Please stop confusing me Winehouse

She was talking about her extremely impressive album 'Back to Black' and how she'd gone about writing the tunes.

Devastatingly, she'd created such a top-class piece of work by turning her back on jazz.

She told how she had flirted with harmonic tensions aplenty in her previous work and had come to the conclusion that simplicity was key.

She'd resolved (there's a pun for the music geeks) to return to the simple chord changes synonymous with the great Motown bands of the sixties.

I felt like there had been some kind of error. I couldn't possibly enjoy Winehouse if it meant I was shunning or implicitly criticising jazz in the process.

It was a moment of pure horror. Had I been cheating on jazz, unknowingly laughing behind its back and mocking its elderly mother by bopping my head to Winehouse's anti-jazz propaganda?

Someone was to blame. Winehouse's people should label her album more clearly, I thought. They should label it with her anti-jazz message - "contains no improvisation" or "may contain watered-down chords".

Who knew how many of my other favourite albums were implicating me in something ghastly?

I was left paranoid enough to consider the possibility that Stevie Wonder's 'Innervisions' was a subtle piece of holocaust denial and Jeff Buckley's 'Grace' a tribute to a young Robert Kilroy Silk.

Of course, I quickly forgot such absurdities and reminded myself that soul and jazz are allowed to co-exist - there's plenty of room for both simple and sophisticated harmony in my CD collection.

I love Sam Cooke and Curtis Mayfield as much as I love Miles Davis and Chick Corea but I guess I hate it when people like Winehouse fool me into momentarily feeling they're in competition.