Seite - (000169) - in Knowledge and Networks

162 model structure (Fig. 8.1d–f) shows the stability of a core and connected periphery configuration, reinforcing the idea of a fairly cohesive field. Yet in Fig. 8.4 a slight shift from the superiority of degree centrality towards betweenness centrality is detectable. When the field reaches the 1955–1959 period, there is a relative equilib- rium between the average betweenness centrality and the average degree centrality, indicating that the field was swinging back towards a more centralized configuration. Elite-2 musicians, mostly associated with the emerging bop style, were impor- tant players from 1945 to 1960. In Fig. 8.1d it is evident that Elite-2 musicians dominated the core, partially displacing Ivory Tower and Elite-1 musicians to the periphery or to the outskirts of the core. Nonetheless, in an increasingly open sys- tem as the phonographic field was becoming (Perrow, 1986, pp.178–218), uncon- tested dominance was not guaranteed. During the following period, from 1950 to 1954, Elite-2’s dominance of the core was shared with Elite-1 and Ivory Tower (Fig. 8.1e). It was first during the 1945–1949 period that Elite-1 and Elite-2 trajectory musi- cians became more prominent than other trajectory types (Fig. 8.2d). This promi- nence was maintained throughout the ensuing period (Fig. 8.2e). Although Shooting Star trajectory musicians had been prominent during the previous period (see Fig. 8.1c), they were now pushed into a more peripheral role. However, the leadership of Elite-2 members was not sustained for long: It soon became a dispersed and low cohesion group (Fig. 8.2f). Although Elite-2 musicians were still central (Fig. 8.1f), they showed low levels of collaboration among them- selves, spending more effort in exploring outbound relationships. In contrast, those in the Elite-1 and Ivory Tower clusters, along with both generations of Shooting Stars, were the only cohesive groups in this period. These findings have several implications. In the previous period, Shooting Star musicians were central in the interactions (Fig. 8.2b, c), but Elite and Ivory Tower musicians dominated the most prominent blocks (Fig. 8.1b, c). Now, however, Elite musicians were both central in the interactions (Fig. 8.2d–f) and dominant in the Core blocks (Fig. 8.2d–f). The Jazz Renaissance: 1960–1969 During the 1960s, jazz became increasingly associated with the “older generation,” and its decline quickened (see Fig. 8.5). In response to this downturn several musi- cians looked for outside the traditional canon for ways to reinvigorate that field of music. For instance, Miles Davis introduced fusion, while Stan Getz helped bring Bossa Nova to American jazz. All these efforts to mitigate jazz’s decline led to an increasingly loosely coupled field. To be sure, there was abundant reaction to dis- qualify some of these new idioms. Miles Davis’s fusion was thought to be more a style of rock than of jazz, while Coleman’s free jazz was unacceptable to some tra- ditional jazz musicians. Geographically, this period also represents a sharp decline in the U.S.-centrism of jazz. The large American cities cited in Fig. 8.3 represented C. Kirschbaum