Connect with us

Features

” Against All Odds”: The Enduring Legacy of Louis Armstrong

Published

on

by Dahami Samarathunga

During my college days, I had a neighbor who would enthusiastically blast his ‘Louis Armstrong’ AKA ‘Satchmo,’ collection on weekend afternoons. He was eager to share his refined musical taste with the entire neighbourhood. While the noise often tempted me to confront him, I believe it was our friendly small talk and his wife’s warm, endearing smile, which I’d receive just before heading off to class, that managed to dissuade me from taking up the disturbance of the loud music with him. I always thought their house was a testament to a bygone era, with its picket fence and asphalt shingles, resembling a perfectly preserved snapshot of a bygone age.

Although, I appreciates jazz, his loud music often felt like an intrusion into a quiet neighbourhood. Like many of my generation, my exposure to Armstrong’s music was limited to occasional snippets, like bits from ‘What a Wonderful World’ on TV commercials. I couldn’t fathom how someone my age could find relevance in jazz composed nearly a century ago. To make matters worse, with a mountain of assignments, research papers, theses, and exams piling up, I was already at my wit’s end, and was simply in no mood to hear ‘I want a big butter and bread man” every other weekend.

However, after my neighbours’ passing last October, I felt compelled to listen to a lot of Satchmo’s work work and soon I discovered why he peaked as high as he did. He was a trailblazer without an equal, often dubbed as one of the most influential forefathers of jazz and scat singing. Armstrong was a colossus of musical innovation, whose groundbreaking artistry, infectious attraction and enduring legacy have continue to inspire and delight audiences across generations, cementing his status as an iconic legend in the pantheon of American music.

Beyond his mastery of the trumpet, his revolutionary techniques and his much-loved gravelly voice, it was Louis Armstrong’s infectious grin, quick wit, and general demeanour that truly set him apart from others. His was a warm and humorous personality that won him a multitude of fans and captured the hearts of millions worldwide. His ability to connect with people through his music, humour, and charisma has cemented his legacy as a beloved entertainer and a timeless icon in the world of jazz.

Born into dire poverty in 1901, Armstrong grew up mostly under his grandmother’s care. He lacked the simple joys of life as a child and suffered malnutrition. In the early 1900’s despite his grandmother’s ambitions for him, being of African descent was a major setback and at the age of seven, he was forced to work selling newspapers or vegetables on the street. At age 11, he had quit school and joined a quartet of boys who sang on the streets for money. After few months of work, he saved enough to buy a used cornet with which he taught himself to play.

During their street performances, Louis and friends would come into contact with many different musicians who played in ‘Storyville Honky Tonks.’ It was here that one of towns best known trumpeters, Bunk Johnson, noticed Armstrong’s raw talent and taught him a variety of techniques to refine his already impressive skills. Johnson invited Armstrong to attend his concerts, paving the way for the young prodigy’s future success.

During this time, Louis lived with his mother and sister and worked for the Karnoffskys’, a local family of Lithuanian Jews. He often helped the family with their two children, Morris and Alex, and did chores around the house. Many believe his fondness for the Jewish faith came from this connection revealed in his memoir ‘Louis Armstrong + the Jewish Family in New Orleans, LA’. Working for the Karnoffskys’ and singing Russian lullabies to put the children to sleep inspired him to ‘sing from the heart’.

As a young boy, Louis Armstrong generally steered clear of trouble, but on New Year’s Eve in 1912 an impetuous act of firing a blank into the air with his stepfather’s gun led to his arrest. As a result, he spent the night in a lock-up and the New Orleans Juvenile Court sentenced him to detention at the Colored Waif’s Home the next day. The home, run by the strict Captain Joseph Jones, was akin to a military camp, with discipline enforced through corporal punishment.

Ironically, it was within those walls that Louis discovered his true passion. The home’s brass band captivated him, as he longed to join its ranks. But the band director was initially hesitant, wary of his troubled past and feared the repercussions of accepting a ‘gun-toting kid from Storyville’ into the band. But Louis’ continued persistence eventually worked as he not only became a member of the band but its leader. It was said that Peter Davis, who became Armstrong’s first teacher was highly impressed with not only his ability, but also his creative mind. And with this band, the 13-year-old Armstrong caught the eye of the likes of Kid Ory.

After being released from detention around 1914, Louis met one of his idols, New Orleans cornet star, Joe “King” Oliver. Oliver was pleased teach and share his skill with upcoming artists and took Louis under his wing, eventually making him his protégé. By 1918, Armstrong had played in brass bands and riverboats in New Orleans, and travelled with the band of Jazz pianist Fate Marable who played on board a steamboat plying up and down the Mississippi River.

Marable was highly impressed with Armstrong’s music and encouraged him and other members of his band to learn sight reading of music. Armstrong would later recounted this time as a crucial part of his career. He described it as his introduction to formal education in music saying it was as though he and his fellow bandsmen were “going to the University” with wider exposure to work with written arrangements.

By the age of 20, Armstrong had already honed his skills to become a proficient sight-reader of music and a pioneering jazz performer renowned for his extended trumpet solos that showcased his unique personality and style. He also began to sing during his performances, adding another dimension to his artistry. In 1922, Armstrong made a pivotal move to Chicago, joining King Oliver’s Creole Jazz Band at the prestigious Lincoln Gardens, a blacks-only venue.

Despite his age, Armstrong’s talent earned him a coveted spot as Oliver’s as second cornet artiste, a huge feat considering his amateur status. Shortly after, news of the young prodigy’s performances spread like wildfire, attracting a diverse audience of music enthusiasts, including future jazz legends Benny Goodman and Bix Beiderbecke who would sneak into the dance hall to experience Armstrong’s magic.

After leaving New Orleans in 1922, Armstrong spent three years playing in jazz ensembles in Chicago and Harlem. He was largely content to be a journeyman musician, but his second wife, pianist Lil Hardin believed he was simply too talented not have a band of his own considering his growing popularity. In 1925, while Armstrong was performing in New York, Hardin went behind his back and secured a deal with Chicago’s Dreamland Café to advertise and use him as a featured artiste.

She even demanded his being billed as “The World’s Greatest Trumpet Player.” Despite Armstrong’s’ hesitation, many believed it was a clever entrepreneurial decision on his wife’s part as this marketing gimmick eventually played out in his favour. It turned out to be the best move of his career, as a few days after arriving in Chicago, Armstrong was given the permission to make his first recordings under his own name by ‘OKeh Records’ – a monumental moment in his career.

Between 1925 -1928, Armstrong and his backup bands, the Hot Five and Hot Seven, went on to release over dozen records that introduced the world to his improvisational trumpet solos and trademark scat singing – all commercial successes. The legendary Hot Five and Hot Seven bands captured not only Armstrong’s development as a fine Jazz soloist, but showcased superiority to his peers and many other artists before his time. His “Struttin with Some Barbecue,” “Cornet Chop Suey” and “Potato Head Blues” were often regarded as three masterpieces where he seemingly switched from the mellower-sounding cornet to the trumpet winning the highest critical praise. His efforts at hitting the higher notes was considered revolutionary at the time.

Asked in an interview to discuss the secret of his success and what distinguished him and his peers from the then current crop of artists, Armstrong replied, “I don’t know what they did. I don’t know where they blew it from.” He added, “That’s their business, but if they sounded good I don’t care where it came from.

You understand? Music is music.” Asked about the future of jazz, he expressed confidence that it would remain secure as long as the sanctity of music was upheld. Responding to a question of changing his style to suit younger audiences, he said, “No, why should you change your music, Mozart didn’t change. Bach didn’t change.” When the interviewer stated that some might find that strategy to be a bit regressive, Armstrong countered, “We never did worry about styles, there ain’t no such thing as styles in music. There ain’t but two kinds of music, good or bad. That’s all.”

Despite his phenomenal success, many often-overlooked the chapter of relentless racism in his career which he and fellow artists of colour endured in the industry. This, ironically, was a stark contrast to the joyfulness in his music . Critics noted that he was often singled out among African American artists during the tumultuous 1940s-1950s, with some labelling him an “Uncle Tom” due to his perceived acquiescence of discrimination, in contrast to figures like Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali who vocally denounced the US government’s handling of racial issues. While some believed Armstrong’s restrained approach was driven by a fear of backlash and career repercussions – which was a legitimate concern given the industry’s predominantly white ownership – his actions nevertheless remained a testament to his strength and perseverance in the face of adversity.

In Sacha Jenkins’ documentary ‘Louis Armstrong’s Black and Blues’ , revealed a rare interview where Armstrong reminisced on the discrimination he faced in the industry, from being heckled by an audience member who yelled ‘I don’t like Negros’ to his face ‘ to being disrespected on a film set in a manner which he believed ,no white artist would ever tolerate.

Armstrong also said in his usual humorous manner how he got last laugh at the encounter he had on the movie set, adding he even harangued them on ‘where to stick their movie’. And as a man who was born less then a half century after the abolition of slavery, it was no less of a miracle that Armstrong reached levels of fame and success that could rival the likes off Frank Sinatra or Bing Crosby, who were both studio darlings.

Louis Armstrong also bridged the generational gap by collaborating with younger artists, notably Ella Fitzgerald, with whom he released the iconic album, “Ella and Louis,” in 1956. This masterpiece showcased the duo’s undeniable chemistry and offered a powerful representation of black Americans in the 1950s, emphasizing the importance of unity and solidarity in the face of segregation. In late 1963, Louis Armstrong (and his All Stars ) recorded “Hello, Dolly!”, a title track for an upcoming musical project.

Although Armstrong himself had low expectations for the song, it became a massive hit when the show premiered on Broadway making “Hello Dolly!” reach number one on the charts, surpassing two songs by The Beatles at the height of ‘Beatlemania in 1964’, making Armstrong the oldest musician in American history to have a number one song at 62 years of age. His crossover appeal continued with his starring role in the film adaptation of “Hello, Dolly!” in 1969, where he shared the screen with Barbra Streisand, further cementing his status as a generational icon. Critics believed these projects demonstrated Armstrong’s ability to transcend age and genre boundaries, leaving an indelible mark music and American cultural heritage.

Shorty before his death on July 6, 1971, in February Armstrong played a two‐week engagement at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. When asked about his return to the scene he said, “I’m going back to work when my treaders get in as good shape as my chops.” Showing audiences that the ‘showman’ in him hasn’t died out despite his rapid decline of health.

“If anybody was Mr. Jazz it was Louis Armstrong. He was the epitome of jazz and always will be. He is what I call an American standard, an American original,” Jazz icon Duke Ellington once said. Critics believe it was a testament to his prodigious talent, innovative spirit, and iconic image that were inextricably linked with the genre of jazz, making him an embodiment of that art form. His legacy continues to inspire generations of musicians, from , Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday to modern virtuosos like Jon Batiste. And, though, the state of Jazz is in no state of a disarray, its current state is a far cry from its former glory, leaving many to ponder if there will ever be another artist who can match the success and enduring influence of Louis Armstrong.

Regina Bain, executive director of Armstrong’s house museum in Corona, lauded him for his unwavering perseverance and resiliency in the face of intense backlash from social critics. ‘Despite enduring racial terror that affected his life and well-being, he continued to push forward,’ she said. ‘While no one, including Armstrong, deserves such treatment, his ability to overcome obstacles and achieve legendary status is a testament to his remarkable talent and strength.’

His influence strictly went beyond nearly a century of jazz to include everyone from Leonard Bernstein to the Rolling Stones, and his imprints extended far beyond jazz, with his momentum serving as an inspiration for many artists in popular music still to this day . And as J.D. Allen once aptly put it, ‘All roads lead back to Pops,’ nodding to Armstrong’s enduring impact as a once-in-a-generation icon.

(The writer is a Sri Lankan living in Toronto, Canada. She may be contacted at dahamisamarathunga44@gmail.com)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Addressing human rights needs multi-pronged approach

Published

on

Volker Türk

by Jehan Perera

The ongoing 63rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which runs from September 7 to October 7, 2026, in Geneva is important to Sri Lanka. Its outcome will send a signal to other international actors, including the European Union, as to whether Sri Lanka’s reform policy is on track. The written update on Sri Lanka, prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights under High Commissioner Volker Türk and presented by Deputy High Commissioner Nada Al-Nashif, has taken a more holistic approach to the government’s performance over the past year. It acknowledged the progress Sri Lanka has made under the NPP government in relation to accountability for financial fraud and other economic crimes. At the same time, the High Commissioner’s update made clear that progress in relation to economic crime cannot be equated with progress in relation to accountability for grave human rights violations committed during the armed conflict and in other periods of political violence.

The government may have felt sufficiently confident that its response to the High Commissioner’s update could be handled by its representative in Geneva and did not require the attendance of Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath. Sri Lanka’s representative Sumith Dassanayake called for a fundamental review of country-specific mandates within the UN Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka has been facing repeated scrutiny in the form of successive UNHRC resolutions from 2012 onwards. Ambassador Dassanayake argued that such mandates should not continue indefinitely and must be regularly assessed against measurable objectives and tangible outcomes. This may reflect confidence that its record of reform is beginning to receive recognition internationally. The reports and statements at the Human Rights Council acknowledged progress in the government’s efforts to address corruption and economic crime.

The government’s anti-corruption drive has included investigations into allegations involving individuals who held the highest political offices in the country. The arrest of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe in connection with alleged misuse of public funds, and the investigation into the controversial SriLankan Airlines Airbus transaction involving former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s son, are examples of the reach of these investigations. The arrest of SLPP National Organiser and Member of Parliament Namal Rajapaksa in connection with allegations relating to the Airbus purchase scandal has also demonstrated that the government is willing to pursue cases involving politically powerful figures.

Wide Range

The ongoing investigations appear to encompass a wide range of parliamentarians and government members, both past and present. They suggest that accountability for corruption is not being confined to lower-level officials or to individuals who lack political influence. This is precisely the kind of accountability that the public has long demanded and that previous governments have too often failed to deliver. The government is also reaching into the upper levels of the military hierarchies of the past. The case in which 11 young men, most of them Tamil, disappeared after being abducted in Colombo between 2008 and 2009 involved allegations that some families were asked to pay ransoms. The investigation into this case has reached senior military figures. The willingness to pursue such cases is important because it challenges the assumption that those who exercised power during the war are beyond the reach of the law. Such cases would provide a practical test of whether the government’s commitment to accountability for economic crimes is part of a broader commitment to the rule of law.

Success in prosecuting corruption cannot substitute for justice for those who were unlawfully killed, disappeared, tortured or otherwise victimised. The UN report noted that there had been no recognition or accountability for crimes under international law, gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law committed by all parties during the war. The government has yet to establish a credible and effective process to address the many cases of enforced disappearance, extrajudicial killing, torture and other serious violations. The government needs to take the international commitments it has inherited on human rights issues seriously. It needs to adopt a multi-pronged approach and go beyond focusing primarily on financial and corruption-related accountability.

Need Action

As a member of the international community, Sri Lanka has a responsibility to abide by the commitments it has made. It cannot selectively uphold international obligations postponing those that are politically difficult. Also, as a small country, Sri Lanka has a self-interest in ensuring the survival of international law, which is all that it has to protect it from the depredations of the bigger international actors. The erosion of international law by powerful states makes it all the more important that smaller states uphold the principles on which the international system is based. Sri Lanka cannot credibly appeal to international law when it is threatened from outside while disregarding its own obligations within. Sri Lanka also needs to win the confidence of its own population that it is committed to justice and equality for all. Public opinion polls and community-level research have disclosed that ethnic and religious minorities are appreciative of the sense of greater security they enjoy under the present government from ethnic or religious extremists.

But a sense of security is not the same as the fulfilment of rights. As far as the Tamil people are concerned, the government has yet to deliver on several of its specific promises. These include the long-standing problems of missing persons, the release of political prisoners who have been members of Tamil militant organisations, and the return of land taken over for military purposes during the war. The issue of Buddhist statues and archaeological sites found on their properties which are then taken from their control continue to trouble them especially as they see no signs of resolution of those disputes. The issue of pastureland in the east of the country in Mylathamadu is particularly concerning to them as they see orders by successive presidents, both President Ranil Wickremesinghe and President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, being disregarded on the ground. The Mylathamadu pastureland dispute is where traditional Tamil dairy farmers have engaged in multi-year protests against the ongoing encroachment of their ancestral grazing lands by Sinhalese crop cultivators relocated under government development schemes.

The government’s failure to hold Provincial Council elections is particularly troubling. The provincial council system is the only one that can provide the Tamil people and other ethnic minorities the opportunity to wield political power and exercise a measure of self-determination in the areas in which they are the numerical majority. The continued postponement of Provincial Council elections therefore has consequences that go beyond an ordinary electoral delay. It deprives communities of an important constitutional avenue for democratic participation and power-sharing. The ethnic and religious minorities appreciate what the government is doing in the larger national interest, but they must not be made to feel that their special concerns are being ignored. The government cannot resolve Sri Lanka’s entire legacy of rights violations overnight. But it does need to demonstrate that it is willing to move forward on multiple fronts, not only on a few.

Continue Reading

Features

The emptying university: why are academics leaving?

Published

on

by Hasini Lecamwasam

Brain drain in Sri Lanka is at an all-time high. The latest Human Flight and Brain Drain Index for 2024 shows that we are 16th of 175 countries on this count, and first in South Asia. That this is a crisis goes without saying. Brain drain affects all sectors, and is a huge strain on the resources of a developing country. Particularly in Sri Lanka, where considerable public investment is made in the moulding of professionals through the system of free education, this amounts to transferring the resources of poorer countries to richer ones with top migration destinations. It is, therefore, important to consider the push and pull factors behind skilled outmigration, specifically from the public university system of Sri Lanka, a key focus of the Kuppi column.

From frustration to exit

Several bitter realities in our crumbling public university system act as push factors in the migration decisions of academics. Many essays on this column have, over several years, attempted to highlight numerous aspects of this erosion. Perhaps, primary among them is the lack of adequate funding, which has debilitating ramifications for the system: very little investment is made in the up-keep of infrastructure (and even less in its expansion), resulting in serious constraints in accommodating growing batches of students and the wellbeing of the staff (particularly in regional universities); research funding is negligible, severely curtailing academics’ ability to effectively discharge their primary duty of teaching which should ideally be informed by their research (and the research of others, access to which is also, unfortunately, mediated by funding); a funding crunch also means a slash in (or greater constraints on) recruitments, increasing the workloads of academics, currently in service, and eating into the quality of their teaching and research.

What recruitments are done frustrate those with any faith in merit. As many of our interventions in this column have shown, recruitment processes are characterised by archaic selection criteria that place very little weight on a candidate’s postgraduate growth and the advantages of interdisciplinary training. Added to this is the general preference for ‘culturally compliant’ candidates who would not rock the boat too much. The combined effect is that those with the capacity and spirit to try out innovations in education are discouraged from joining or staying on in the public university system. Some, or many, of them may instead seek appointments abroad.

A thread that binds all of these problems together is pervasive hierarchy which, again, many interventions on this column have sought to highlight. It is the interest in preserving hierarchy that leads to the preference for alumni in recruitment processes. Hierarchy within universities can be particularly frustrating for younger faculty and women, who typically have to bear the brunt of the workload of their senior, often male, colleagues. In a context of funding, and, therefore, recruitment, restrictions, this translates into a disproportionate burden being placed on junior (usually female) faculty, seriously hindering their prospects of growing into successful academics due to the time constraints within which they have to operate. Junior academics, therefore, are more likely to look to educational institutions abroad for what they hope would be a different work culture that respects them more.

Ideological ruses

On top of these structural frustrations are also the workings of neoliberal ideology. For one, the nature of relations between the global metropole and peripheral countries like Sri Lanka largely dictates what is desirable and what is not. The apparent lifestyles of Western countries – from food to clothing, housing, appliances, and so on – have continued to lure people from the periphery with the promise of a ‘better’ life, alongside better career advancement opportunities. This, of course, masks much of the struggle that goes on behind the scenes to survive in Western societies. For instance, in most cases highly attractive public infrastructure such as roads, public transport, clean air, quality control of food, and so on belie the astronomical privatised costs of healthcare and education. Health insurance is usually mandatory and steep in most high-income settings, while even subsidised education (for which eligibility criteria are strict) creates a serious dent in household earnings. Of course, the happy images of glossy trams and gleeful international travellers don’t convey this.

A second ideological ruse is the myth of greater opportunities and recognition abroad. While there is no denying that local skilled sectors – be it higher education, health, civil service, or private white-collar positions – are replete with issues that inhibit merit-based professional advancement, the notion that things are fundamentally different in Western countries stems from an uninformed optimism. As is now increasingly known and discussed, Western labour markets are notoriously racialised, and equivalent skills are rarely treated as such. Instead, it is usually demanded that skilled migrants clear certain formal examinations in their host countries. In fields like medicine, this is followed by an interview that may also be racially prejudiced. Once these initial steps are cleared, remuneration reverts to square one irrespective of experience accumulated abroad, not to mention the many subtle aggressions, rejections, and trials one has to go through in the negotiation of everyday life. In the many cases where professional qualifications are used as leverage for a move abroad, sights are set on a better future for one’s children, which again is informed by the misplaced faith in greater opportunities and a lack of awareness of the factors outlined above. Needless to say, in the global swing to the Right, things have become even more challenging. In such a context, considering the few rare cases where skilled migrants live extremely comfortable lives as the norm becomes a dangerous misconception.

The two ideological pull factors mentioned above are complemented by a push factor, which has to do with a highly classed understanding of what a white-collar professional is due in their society. Many of these aspirations are clearly articulated in academic trade union action demanding separate quotas for school entry, increased fuel allowances, winning back the presently stalled vehicle permit scheme, salary hikes, and so on. While working people have every right to agitate for better material conditions, insofar as it remains unconnected to a broader movement for improving the conditions of the lot of the working class, it remains self-serving and very much within the class logic of capitalist society. Since these demands are articulated as a means of maintaining distinction, it is clear that they are not envisaged as part of a class movement. The frustration of not having these needs for distinction satisfied may push some to seek greener pastures abroad, at least financially, (perhaps as a means of social mobility based on it), only to be disappointed on most occasions.

What is to be done?

Addressing the systemic push factors listed above requires, first and foremost, greater allocations for free public higher education. This would immediately translate into more recruitments and less work per academic, and better research and teaching in the long haul. An increase in funding would also ideally lead to greater infrastructural investments, especially including improving the living conditions of those who work in regional universities amid untold hardships. Next, fairer, more creative, and, therefore, more effective recruitment policies are badly needed to attract talented individuals to university positions. Rather than carving out a ‘special category’ for academics to achieve this purpose, which is informed by a classed logic, this needs to be done through fundamental reforms in recruitment processes. Third, a persistent attack on the entrenched hierarchy within universities through internal reform is much called for. Reforming recruitment practices will go a long way towards addressing this. Measures should also be taken to introduce more stringent policies against SGBV (not to mention ragging, even though it is not directly connected to brain drain). Such measures would create a safer, fairer, and more attractive workplace, which would give more reasons for people to stay.

On top of greater allocations, we also need a transformation of our aspirations themselves if this situation is to change. That necessitates a kind of education capable of questioning the ‘paradise’ conception of Western societies, and lays bare their colonial material and ideological dimensions, in both their historical and contemporary manifestations. These colonial understandings of the ‘good life’, moreover, have devastating ecological implications for the planet, not to mention social justice. An education with the ability to transform this mindset would hopefully prove to be more than a mere path to social mobility, rather being a tool of social emancipation that renders mobility moot.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is with the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Continue Reading

Features

Friends favourite Suzi Croner returns for Oktoberfest 2026

Published

on

Charming audiences in Switzerland as Suzi Flückiger, Sri Lanka’s own Suzi Croner is coming home… for a very special occasion.

The bubbly former frontline vocalist of 90s band Friends will take the stage at a popular venue in Colombo for Oktoberfest 2026.

Known in Europe for her country and classic hits, Suzi has remained a much-loved name back home. This will be a rare chance for local fans to see her live and celebrate the voice behind so many Friends memories.

Oktoberfest 2026 in Colombo promises an evening of live music, traditional Bavarian food and beer, colourful dirndls and lederhosen, folk dancing, and plenty of community cheer.

Suzi Croner (Flückiger)

Against this lively backdrop, Suzi will take the stage for a special solo set, featuring her own pre-recorded music. She performed at the event last year too, as a solo artiste, but a German band providing the music.

This year, however she says, it’s a different scene.

“The novel attraction will be the dancers from Germany — all girls, clad in German outfits,” Suzi said. She added that the event will also highlight the activities generally connected with Oktoberfest, which should generate a lot of fun and excitement for those who join her in Colombo next month.

Suzi has become a much-in-demand artiste in Europe, and has even performed Down Under, in Melbourne.

In Switzerland, where she has been based for the past 42 years, she continues to charm audiences with country and classic hits, performing at private events and community nights across Europe.

“My weekends are generally loaded with my work as a singer,” she said. “And I also play tennis three times a week, because I need to keep fit to entertain my audience in an active way.”

Her repertoire is made up mainly of Swiss, German and English songs.

And true to form, Suzi loves springing surprises.

“So watch out when you join me at Oktoberfest 2026, in Colombo!” she said.

Continue Reading

Trending