragtime is vocal music.¹⁰ And composer-educator Daniel Gregory Mason (1873–1953), who vehemently opposes most of Moderwell’s views on this subject, has no qualms about accepting such songs as Everybody’s Doin’ It and Memphis Blues (1912) as ragtime:

Suppose … we examine in some detail a typical example of ragtime such as “The Memphis Blues” … ¹¹

As songs were the most conspicuous species of ragtime, it follows that songwriters were the most conspicuous composers. This assumption is confirmed by the literature of the time, for those named as ragtime composers were almost invariably songwriters (some exceptions will be discussed in Chapters Four and Nine). Some of the most frequently mentioned were Irving Berlin (b. 1888), George M. Cohan (1878–1942), Louis Hirsch (1887–1924), Lewis F. Muir (1884–1950), and Jean Schwartz (1878–1956). Irving Berlin, who did not attain prominence with his ragtime songs until 1911, even claimed a part in the genesis of ragtime:

I believe that such songs of mine as “Alexander’s Ragtime Band,” “That Mysterious Rag,” “Ragtime Violin,” “I Want To Be in Dixie,” and “Take a Little Tip from Father” virtually started the ragime mania in America.¹²

It has been suggested in recent years that the popular understanding of ragtime today is not what it was when the music was being created, but the thesis has not met with general acceptance. In a letter to the Ragtime Society newsletter in 1965, one who was apparently present during the early days of ragtime expressed his perplexity over the present trend of emphasizing a particular kind of piano ragtime and ignoring vocal ragtime:

… we who were around when “Boom de Ay” was discovered in Babe Connor’s place in St. Louis as the nineties started up, and when the “Hot Time” tune took words and entered the ragtime-song race … await enlightenment as to just what it is about a specimen of syncopation that makes it “classic ragtime,” while countless of the world’s favorite old ragtime numbers apparently go rejected by the modernists.¹³

Perhaps the vocal ragtime mentioned above is not on the same musical level as the best in piano ragtime. Quite possibly only a few ragtime enthusiasts today would be interested in these songs. But ignoring the fact that this music was considered ragtime conceals the historical truth and inevitably leads to serious misinterpretations. Whereas the restricted interpretation of ragtime suffices for the needs of today’s entertainment, for a true historical and critical view of the subject a broader perspective must prevail.

The Ragtime Band

The predominance of vocal music in early writings on ragtime is revealed not only in the relatively high proportion of articles devoted exclusively to songs, but also in the frequent linking of vocal with instrumental ragtime. Although ragtime songs seem to have made their initial impact upon the musical stage, they were played as well by dance, march, and concert bands:

Probably the majority of our readers are aware that the most popular music of the day is that known as “rag-time.” … From New York to California and from the great lakes to the gulf ragtime music of all styles is the rage. Look at the ballroom programmes for the past season and we find rag-time and other “coon” melodies introduced into every dance where it is practicable.¹⁴

[John Philip Sousa] was as usual liberal with his encores consisting of his own marches and ragtime ballads.¹⁵

[In New Orleans, around 1905] many of the tunes played by the small marching bands were popular ragtime songs, not classic rags such as those composed by Joplin.¹⁶

Even when they were not direct adaptations of existing songs, instrumental rags were frequently thought of as derivatives of the vocal medium:

The craze for “coon” songs, as they are familiarly known, began about three years ago, and shows little sign of abatement at the present time. Not content with “rag-time” songs, marches, two-steps, and even waltzes have been subjected to this syncopated style of treatment, in order to appease the seemingly insatiable thirst for that peculiar rhythmic effect produced by successive irregular accent.¹⁷

The song-to-instrument route was not one-sided; the process was also reversed as original instrumental rags such as Kerry Mills’s dance hit At a Georgia Campmeeting (1897) were reissued in alternate versions with words. In addition, many early instrumental rag publications include a vocal chorus. Because of such developments, original instrumental pieces and adaptations from songs frequently merged into one body of ragtime literature.

An important phase of ragtime ensemble performance—important because it reflects on the origins of both ragtime and jazz—is the improvised syncopation, or “ragging,” of existing pieces. By its very nature the music is not notated, and no contemporaneous recordings have been discovered, but the style is known today through later re-creations made by musicians from the period, such as those recorded by ragtime-jazz musician Bunk Johnson (1879–1949) in the mid-1940s, and through descriptions. Johnson has related how hymns were transformed by turn-of-the-century New Orleans funeral bands,¹⁸ and Jelly Roll Morton (1855–1941) has similarly depicted the ragging of Sousa marches,¹⁹ a popular practice described also by black poet-song lyricist Paul Laurence Dunbar (1872–1906):

But hit’s Sousa played in ragtime, an’ hit’s Rastus on Parade,

W’en de colo’d ban’ comes ma’chin’ down de street.²⁰

Although much ensemble ragtime was published and copyrighted in piano editions, it is evident that in at least some cases the composers intended the music for band performance. On the cover of William Krell’s Mississippi Rag (1897), the earliest identified piano score using the term “rag” in its title, is a banner proclaiming: “The First Rag-Time Two Step Ever Written, and First Played by Krell’s Orchestra, Chicago.” In another case, an unusual bass line in Arthur Pryor’s A Coon Band Contest (1899) is identified as “trombone solo” (Example I–1).

EXAMPLE I–1. Arthur Pryor, A Coon Band Contest (Arthur Pryor, 1899), C 2–6.*

*The designation C 2–6 means: third formal section, or strain, measures 2–6. The formal designs of instrumental rags are discussed in Chapter Five.

The prominence of bands in early nonvocal ragtime recordings also testifies to the importance of this medium,²¹ as do the advertisements for band arrangements in some popularly oriented music magazines. One such periodical that devoted considerable space to band advertisements was Metronome. During 1897 Metronome printed numerous announcements of cakewalk marches, two-steps, schottisches, polkas, waltzes, and band arrangements of coon songs. The first advertisement in this magazine to specify “ragtime” appeared in the January 1898 issue, and by the following year such notices were commonplace. Ragtime advertisements continued to appear in substantial quantities until early 1916, when the demand for this music in the ballroom was reduced. (The other dances being advertised in 1916 were one-steps, tangos, fox and turkey trots, waltzes, and maxixes.) In the November 1916 issue the category of ragtime was eliminated. Although the word “rag” continued to appear occasionally in titles, such pieces were not necessarily considered rags; Eubie Blake’s Bugle Call Rag (1916), for instance, was labeled a fox trot.

Ragtime for Other Instrumental Combinations

The media for ragtime were not restricted to piano, song, and band. The instrumental diversity included some combinations which seem exotic today. The cover of the piano publication of Theodore Morse’s Coontown Capers (1897), for instance, lists the availability of fifteen different arrangements, including orchestra; brass band; violin and piano; banjo; zither; and two mandolins, guitar, and piano. Similarly, the cover of Abe Holzmann’s Bunch o’ Blackberries (1899) advertises: “Published also for all instruments including Mandolin, Guitar, Banjo, Orchestra, Band, Etc.”

Recordings of the period reveal this same diversity. While the listings in Jasen’s Recorded Ragtime do not specify the medium, some clues to the instruments of frequently recorded artists are given on pages 7–10 of the introduction, and additional identification is occasionally supplied by the name of the performing group, such as “Murray’s Ragtime Banjo Quartet.”²² Thus it is possible to detect some of the instrumental variety that was represented on recordings: two accordion performances (1914, 1915) of Hungarian Rag, a marimba-band version (1916) of Dill Pickles, three piccolo solos (1900–1902) on Rag Time Skedaddle, a xylophone recording (1912) of Red Pepper. Similarly, among the 8,000 listings in Koenigsberg’s Edison Cylinder Records, are many of rags played on “exotic” instrumental combinations.

The relative position of piano ragtime is considered more thoroughly in Chapter Four. For the present it is sufficient to observe that with such an abundance and variety of instrumental and vocal versions of ragtime, the piano genre did not have the prominence it enjoys today.

Syncopation

At the core of the contemporary understanding of ragtime, regardless of medium, was syncopation. The question “What is ragtime?” was asked throughout the period, and almost invariably explanations included a statement about syncopation:

So rag-time music is, simply, syncopated rhythm maddened into a desperate iterativeness; a rhythm overdone, to please the present public music taste.²³

Rag-time is merely a common form of syncopation in which the rhythm is distorted in order to produce a more or less ragged, hysterical effect.²⁴

RAG TIME. A modern term, of American origin, signifying, in the first instance, broken rhythm in melody, especially a sort of continuous syncopation.²⁵

“Rag-Time,” then may be said to be a strongly syncopated melody superimposed on a strictly regular accompaniment, and it is the combination of these two rhythms that gives “rag-time” its character.²⁶

Ragtime music is chiefly a matter of rhythm and not much a matter of melody or fine harmony. It is based almost exclusively upon syncopated time.²⁷

Not satisfied simply with designating syncopation as the defining feature of ragtime, Hiram Moderwell, who as a frequent contributor of music articles to New Republic and other periodicals should have known better, attributes an exaggerated significance to the rhythms of ragtime:

It [ragtime] has carried the complexities of the rhythmic subdivision of the measure to a point never before reached in the history of music.²⁸

Irving Berlin reverses the relationship between ragtime and syncopation as he says, not that ragtime is a form of syncopation, but that “Syncopation is nothing but another name for ragtime.” From this false premise, he compounds his error by concluding that “the old masters” also wrote ragtime, but “in a stiff and stilted way.”²⁹

The implication, evident in many of these articles, that the term “ragtime” refers directly to the ragged rhythmic quality of syncopation is occasionally spelled out explicitly. An editorial referring to compositions “written in what is contemptuously called ‘rag time’”³⁰ clearly designates ragtime as a rhythmic process as well as a genre. The word is also used as a synonym for syncopation: “in American slang to ‘rag’ a melody is to syncopate a normally regular tune.”³¹ “Strictly speaking, to rag a tune means to destroy its rhythm and tempo and substitute for the 2–4 or 4–4 time a syncopated rhythm.”³² An article on ragtime performance specifies that the pianist must have the ability “to syncopate (rag) the tones.”³³

The term “rag” is thus seen to be a noun, identifying a type of music; a verb, referring to the process of syncopation; and an adjective, modifying “time,” that is, “ragged time.” Etymologically, the hyphenated form used in the earlier articles (rag-time) and the rarer two-word form (rag time) also suggest adjectival origins.

The assumption of ragtime’s being characterized primarily by a syncopated rhythm was so widespread that few writers questioned this connection. One who did was music critic and biographer Francis Toye (1883–1964). Noting the absence of syncopation in some pieces identified as ragtime, he commented:

I do not think that rag-time can be defined as rhythm at all. True it has a characteristic rhythm and usually a syncopated one. But not invariably. The popular “Hitchy-Koo” and “Dixie,” for instance, are hardly syncopated, yet it were pure pedantry not to class them as rag-time.³⁴

Another writer, giving similar reasons, tried to separate the concept of ragtime from syncopation:

Perhaps the best way to define ragtime and prove that it and syncopation are not necessarily analogous will be to go to the bottom of things and summon up some actual illustration.…

“For Me and My Gal” is typically ragtime, yet it is practically free of syncopation—to be exact, there are just three measures of syncopated melody.… The most striking example of ragtime music came out a few years ago in Irving Berlin’s song “Alexander’s Ragtime Band.” …

What made this song so popular? It was not syncopation, for there is no syncopation at all in the chorus, which is the most pleasing part of the song.³⁵

These articles, however, are exceptions, and reflect the general tendency by 1911 to include in the ragtime category almost any rhythmical, popular music. At least one commentator protested against this extension of the term “ragtime,” suggesting that its application be restricted to syncopated music:

“Ragtime” … has become a most comprehensive word in recent years, and at least with a certain class of musicians who should know better, it means pretty nearly anything not under the head of serious or classical music.

If the rhythmic element predominates or is at all prominent it is “ragtime,” no matter whether a single instance of syncopation occurs in the music or not.…

The writer, for one, is in favor of restricting the word ragtime to its original definition, as meaning that time or rhythm in which the dominating characteristic feature is syncopation.³⁶

This protest reveals a recognition, by 1913, of the process that was already divesting ragtime of its most definitive feature. Of this process, more will be said later.

Ragtime Dance

From its earliest days ragtime has been associated with dancing. Performers who sang ragtime lyrics on the minstrel stage also danced to its rhythms. As the music moved to the ballroom, syncopated ragtime marches, two-steps, and cakewalks co-existed with unsyncopated versions of the same steps. In some instances the dances themselves acquired the ragtime label. Throughout the period there are references to specific steps being “rags” and to “ragging” being a style of dancing.³⁷ More often, though, dances were simply associated with ragtime music without appropriating the name. While almost any duple- or quadruplemetered step could be executed to the music, some dances had an especially close affiliation with ragtime.

Ragtime sheet music, which frequently lists the “appropriate” dances, is an important source of information on ragtime ballroom styles; a year-by-year survey of the sheet music clearly reveals the gradual changes in fashions.

The dances named on the earliest ragtime sheet music are the cakewalk, march, and two-step. (As with the word “ragtime,” there is no orthographical consistency; “cakewalk” and “two-step” appear also as “cake walk,” “cake-walk,” “two step,” and “twostep.”) An indication of the lack of musical distinction made between these dances is that all, or any combination, may be listed on a single piece of music: The Rag-Time Sports. Cake Walk-March and Two Step (1899); Rag Time Society. Characteristic March & Two Step (1899); or Africana. A Rag-Time Classic. Characteristic March Two-Step and Cakewalk (1903). Sometimes another dance, such as the polka, is also included: The Honolulu Cake Walk. Ragtime March (1899) “Can also be used as: Two-Step, Polka or Cake-Walk.”³⁸

The first of these three main dances to disappear from the sheet music was the Cakewalk, which died out by 1904. The march began to decline in 1908, and the two-step in 1911; both dances, though, lingered on until the mid-1910s.

In the second decade of the century new dances were cited on ragtime sheet music, but without the persistence of the earlier steps. The turkey trot had a short life, from about 1912 to 1914; the one-step and fox trot were both prominent by 1913, the former lasting until 1917, the latter having an unmatched longevity.³⁹ The slow drag was mentioned throughout the entire ragtime period, but never in significant numbers.

With less consistency many other dances were associated with ragtime. The vocal version of Scott Joplin’s Ragtime Dance is particularly interesting for its inventory of dances,⁴⁰ some of which do not appear in other sources. It is possible that these less familiar dances had a restricted circulation and were known primarily in the black communities. The dances mentioned are the “rag time dance,” “cake walk prance,” “slow drag,” “worlds fair dance,” “clean up dance,” “Jennie Cooler dance,” “rag two step,” “back step prance,” “dude walk,” “stop time,” and “Sedidus walk.”

Despite the variety of dance names appearing in Joplin’s piece, almost all of the music retains the same rhythmic character. Only the “stop time” and “Sedidus walk” use music of a different style—“stop-time” music, which appears infrequently in published ragtime.⁴¹ It was not until the second decade of the century, with the appearance of the fox trot, that a major ragtime-related dance was again linked with music of a differentiated character. As is demonstrated in Chapter Eight, the rhythmic patterns associated with the fox trot tended to replace the accepted modes of ragtime syncopation, and this process ultimately led to the disintegration of ragtime as a distinctive musical type.

Jazz and the Close of the Ragtime Era

It was with the advent of the “jazz age,” shortly before 1920, that the ragtime era came to a close. The end came gradually, as characteristics of ragtime were absorbed by jazz; for a while the two terms were freely interchanged. At last, supplanted by a newer wave of syncopation, ragtime ceased to be the emissary of American popular culture.

Jazz, like ragtime, originally embraced a much broader musical and social spectrum than is accorded to it by present-day thought. In publications of the late 1910s and early twenties jazz was typified not by the figures who are today considered the main exponents of that time (such as Louis Armstrong, Jelly Roll Morton, Fletcher Henderson, and Bix Beiderbecke), but by popular band leaders and songwriters (Paul Whiteman, Irving Berlin, Victor Herbert)—and by ballroom dance.

Many writers used the terms ragtime and jazz almost synonymously:

Oldtimers such as “Alexander’s Ragtime Band” … and “Maple Leaf Rag” began to establish a conventional form for jazz.…

For purposes of this discussion we will omit the waltz, which is not jazz, and the so-called “ballad.” Just how is the typical “rag” built?⁴²

A report on Roger-Ducasse’s Epithalme discusses the composer’s use of “ragtime rhythms” as “evidence of the valuable use to which the European craze for jazz can be put.”⁴³ A discussion of jazz describes the “ragtime pianist” in terms that apply equally to the jazz pianist: “The real ragtime pianist is a composer as well as performer. That is, he can take a tune and reharmonize it if necessary, judiciously introduce innovations, alter the rhythm.”⁴⁴ In describing “fly-drumming,” a ballroom drum technique, one writer suggests that the distinction between jazz and ragtime is in name only: “A decade past it was called ‘ragging’ while today we call it ‘jazzing.’”⁴⁵

There were some who objected to the word “jazz,” preferring to retain the older “ragtime”: “The Rag-time movement would have been the better style, but the word ‘Jazz’ has passed into at least two languages.”⁴⁶ Others favored the term “jazz,” even applying it to music clearly falling within the ragtime era and sphere: “Ragtime was the name employed by Mason and Moderwell; jazz was the thing they were discussing.”⁴⁷ While disagreeing over the more appropriate terminology, these two writers implicitly concur in assuming no substantive distinction between ragtime and jazz.

Some commentators of the time also tried to identify the characteristics of jazz, and while the intent was not necessarily to contrast it with ragtime, the descriptions and affiliations of jazz often served to differentiate it from the earlier style. One such association was with new dances, especially the fox trot:

The latest international word seems to be “jazz.” It is used almost exclusively in British papers to describe the kind of music dancing—particularly dancing—imported from America.… While society once “ragged,” they now “jazz.”⁴⁸

Jazz, in brief, is a compound of (a) the fox-trot rhythm, a four-four measure (alla breve) with a double accent, and (b) a syncopated melody over this rhythm.⁴⁹

Jazz is also typified by certain unique instrumental effects:

⁵⁰