I don't frequently do out-and-out reviews, but Dave Matthews Band's latest deserves one.
There are two kinds of DMB listeners: Those who knew or discovered them at the beginning who loved them because they were fresh and unafraid to explore the limits of their capabilities, and those who know or discovered them after radio play made them popular when they began to package their tunes for "listenability." I belong to the former category. Thus, it is a great sense of relief and joy that I cheer their latest studio CD, "Stand Up."
"Stand Up" is most like "Crash." There is no seeming beginning or end to these songs, and yet each is a stand-alone piece. I was prepared to be bored and am fortunately disappointed in that expectation. Each song caught my attention in its turn. Prepare yourself for long intros, long solos, and a different style every 5 minutes. It's a testimony to what they've recorded that I cannot ignore a single track on this CD, yet I've managed to ignore all of "Everyday" and "Busted Stuff." You can tell Dave's lyrics are off-the-cuff, written at the end of the creation period, not the beginning. Even his ever-present "mad ramblings" fit and add to the rhythms in a way that his pre-thunk lyrics never did. The point of this album doesn't seem to be so much "Listen to what I have to say," as it is "Listen to our sound." That sound is big, brash, and invigorating in a purely musical way that hasn't been heard from them on a studio album since "Before These Crowded Streets." Producer Batson has an ear for a hook AND for a line and sinker; even the most repetitive of these tracks ("Louisiana Bayou") draws you in to the diversity and talent of the individual band members. Grunge bass with funk sax? Classical violin pizzicato with R&B vocals? Piano licks with metal guitar? It's all in there, a party for the ears if you care to listen to your music instead of let it wash by you.
I predict a lot of people will hate this CD, but those people are the ones who never developed an appreciation for the individual genius of each of DMB's talented members to begin with. Let them whine. I, on the other hand, want to celebrate.
Welcome back, Dave, Boyd, LeRoi, Carter & Stefan!!
19 June 2005
26 May 2005
My Psychosis
It's late and I'm reviewing the day with a certain sense of satisfaction. After a very emotional and difficult week, I feel equilibrium return like a welcome friend. So of course, being me, I have to program in some music to cut my brain loose and let it roam. Because of the reflective tone my life has taken of late, I chose the recordings of piano days. There aren't that many, perhaps 5 altogether, though to people who hate classical music I'm sure they would seem like an entire CD in themselves. And as I listen to myself circa 1984, I realize what large chunk of me has been missing.
Passion. Not conviction, not anger, not enjoyment, not whimsy, love, or commitment. Pure emotional passion.
The music is a testament to the fact that, once upon a time, I felt with every nerve ending in my body. And poured it out through my fingertips. I could buy a piano tomorrow, practice 5 hours every day for the next 2 decades and never produce the music I produced then. Back then, music was such a psychotic experience for me. I still transcend everything when I sing, but I don't lose touch with reality. Then, I was gone--in Neverland, in a world created by the emotion and the keyboard and the sound of notes cascading through my brain. I didn't belong to the space-time continuum. And if I close my eyes as I listen, I can still see the lushly surreal, fantasmagorical worlds I visited when I played.
Music may be the most powerful communication tool ever created. It provides a direct patch from the emotional center to the subconscious. It's visceral in a way no other medium or art form is. It requires no interpretation, no conscious or logical facility to be experienced and understood.
Kirk, if you are reading this, I love you so much for dubbing this stuff over into digital for me. I rediscover myself every time I play it.
Passion. Not conviction, not anger, not enjoyment, not whimsy, love, or commitment. Pure emotional passion.
The music is a testament to the fact that, once upon a time, I felt with every nerve ending in my body. And poured it out through my fingertips. I could buy a piano tomorrow, practice 5 hours every day for the next 2 decades and never produce the music I produced then. Back then, music was such a psychotic experience for me. I still transcend everything when I sing, but I don't lose touch with reality. Then, I was gone--in Neverland, in a world created by the emotion and the keyboard and the sound of notes cascading through my brain. I didn't belong to the space-time continuum. And if I close my eyes as I listen, I can still see the lushly surreal, fantasmagorical worlds I visited when I played.
Music may be the most powerful communication tool ever created. It provides a direct patch from the emotional center to the subconscious. It's visceral in a way no other medium or art form is. It requires no interpretation, no conscious or logical facility to be experienced and understood.
Kirk, if you are reading this, I love you so much for dubbing this stuff over into digital for me. I rediscover myself every time I play it.
21 May 2005
Poetry
Lately, in my spare time, I've been going through my old and not-so-old writings. Much of it is poetic, so I've started a separate blog for that. Noetic Decay at http://noeticdecay.blogspot.com/
10 May 2005
In the Eye's Mind
In one of the last scenes of Waking Life, Richard Linklater states a theory that this entire journey called Life is nothing that instant of moving from the No to the Yes, from rejection to acceptance of God's love. I would change it and add this:
All of this life is series of moving from the No to the Yes. Yes, you choose to experience. Yes, you choose to participate. Yes, you choose to love. These are all action verbs which require a decision on your part. And each Yes adds up to a greater Yes -- the Yes to live fully, conscious that you are manifesting your own reality.
You cannot truly live if you fear death for without death you cannot be alive. It is all the same journey. Once you say Yes to Death, the fear of it dissipates. It becomes, as it has always been, just another rite of passage to experience. You find your priorities shift from holding on to what you can own of this earth to what you can create within it.
And with each Yes the next comes easier, until saying Yes becomes a reflexive muscle.
This does not mean we do not have to live within boundaries and limits. We exist in a physical form and that fact imposes its own limitations. I should know better than most what it means to burn yourself out saying Yes to too many things at once because I still do it too frequently for my body's full health. However, the life fully lived means risking everything you fear and everything that causes you pain.
So here's your task, should you choose to accept it. Say Yes to some action this week, and take the ride of that choice as far as you can. Expand and live.
All of this life is series of moving from the No to the Yes. Yes, you choose to experience. Yes, you choose to participate. Yes, you choose to love. These are all action verbs which require a decision on your part. And each Yes adds up to a greater Yes -- the Yes to live fully, conscious that you are manifesting your own reality.
You cannot truly live if you fear death for without death you cannot be alive. It is all the same journey. Once you say Yes to Death, the fear of it dissipates. It becomes, as it has always been, just another rite of passage to experience. You find your priorities shift from holding on to what you can own of this earth to what you can create within it.
And with each Yes the next comes easier, until saying Yes becomes a reflexive muscle.
This does not mean we do not have to live within boundaries and limits. We exist in a physical form and that fact imposes its own limitations. I should know better than most what it means to burn yourself out saying Yes to too many things at once because I still do it too frequently for my body's full health. However, the life fully lived means risking everything you fear and everything that causes you pain.
So here's your task, should you choose to accept it. Say Yes to some action this week, and take the ride of that choice as far as you can. Expand and live.
04 May 2005
Creative Changes for Education
Imagine if your high school class was run like a D&D game. You are a 14-year-old adventurer and you walk into this unknown classroom. You know about 4 other people out of the 25 gathered there, so you and your buds slink into seats in the back of the class. The GM/Teacher looks everyone over and starts counting you off in groups of 5. You are separated from your buds and you're moving your bookbag into the desk between the pimply-faced nerd and the snooty girl with an accent that could cut diamonds. You and your team, which includes the nerd, the snoot, a jock-wannabe, and a reject from the local stoners' bar, are given your assignment: To pass 9th grade. 80% of your overall pass rate will come from your own work. But the other 20% will come from teamwork and how well the other members your group also succeed at mastering their classes.
Think of it -- 20% is not enough to flunk you if you are a generally excellent student, but it will sure make a dent or a difference to anyone attempting to get by with a "Gentleman's C."
It also fosters teamwork and a sense of community, and motivates helpfulness through use of self-interest. Could it work?
Think of it -- 20% is not enough to flunk you if you are a generally excellent student, but it will sure make a dent or a difference to anyone attempting to get by with a "Gentleman's C."
It also fosters teamwork and a sense of community, and motivates helpfulness through use of self-interest. Could it work?
03 May 2005
Small Blessings
Among the small blessings I count in my life is a city council that has a sense of humor. They certainly needed it last night.
Kudos to Stratton Salidis, who knows how to put on a good show. My bad that I didn't bring enough popcorn. The issue at hand: Development the Meadowcreek Parkway and the eastern connector. Specifically, the $1.5 million set aside to do yet another study on how it can be accomplished. This is a road project which has been debated and rejected for 30 years. Stratton's cast of characters who spoke before Council last night included a woodchuck who moved his family into McIntire Park and would be displaced if the Parkway was built and a "developer" who wanted to spend more money on sprawl and needed the roads in order to bear the traffic of new housing and shopping center plans on his table. Most of the councilors could not keep a straight face through the procession. (Rob Schilling, the exception and the sole Republican, looked as if he thought the dignity of the council was being affronted by such tactics.)
I do not want the Parkway. I understand why it is needed, but, IMO, there's a better way to handle it.
We have made Charlottesville City a very attractive place to visit, to hang out, to shop, and to live. Unfortunately, this attractiveness has resulted in a very expensive place to live. Because of this, Albemarle County is in genuine danger of becoming overdeveloped. Certainly the road system from the County into the City that exists now barely bears the traffic required of it.
Instead of using the monies set aside for the study, or for the project itself, on paving over sections to relieve traffic congestion, why not use the money to create the kind of environment in Albemarle that Charlottesville has in abundance?
We don't need more shopping centers and residential communities, so much as we need more neighborhoods, with work and amenities within easy walking, bussing, and biking distance. Charlottesville has the Downtown area, with it's charming street mall, the University area, with its kitschy stores and trendy bars, and Barracks Road, while still a strip mall, manages to attract foot and bus traffic by the virtue of combining easy accessibility with diversity of storefronts and services.
Albemarle and Charlottesville, if they are truly concerned about traffic, should work harder to make such community settings in Albemarle territory. No one wants to go to Albemarle Square, Seminole Square, Rio Hill, or Fashion Square Mall. One needs to shop at Circuit City, Office Depot, TJ Max, or Sears. These malls are driving destinations: not a joy for window shopping, hanging out with friends, or grabbing a quick bite or drink at the local pub. They represent everything that is wrong with current development. If Albemarle had more user-friendly destinations, business, and, thus, traffic would want to develp around those neighborhoods instead of everyone driving into C'ville. What C'ville has is the ambience which makes people want to make the trip in for the day or evening. C'ville will lose that ambience unless smarter development takes place.
Kudos to Stratton Salidis, who knows how to put on a good show. My bad that I didn't bring enough popcorn. The issue at hand: Development the Meadowcreek Parkway and the eastern connector. Specifically, the $1.5 million set aside to do yet another study on how it can be accomplished. This is a road project which has been debated and rejected for 30 years. Stratton's cast of characters who spoke before Council last night included a woodchuck who moved his family into McIntire Park and would be displaced if the Parkway was built and a "developer" who wanted to spend more money on sprawl and needed the roads in order to bear the traffic of new housing and shopping center plans on his table. Most of the councilors could not keep a straight face through the procession. (Rob Schilling, the exception and the sole Republican, looked as if he thought the dignity of the council was being affronted by such tactics.)
I do not want the Parkway. I understand why it is needed, but, IMO, there's a better way to handle it.
We have made Charlottesville City a very attractive place to visit, to hang out, to shop, and to live. Unfortunately, this attractiveness has resulted in a very expensive place to live. Because of this, Albemarle County is in genuine danger of becoming overdeveloped. Certainly the road system from the County into the City that exists now barely bears the traffic required of it.
Instead of using the monies set aside for the study, or for the project itself, on paving over sections to relieve traffic congestion, why not use the money to create the kind of environment in Albemarle that Charlottesville has in abundance?
We don't need more shopping centers and residential communities, so much as we need more neighborhoods, with work and amenities within easy walking, bussing, and biking distance. Charlottesville has the Downtown area, with it's charming street mall, the University area, with its kitschy stores and trendy bars, and Barracks Road, while still a strip mall, manages to attract foot and bus traffic by the virtue of combining easy accessibility with diversity of storefronts and services.
Albemarle and Charlottesville, if they are truly concerned about traffic, should work harder to make such community settings in Albemarle territory. No one wants to go to Albemarle Square, Seminole Square, Rio Hill, or Fashion Square Mall. One needs to shop at Circuit City, Office Depot, TJ Max, or Sears. These malls are driving destinations: not a joy for window shopping, hanging out with friends, or grabbing a quick bite or drink at the local pub. They represent everything that is wrong with current development. If Albemarle had more user-friendly destinations, business, and, thus, traffic would want to develp around those neighborhoods instead of everyone driving into C'ville. What C'ville has is the ambience which makes people want to make the trip in for the day or evening. C'ville will lose that ambience unless smarter development takes place.
28 April 2005
Heavenless Hells & Homeless Homes
"unlove's the heavenless hell and homeless home
of knowledgeable shadows(quick to seize
each nothing which all soulless wraiths proclaim
substance;all heartless spectres,happiness)"
Condoleeza Rice made a statement today to the effect that it is the duty of democracies to "tell the world that tyranny is a crime of man." (See MSNBC article at http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusintl/ap04-28-180748.asp?reg=americas&vts=42820051848.)
It is my personal opinion that Ms. Rice needs to give her Pradas to charity and walk the streets of DC more often before she has earned the right to tell the world anything about tyranny. If, by "tyranny," one means the unjust or abusive exercise of a governmental power to benefit itself at the expense of its citizenry, then the United States is no stranger to it. If, by "tyranny," one means a government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power, then there are many examples in history in which a tyrant has given much better service to his people than Condoleeza Rice and her cohorts in Washington.
She continued on to say that "freedom is the universal longing of every soul." Not in my experience. In my experience, love is the longing of every soul. As a nation, we have demonstrated just how much of a heavenless hell and a homeless home unlove can create through our actions in Iraq, our lack of economic and environmental stewardship, and our unmitigated arrogance that the rest of the world would benefit from following our selfish example. The rest of the world loves us not. Why? Because we are in the winter of our discontent, making the clouds that lower over our heads.
"lovers alone wear sunlight. The whole truth
not hid by matter;not by mind revealed....
Here(only here)is freedom:always here
no then of winter equals now of spring;
but april's day transcends november's year"
Instead of dictating to other nations how they should emulate us, I suggest that it's long past time that we show those other nations something worth emulating.
(Quoted poetry from ee cummings, "unlove's the heavenless hell and homeless home," 95 Poems (1958).)
of knowledgeable shadows(quick to seize
each nothing which all soulless wraiths proclaim
substance;all heartless spectres,happiness)"
Condoleeza Rice made a statement today to the effect that it is the duty of democracies to "tell the world that tyranny is a crime of man." (See MSNBC article at http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusintl/ap04-28-180748.asp?reg=americas&vts=42820051848.)
It is my personal opinion that Ms. Rice needs to give her Pradas to charity and walk the streets of DC more often before she has earned the right to tell the world anything about tyranny. If, by "tyranny," one means the unjust or abusive exercise of a governmental power to benefit itself at the expense of its citizenry, then the United States is no stranger to it. If, by "tyranny," one means a government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power, then there are many examples in history in which a tyrant has given much better service to his people than Condoleeza Rice and her cohorts in Washington.
She continued on to say that "freedom is the universal longing of every soul." Not in my experience. In my experience, love is the longing of every soul. As a nation, we have demonstrated just how much of a heavenless hell and a homeless home unlove can create through our actions in Iraq, our lack of economic and environmental stewardship, and our unmitigated arrogance that the rest of the world would benefit from following our selfish example. The rest of the world loves us not. Why? Because we are in the winter of our discontent, making the clouds that lower over our heads.
"lovers alone wear sunlight. The whole truth
not hid by matter;not by mind revealed....
Here(only here)is freedom:always here
no then of winter equals now of spring;
but april's day transcends november's year"
Instead of dictating to other nations how they should emulate us, I suggest that it's long past time that we show those other nations something worth emulating.
(Quoted poetry from ee cummings, "unlove's the heavenless hell and homeless home," 95 Poems (1958).)
Delay's Left-Wing Conspiracy
I'm disappointed. There's finally a social club I want to join, and no one from the vast left-wing conspiracy has called me up and asked me to. Not even a solicitation for non-deductible donations. I have to say that I'm hurt. I've been a vocal leftist for over 20 voting years and they left me out in the cold. < pout >
27 April 2005
Joie de Livre
I admit to being more than a little in love with life. I wish I could hug the universe just because being alive within it is a joyous thing to feel.
However, there isn't much modern writing which falls in the category of the simply celebratory. For those who feel the world is closing in, or that it is collapsing around their ears, take a dandelion break with any any poem by e.e. cummings. Or Google him; there are several websites dedicated to this poet and author. In cummings' world, slatterns are the subject of love sonnets and even crumbs become mysterious. If you haven't discovered the craziness in a daisy, then let your soul arise and sing with any collection of his.
26 April 2005
SWF ISO SC 4 LTR
My classified ad:
Single white female in search of sustainable city for long-term residence. Must have neighborhoods, the kind where you can walk w/in 6 blocks to do all your shopping, and I don't mean at 7-11. (Resident butchers, bakers, and fresh produce included.) Rents low enough for a SINK and well-supported public transportation system required. Good cultural programs and a liberal-minded population are pluses. All qualified applicant cities will be considered.
Single white female in search of sustainable city for long-term residence. Must have neighborhoods, the kind where you can walk w/in 6 blocks to do all your shopping, and I don't mean at 7-11. (Resident butchers, bakers, and fresh produce included.) Rents low enough for a SINK and well-supported public transportation system required. Good cultural programs and a liberal-minded population are pluses. All qualified applicant cities will be considered.
The Mac & Cheese Vote
We've all seen it many times before: Given a choice between on a train or on a plane, from a cote or from a stoat, whether green eggs or green ham, Sam I Am will always choose that with which he is most familiar and comfortable.
David Toscano, all-around good Democrat and former mayor unextraordinnaire, is that familiar choice for the 57th House of Delegates seat. Everyone knows his name around town. He's a solid administrator with no major vices and, unfortunately, no major drives. He's the mac & cheese on the menu, the comfort zone choice who is expected to ride into Richmond on Mitch Van Yahres's coattails. (See http://www.toscano2005.com)
We all know that a HoD chair is like getting tenure at UVa: you have to sexually assault a student in order to be kicked out once you are in. Whoever we vote in will likely be our bump on this log ride for the next 26 years. Toscano is not Van Yahres's equal, so why is my community so hell-bent on making him Van Yahres's successor?
With apologies to Virginia Dems across the state, Charlottesville likes to consider itself the last bastion of Blue in the southern Red sea. Let's say, arguendo, that we are. Don't we owe it to ourselves to elect someone who is less of a paper tiger than Toscano? I have nothing against the man. If he gains the Dem nomination, I will vote for him. But in this, as in all things, I like to think I can do better.
WAKE UP CHARLOTTESVILLE! If you want to make a difference in the direction Virginia heads, Toscano is neither strong enough nor progressive enough to do it. He'll shortly become a party critter in a Rep-tie zoo. Just my opinion.
David Toscano, all-around good Democrat and former mayor unextraordinnaire, is that familiar choice for the 57th House of Delegates seat. Everyone knows his name around town. He's a solid administrator with no major vices and, unfortunately, no major drives. He's the mac & cheese on the menu, the comfort zone choice who is expected to ride into Richmond on Mitch Van Yahres's coattails. (See http://www.toscano2005.com)
We all know that a HoD chair is like getting tenure at UVa: you have to sexually assault a student in order to be kicked out once you are in. Whoever we vote in will likely be our bump on this log ride for the next 26 years. Toscano is not Van Yahres's equal, so why is my community so hell-bent on making him Van Yahres's successor?
With apologies to Virginia Dems across the state, Charlottesville likes to consider itself the last bastion of Blue in the southern Red sea. Let's say, arguendo, that we are. Don't we owe it to ourselves to elect someone who is less of a paper tiger than Toscano? I have nothing against the man. If he gains the Dem nomination, I will vote for him. But in this, as in all things, I like to think I can do better.
WAKE UP CHARLOTTESVILLE! If you want to make a difference in the direction Virginia heads, Toscano is neither strong enough nor progressive enough to do it. He'll shortly become a party critter in a Rep-tie zoo. Just my opinion.
25 April 2005
What's in a Theory?
Global warming, like macroevolution, is just a scientific theory, right? Let's take a look at some of the CNN headlines of the past month:
One-fifth of world's reefs destroyed: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/25/seychelles.coral.reut/index.html
Snow makes unexpected return in Midwest:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/04/23/spring.snow.ap/index.html
Earthquake shakes southern California:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/16/california.quake.ap/index.html
University to research melting ice caps: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/12/polar.ice.grant.ap/index.html
Spring blizzard slams Colorado:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/04/10/colorado.blizzard.ap/index.html
Earthquake strikes near Sumatra:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/04/10/sumatra.quake/index.html
Quake rattles Japan's main island:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/04/03/japan.quake/index.html
Disaster looms in coastal, urban regions:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/03/29/disaster.risk.ap/index.html
Australian wave warning for west:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/australia.warning.ap/index.html
US in "battle mode" following quake:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/us.indonesia.quake/index.html
Global warming is happening every day, and we are doing nothing concrete to stop it. How can the Bush administration send so much relief aid to so many countries and then propose to lower emission standards and drill in the arctic. From where does this "That is them and this is us" attitude derive? Is this the world you want to live in?
Ian McEwan discusses the topic frankly on Grist at http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbox/2005/04/25/mcewan-climate/index.html It is definitely worth a read. The problem with his solution is this: International measures hold no weight in the US. We allow for no law above ourselves.
One-fifth of world's reefs destroyed: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/25/seychelles.coral.reut/index.html
Snow makes unexpected return in Midwest:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/04/23/spring.snow.ap/index.html
Earthquake shakes southern California:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/16/california.quake.ap/index.html
University to research melting ice caps: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/12/polar.ice.grant.ap/index.html
Spring blizzard slams Colorado:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/04/10/colorado.blizzard.ap/index.html
Earthquake strikes near Sumatra:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/04/10/sumatra.quake/index.html
Quake rattles Japan's main island:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/04/03/japan.quake/index.html
Disaster looms in coastal, urban regions:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/03/29/disaster.risk.ap/index.html
Australian wave warning for west:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/australia.warning.ap/index.html
US in "battle mode" following quake:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/us.indonesia.quake/index.html
Global warming is happening every day, and we are doing nothing concrete to stop it. How can the Bush administration send so much relief aid to so many countries and then propose to lower emission standards and drill in the arctic. From where does this "That is them and this is us" attitude derive? Is this the world you want to live in?
Ian McEwan discusses the topic frankly on Grist at http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbox/2005/04/25/mcewan-climate/index.html It is definitely worth a read. The problem with his solution is this: International measures hold no weight in the US. We allow for no law above ourselves.
The United State of Europe
Well, finally someone has the balls to print what those who have traveled Europe already know. The EU is a fait accompli and the European self-identification is becoming normal. I do love the International Herald Tribune. See article at http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/04/26/news/enlarge2.php
While individual nations' media mouthpieces cast doubt, it has been evident since the borders opened that increased travel would make states of the nations. And, as they have had the sense to be nations for several centuries before becoming an ethnic fondue pot, I trust that Europe will, once again, show the US what our job should have been all along. I only hope we're smart enough to follow their example.
Yeah, I know, maybe I should just up and move there.
While individual nations' media mouthpieces cast doubt, it has been evident since the borders opened that increased travel would make states of the nations. And, as they have had the sense to be nations for several centuries before becoming an ethnic fondue pot, I trust that Europe will, once again, show the US what our job should have been all along. I only hope we're smart enough to follow their example.
Yeah, I know, maybe I should just up and move there.
17 April 2005
The Liberal What?
From CNN: An embattled Delay rips the liberal media? I want to know where this "liberal media" which supposedly rules American public opinion is, because I haven't seen it in approximately 3.5 years. So his electorate doesn't like him. That's why we have elected officials. So we can get rid of the ones we don't like. Yeesh.
GET OUT AND VOTE!
GET OUT AND VOTE!
The Dark Before Earth Day
Has anyone noticed the news lately? There's a lot in there about the Clean Air Act and EPA battles all over the nation. It's almost as if the press were celebrating Earth Day.
10 states have now joined in an action against the latest amendments to the Clean Air Act instigated by the Bush administration. From yesterday's NY Times: "Deep in the energy bill that was approved by a House committee this week, under a section titled 'Miscellaneous,' is a brief provision that could have major consequences for communities struggling to clean up their dirty air."
In essence, this "miscellaneous" provision allows communities whose air pollution is wafted from hundreds of miles away to delay meeting national air quality standards until their offending neighboring states meet those standards themselves.
Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Imagine living in downwind Connecticut having to deal with smog from New York. One large problem: This just measure indefinitely postpones meeting emission deadlines. Emissions are the primary cause of global warming. We are already 25 years behind where we need to be on meeting the emissions standards to alleviate that problem. In my opinion, global warming should not be qualified as "miscellany."
Sometimes I think it would be easier to teach polar bears to sing "I'm Dreaming of a Green Christmas" than to teach the current administration proper stewardship.
10 states have now joined in an action against the latest amendments to the Clean Air Act instigated by the Bush administration. From yesterday's NY Times: "Deep in the energy bill that was approved by a House committee this week, under a section titled 'Miscellaneous,' is a brief provision that could have major consequences for communities struggling to clean up their dirty air."
In essence, this "miscellaneous" provision allows communities whose air pollution is wafted from hundreds of miles away to delay meeting national air quality standards until their offending neighboring states meet those standards themselves.
Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Imagine living in downwind Connecticut having to deal with smog from New York. One large problem: This just measure indefinitely postpones meeting emission deadlines. Emissions are the primary cause of global warming. We are already 25 years behind where we need to be on meeting the emissions standards to alleviate that problem. In my opinion, global warming should not be qualified as "miscellany."
Sometimes I think it would be easier to teach polar bears to sing "I'm Dreaming of a Green Christmas" than to teach the current administration proper stewardship.
25 January 2005
Fahrenheit 434
Some basic societal operating principles I take for granted that People Know. For example, that career choices inform you as to what a person does. Teachers and professors teach; chefs and cooks work in kitchens; bankers, accountants and tax attorneys are interested in finances; painters, illustrators and photgraphers use visuals to form expression; film-makers, authors, and playwrights tell stories. It was idiocy on my part, I suppose, to presume that other intelligent people took the obvious to be just that.
In talking with a friend the Sunday night, I admit I fired the first shot in the argument that led to this post. I know he is an ardent Bush-voting Republican. I try not to hold that against him. I even succeed fairly often. But I could not resist, since the conversation was boring me, turning it toward politics. Between my friend and I, politics is always a good way to shake things up, and I had just listened to Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 again. Fully expecting the vehement "No!" I asked him if he'd seen the film.
What I got was a 62 minute (yes, I counted) rant against Michael Moore. From a man who admits he has never seen a Michael Moore film. Most of it asserting that Moore's arguments were suspect, irresponsible, unsupported by the evidence, and even fictitious. I hope I don't have to point out the irony. My friend spent an egregious amount of his time trying to make the point that Moore, as a documentarian, had a responsibility to tell the Truth. I hope I don't have to point out the irony in that either.
I would like to repeat here what I said to my friend: The first rule of making any kind of movie is that it has to tell a story. That's what movies do. He tried to argue with me. I pointed out that as I was the former theater major I was considerably more of an authority than he was on the subject.
A documentary is a subcategory of the published media, e.g., a film or television program, which presents political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner, often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration. There is absolutely nothing in that statement that implies that a documentary must be True, or even seeking Truth. The words "factual" and "informative" modify the word "manner," not the words "subject matter."
Michael Moore told the story of the Bush Administration that he wanted to tell. He's rolling the camera, so the entirety is filmed from his lens. Moore has made no secret of disliking Republicans in general and Bush in the particular. Therefore, why would any intelligent person expect his film to be unbiased or even fair? Why the vitriol?
To do Moore justice, he never once stated "The Bush family is in bed with the bin Ladens" or even "The Bush Administration deliberately went to Iraq with full knowledge there was no just cause." He just laid his trail out and asked very pointed questions. The fact that the paper trail is not evidentially precise means nothing. Moore implies much and his sarcastic narrative may lead you to draw some conclusions, but in this film he shies away from overstating his evidence. (A remarkable restraint, given his usual style.) He does an admirable job of stringing sordid possibilities together and highlighting discrepencies without actual defamation. Is it Truth? I don't think so. Is it a documentary? Unarguably. Is it a great story? Indubitably.
And finally: Do I think it's a great film? Absolutely. I like a well-told story. I do not take on faith even 1/2 of Moore's slant as viewed in Fahrenheit 9/11. But I do believe that Bush and his administration has spun their media web as skillfully as Moore has, and to greater effect. With all the Dems' ineffectiveness of the past election, it was lovely to see a real liberal land a solid punch.
In talking with a friend the Sunday night, I admit I fired the first shot in the argument that led to this post. I know he is an ardent Bush-voting Republican. I try not to hold that against him. I even succeed fairly often. But I could not resist, since the conversation was boring me, turning it toward politics. Between my friend and I, politics is always a good way to shake things up, and I had just listened to Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 again. Fully expecting the vehement "No!" I asked him if he'd seen the film.
What I got was a 62 minute (yes, I counted) rant against Michael Moore. From a man who admits he has never seen a Michael Moore film. Most of it asserting that Moore's arguments were suspect, irresponsible, unsupported by the evidence, and even fictitious. I hope I don't have to point out the irony. My friend spent an egregious amount of his time trying to make the point that Moore, as a documentarian, had a responsibility to tell the Truth. I hope I don't have to point out the irony in that either.
I would like to repeat here what I said to my friend: The first rule of making any kind of movie is that it has to tell a story. That's what movies do. He tried to argue with me. I pointed out that as I was the former theater major I was considerably more of an authority than he was on the subject.
A documentary is a subcategory of the published media, e.g., a film or television program, which presents political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner, often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration. There is absolutely nothing in that statement that implies that a documentary must be True, or even seeking Truth. The words "factual" and "informative" modify the word "manner," not the words "subject matter."
Michael Moore told the story of the Bush Administration that he wanted to tell. He's rolling the camera, so the entirety is filmed from his lens. Moore has made no secret of disliking Republicans in general and Bush in the particular. Therefore, why would any intelligent person expect his film to be unbiased or even fair? Why the vitriol?
To do Moore justice, he never once stated "The Bush family is in bed with the bin Ladens" or even "The Bush Administration deliberately went to Iraq with full knowledge there was no just cause." He just laid his trail out and asked very pointed questions. The fact that the paper trail is not evidentially precise means nothing. Moore implies much and his sarcastic narrative may lead you to draw some conclusions, but in this film he shies away from overstating his evidence. (A remarkable restraint, given his usual style.) He does an admirable job of stringing sordid possibilities together and highlighting discrepencies without actual defamation. Is it Truth? I don't think so. Is it a documentary? Unarguably. Is it a great story? Indubitably.
And finally: Do I think it's a great film? Absolutely. I like a well-told story. I do not take on faith even 1/2 of Moore's slant as viewed in Fahrenheit 9/11. But I do believe that Bush and his administration has spun their media web as skillfully as Moore has, and to greater effect. With all the Dems' ineffectiveness of the past election, it was lovely to see a real liberal land a solid punch.
08 January 2005
Sliding Down the Food Chain
Article referenced: Salon.com: Tsunami kills few animals in Sri Lanka
http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/12/29/animals/index.html
In all the news coverage of the tsunami disaster, only this one article has brightened my desktop. According to wildlife officials, they have yet to recover a single dead animal from the wreckage---because there appear to be no dead animals.
"'Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a sixth sense,' Wijeyeratne said."
Perhaps it isn't so much a "sixth" sense as just plain sense?
No, I'm not snarking on the countries hit by this disaster. Rather, I'm leading to something else.
In the introduction of William Cronan's "Uncommon Ground," there is a discussion about the folly of modern man's love affair with building new metropolitan Edens along the coast of California. Coastal California--an area known for its earthquakes, wildfires, floods, and mudslides (the latest report of which is today, click for the MSNBC summary), an area which features the San Andreas Fault and is popularly expected to eventually fall off into the Pacific, and every inch of which is now virtually barren of fresh water resources demanding extensive conservation and irrigation techniques to be fruitful--commands the highest land property values in the America.
Why do we value most that area which is least naturally productive and stable? Because of its beauty. The climate is perfect, the cliffs are breathtaking, and the ocean is alluring. It is as dramatic a setting as any Hollywood designer could invent.
Once upon a time, mankind had instincts which would have preserved us from most natural disasters. Now we court them with our complacency that they, too, can be controlled by our superior wit, skill, and adaptability which has invented the modern technology that has replaced instinctual knowledge. How soon will we find ourselves sliding back down the food chain because we refuse to acknowledge that there are powers greater than ourselves? Nature deserves our respect, not our arrogance.
http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/12/29/animals/index.html
In all the news coverage of the tsunami disaster, only this one article has brightened my desktop. According to wildlife officials, they have yet to recover a single dead animal from the wreckage---because there appear to be no dead animals.
"'Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a sixth sense,' Wijeyeratne said."
Perhaps it isn't so much a "sixth" sense as just plain sense?
No, I'm not snarking on the countries hit by this disaster. Rather, I'm leading to something else.
In the introduction of William Cronan's "Uncommon Ground," there is a discussion about the folly of modern man's love affair with building new metropolitan Edens along the coast of California. Coastal California--an area known for its earthquakes, wildfires, floods, and mudslides (the latest report of which is today, click for the MSNBC summary), an area which features the San Andreas Fault and is popularly expected to eventually fall off into the Pacific, and every inch of which is now virtually barren of fresh water resources demanding extensive conservation and irrigation techniques to be fruitful--commands the highest land property values in the America.
Why do we value most that area which is least naturally productive and stable? Because of its beauty. The climate is perfect, the cliffs are breathtaking, and the ocean is alluring. It is as dramatic a setting as any Hollywood designer could invent.
Once upon a time, mankind had instincts which would have preserved us from most natural disasters. Now we court them with our complacency that they, too, can be controlled by our superior wit, skill, and adaptability which has invented the modern technology that has replaced instinctual knowledge. How soon will we find ourselves sliding back down the food chain because we refuse to acknowledge that there are powers greater than ourselves? Nature deserves our respect, not our arrogance.
30 December 2004
We're So Nice
A conversation reported to me by my best friend, which took place at a doctor's office between her and the nurse, went something like this:
Nurse (recently returned from Germany): I don't like foreign news services.
Friend (recently returned from Ireland): Why?
Nurse: Because the images they show on their news is icky.
Friend: They are only telling the truth, more of it anyway than we get here.
Nurse: But I like our news better. It's nicer.
My query to friend: How can she think our news is nicer?
Friend: Well, it is more graphic over there.
Me: More graphic? How?
Friend: Because over there they show images of Americans beating up and abusing Iraqis.
Me: So our media coverage is nicer because we show them dead, instead of merely being abused? Of course she likes our news better. She's more offended by their portrayal of American brutality in the particular, than by the static results of a level of violence we've all become accustomed to. After all, we're supposed to be the "nice guys." Goddess forbid we be shown for being merely human instead of heros on the world stage. Sucks to be merely human, doesn't it?
Nurse (recently returned from Germany): I don't like foreign news services.
Friend (recently returned from Ireland): Why?
Nurse: Because the images they show on their news is icky.
Friend: They are only telling the truth, more of it anyway than we get here.
Nurse: But I like our news better. It's nicer.
My query to friend: How can she think our news is nicer?
Friend: Well, it is more graphic over there.
Me: More graphic? How?
Friend: Because over there they show images of Americans beating up and abusing Iraqis.
Me: So our media coverage is nicer because we show them dead, instead of merely being abused? Of course she likes our news better. She's more offended by their portrayal of American brutality in the particular, than by the static results of a level of violence we've all become accustomed to. After all, we're supposed to be the "nice guys." Goddess forbid we be shown for being merely human instead of heros on the world stage. Sucks to be merely human, doesn't it?
29 December 2004
Armchair Rubbernecking
"Unprecedented Disaster!"
"Field of Death!"
"Waves of Destruction!"
"Death Toll Could Top 100,000!"
[___________ insert exclamation marks here]
Yes, it's horrible, yes, it's tragic.
But today I am particularly appalled by an earlier notice on MSN: There was actually a link to a story indicating a scramble for the most gut-ripping shot of the tsunami disaster in the Indian Ocean. The mental image of photojournalists shoving each other out of range, lining themselves up to get the most gruesome pictures should be appalling. When did mass destruction become a spectator sport? Why?
Like Rome before us, we Americans have become desensitized to real tragedy and real waste. The popular media, from movies to the evening news, has been feeding us a highly concentrated diet of mayhem for decades. And we accept this as our form of entertainment, oblivious to the intrusion on privacy it occasions on others and the somnific affect it has on our sensibilities.
How many gigs are these "news" sites dedicating to invasive photos and videos of grieving Asians when they could be doing something far more constructive with that space? How much money are they shelling out for 24/7 photo and video coverage which could be spent in more productive ways considering the size of the disaster being covered?
I am as much a product of this culture as anyone else. I am more ready to vomit over the callousness of our coverage than I am over the pictures themselves. But it cannot be just me who is sickened by this armchair rubbernecking our media partakes in. Can we not, as the consumer public this hype is geared toward, manage to send a clear message that this kind of behavior is wholly unacceptable? Are we ourselves so far removed from common decency that we prize our right to voyeurism over anyone else's right to basic human dignity? The media is doing this ostensibly for our enjoyment, because this is what they have been training us to want for 40 years.
The primary news websites post links to relief efforts below the links to the latest video feed. Anyone else here remember the old newspaper adage about placing the attention-grabbing headlines above and below the folds? Websites do the exact same type of layout! Their editors, producers, and gold-plated BoDs sit on their asses and reap the traffic benefits of pot-shot pictures because they know violence sells. They know this because we've bought into it. Time and time again. If I were a Sri Lankan woman sifting through heaps of bodies for my children, I would deck the first photographer who came within 100 feet of me with his own damn Nikon. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! TURN OFF YOUR TVs AND STOP CLICKING THOSE VIDEO & SLIDESHOW LINKS NOW!
Why can't MSN splash a fundraising offer across its site e.g., "Microsoft will match every dollar you contribute to Tsunami Disaster Relief--just follow these links"? Why can't CNN solicit its advertisers' contributions with "Buy an ad during our 'Tsunami Coverage' and we'll donate 50% of your purchase to Doctors without Borders"? For crissake, are you men or media vultures? If you really gave a damn, you would do something real to help the relief effort you so effortlessly profit from.
"Field of Death!"
"Waves of Destruction!"
"Death Toll Could Top 100,000!"
[___________ insert exclamation marks here]
Yes, it's horrible, yes, it's tragic.
But today I am particularly appalled by an earlier notice on MSN: There was actually a link to a story indicating a scramble for the most gut-ripping shot of the tsunami disaster in the Indian Ocean. The mental image of photojournalists shoving each other out of range, lining themselves up to get the most gruesome pictures should be appalling. When did mass destruction become a spectator sport? Why?
Like Rome before us, we Americans have become desensitized to real tragedy and real waste. The popular media, from movies to the evening news, has been feeding us a highly concentrated diet of mayhem for decades. And we accept this as our form of entertainment, oblivious to the intrusion on privacy it occasions on others and the somnific affect it has on our sensibilities.
How many gigs are these "news" sites dedicating to invasive photos and videos of grieving Asians when they could be doing something far more constructive with that space? How much money are they shelling out for 24/7 photo and video coverage which could be spent in more productive ways considering the size of the disaster being covered?
I am as much a product of this culture as anyone else. I am more ready to vomit over the callousness of our coverage than I am over the pictures themselves. But it cannot be just me who is sickened by this armchair rubbernecking our media partakes in. Can we not, as the consumer public this hype is geared toward, manage to send a clear message that this kind of behavior is wholly unacceptable? Are we ourselves so far removed from common decency that we prize our right to voyeurism over anyone else's right to basic human dignity? The media is doing this ostensibly for our enjoyment, because this is what they have been training us to want for 40 years.
The primary news websites post links to relief efforts below the links to the latest video feed. Anyone else here remember the old newspaper adage about placing the attention-grabbing headlines above and below the folds? Websites do the exact same type of layout! Their editors, producers, and gold-plated BoDs sit on their asses and reap the traffic benefits of pot-shot pictures because they know violence sells. They know this because we've bought into it. Time and time again. If I were a Sri Lankan woman sifting through heaps of bodies for my children, I would deck the first photographer who came within 100 feet of me with his own damn Nikon. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! TURN OFF YOUR TVs AND STOP CLICKING THOSE VIDEO & SLIDESHOW LINKS NOW!
Why can't MSN splash a fundraising offer across its site e.g., "Microsoft will match every dollar you contribute to Tsunami Disaster Relief--just follow these links"? Why can't CNN solicit its advertisers' contributions with "Buy an ad during our 'Tsunami Coverage' and we'll donate 50% of your purchase to Doctors without Borders"? For crissake, are you men or media vultures? If you really gave a damn, you would do something real to help the relief effort you so effortlessly profit from.
These Snarcophagic Times
These Snarcophagic Times
SARC [From Latin, sarx]: flesh
+ PHAGE [From Grk, -phagos]: to eat
+ SNARK [From Lewis Carroll via MTS ]: 1. a system failure; 2. any unexplained or threatening event on a computer, often refers to an event that might indicate an attempted security violation.
+ SNARKY [dialectical]: ill-humored, irascible, irritated, nagging
-----------------------------------------------------------------
= SNARCOPHAGY: n., the major media's cannibalization of the public brain through the use of pervasive spin, overblown rhetoric, and nagging pablum, the goal of which is to bypass rational voter thought, disrupt critical social dialogue, and cause a complete democratic system failure.
[Take note, OED: Word and definition created by TL Patten, Dec. 2004]
Do you know your opinion is being influenced even as you read this? In the course of 2 paragraphs, you have decided whether I am (1) an elitist, arrogant pundit worthy of criticism, or (2) a witty, intelligent commentator worthy of future reading.
Every opinion you have formed has been influenced by someone somewhere. So have mine. What chaps my arse about these snarcophagic times is the permeation of broadcast media influence on public opinion. Once it purported to disseminate the news. Now it has become the news. Ever since the first Greek chorus took the stage, the media has had a proprietary interest in spinning a tale. That is its job. But with that job usually came some sense of responsibility to the public. Responsibility has fallen by the wayside. Hard fact has been replaced by fractious opinion and hard news by celebrity causes.
Assertion is no substitute for research and glamour is no equivalent for substance. This insipid, Paris Hilton mentality is being shoved down our throats because the corporations and the government prefer their chattel dumbed and numbed to the lowest common denominator.
You may hate my blog, you may enjoy my blog, but at least I insist upon thinking. And here I will be thinking most about who is spinning what, how, and, most importantly, why. I look forward to our dialogue and dialectic.
SARC [From Latin, sarx]: flesh
+ PHAGE [From Grk, -phagos]: to eat
+ SNARK [From Lewis Carroll via MTS ]: 1. a system failure; 2. any unexplained or threatening event on a computer, often refers to an event that might indicate an attempted security violation.
+ SNARKY [dialectical]: ill-humored, irascible, irritated, nagging
-----------------------------------------------------------------
= SNARCOPHAGY: n., the major media's cannibalization of the public brain through the use of pervasive spin, overblown rhetoric, and nagging pablum, the goal of which is to bypass rational voter thought, disrupt critical social dialogue, and cause a complete democratic system failure.
[Take note, OED: Word and definition created by TL Patten, Dec. 2004]
Do you know your opinion is being influenced even as you read this? In the course of 2 paragraphs, you have decided whether I am (1) an elitist, arrogant pundit worthy of criticism, or (2) a witty, intelligent commentator worthy of future reading.
Every opinion you have formed has been influenced by someone somewhere. So have mine. What chaps my arse about these snarcophagic times is the permeation of broadcast media influence on public opinion. Once it purported to disseminate the news. Now it has become the news. Ever since the first Greek chorus took the stage, the media has had a proprietary interest in spinning a tale. That is its job. But with that job usually came some sense of responsibility to the public. Responsibility has fallen by the wayside. Hard fact has been replaced by fractious opinion and hard news by celebrity causes.
Assertion is no substitute for research and glamour is no equivalent for substance. This insipid, Paris Hilton mentality is being shoved down our throats because the corporations and the government prefer their chattel dumbed and numbed to the lowest common denominator.
You may hate my blog, you may enjoy my blog, but at least I insist upon thinking. And here I will be thinking most about who is spinning what, how, and, most importantly, why. I look forward to our dialogue and dialectic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
