And that's a dilemma in a way. And he says that what he does is not music for rock stadiums, it's music for small clubs. That he has to make it work financially and every other way by finding the small clubs and the small record labels to support him. It seems to me that this is a realisation that is slowly dawning on people. That if the big record companies and the mass market for jazz, which is anyway not that big, are not interested, if jazz has gone in that direction, then we have to get government money, sponsorship money, whatever kind of money we can get to make sure we get decently paid when we play a gig to fifty or a hundred people.
Somebody has to support the music now.
We support it ourselves, of course, but it should be seen as a creative part of any country's culture. This is difficult here in America where they are used to things having to pay for themselves and generally there's not much support going to jazz. Generally in Europe the whole system of culture, symphony orchestras, the conservatories and so on are heavily supported. Claiming that jazz is art means that it deserves some part of this support. And we know that the audience might be relatively small in comparison to the masses, but we should not even try to get to the masses with this music.