Despite the fact that it commands a large portion of the jazz marketplace, smooth jazz has become the "elephant in the room" in jazz studies—its absence from contemporary jazz scholarship is made all the more conspicuous by its ubiquity in contemporary society. With a few exceptions, there has been little discussion of its history, characteristics, or reception within the discipline. What notice it has received has come mainly from the popular press, and even there it is often dismissed as being too commercial to be substantial. Throughout its development, various terms have been used to describe this music, many of which betray its apparent lack of legitimacy: jazz-pop, light jazz, jazz-lite, or just crossover. The latter term in particular references the style's self-conscious positioning within the music market, and highlights its intent to appeal to both jazz and mainstream (i.e., nonjazz) listeners alike. As the opening quote illustrates, this commercialism often stands in direct contrast to the critical reception of the music, and continues to undermine musicians' attempts to establish the music as a serious musical genre with respect to jazz and popular music criticism. For example, in 1977, New York Times critic Robert Palmer quips: "The best way to listen to jazz pop is to forget that many jazz fans consider it a failed art music" (Palmer 1977).