For the last few days, I've been doing what I've never before and might never do again - watching Fox News and reading the blowhard idiots at the National Review with a big, huge, gigantic grin on my face!
I'm now waiting eagerly to hear those three little words that'd mean oh so much:
Impeach the motherf**kers!!!!
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Who are they?
Read this -
And then read this -
This captures all the reasons I still love this band/ these guys and will always make time to listen to whatever Townshend decides to do next. Any band of this size and vintage would have figured out a neatly worked, manicured and tweezed story for the press and the public by now, containing just the right proportions of the following:
- Yes, we had our differences but we're like brothers now that we've discovered how much we mean to each other.
- No, we never wrote songs together, but I was surprised how much he brought to the process this time and it really opened my eyes.
- No, no, no it's never been about the money for us. Honest.
- This album really is a return to form for us.
- We love all of this new technology and all of this new stuff - it's a great way for us to communicate directly with our fans.
The Who? Townshend says of the last few Who tours: 'When Roger and I were on our last tour with John, I sat with our manager, Bill Curbishley, on the last day and asked, "Are we gonna do this again?" He said, "If you want to, we can always do it again." And I said, "Is there any possibility that we're enabling John Entwistle? Rather than helping him, what we're actually doing is sending him home with, after tax, probably a million dollars, half of it's probably gonna go up his girlfriend's nose." God rest her soul, she's dead now. I thought, "I don't need to play old Who songs. I could sell them to fucking CSI."'
And this next bit is, for my money, the most brutally honest and direct statement to come out of any rocker of his generation in what - 30 years? (Take notes Sir Mick, when you're done shtupping 25 year old models!) From Rolling Stone:
'I don't think that the big boomer bands are going to be able to do this much longer. I really don't. We're fucking lucky to be able to do it, but I don't think we'll be able to do it much longer. I don't want to go out and see Bob Dylan. I don't want to go out and see the Stones. I wouldn't pay money to go see the Who, not even with new songs. I wouldn't pay money to go see Crosby, Stills and Nash. They fucking make me sick. When I say that, what I mean is I'm ageist about it. I don't want to look at these old guys in their self-congratulatory mode. Somebody gave me tickets for Marlene Dietrich's last concert in London, and apparently she came out and she looked fantastic under the lights, but you know that she's an eighty-year-old woman held together by glue and string. Why would you want to do that? I'd prefer to come and see Elaine Stritch down in the bar here. My point is, I don't think it will go on much longer.
Our audience, our boomer audience, are sustaining it. It's not young kids. People say, "Oh, I went to a Rolling Stones concert and there were lots of young people there!" Once. They come once. I went to see Jimmy Reed once. I went to see John Lee Hooker once. I went to see Jimmy Smith once. I went to see Ray Charles once. I just wanted to be able to say I saw him. If Charlie Parker had been alive, I would have seen him once. I saw Roland Kirk once. I saw them all once. I wouldn't follow them around the fucking world. There's a lot of people that come and see bands like the Who once.
RS: It works out fine, right? Because those same artists aren't going to be touring forever. It's not like fifteen years from now you're going to be like, "Oh, I guess nobody wants to come to our shows anymore."
'No, my point is when you look at the commerce behind the music business, what's running the whole thing is live shows. The problem for the Who is because we can go out and generate hundreds of millions of dollars in ticket grosses, we're a commodity and treated as such. It would be nice if it was the same with the record, but it won't be. Universal are probably stamping around today thinking, "Oh, my God, not another fucking Who record. Oh, my God, what do we do? Thank God for the Scissor Sisters!"'
The last bit is as funny as it is true - acts of the Who's vintage often put out new albums just for a hook to hang a tour on. The bands I'd hail as honourable exceptions would be few - Neil Young (NOT CNSY - when I went to see them, I pretty much sold it to myself as Young + 3), Dylan and I can't think of anyone else. Townshend will be well aware that he himself released two very average 'new songs' as part of the 73rd Greatest Hits compilation from The Who two years ago and then went on tour ...
Still - bracing stuff.
And then read this -
This captures all the reasons I still love this band/ these guys and will always make time to listen to whatever Townshend decides to do next. Any band of this size and vintage would have figured out a neatly worked, manicured and tweezed story for the press and the public by now, containing just the right proportions of the following:
- Yes, we had our differences but we're like brothers now that we've discovered how much we mean to each other.
- No, we never wrote songs together, but I was surprised how much he brought to the process this time and it really opened my eyes.
- No, no, no it's never been about the money for us. Honest.
- This album really is a return to form for us.
- We love all of this new technology and all of this new stuff - it's a great way for us to communicate directly with our fans.
The Who? Townshend says of the last few Who tours: 'When Roger and I were on our last tour with John, I sat with our manager, Bill Curbishley, on the last day and asked, "Are we gonna do this again?" He said, "If you want to, we can always do it again." And I said, "Is there any possibility that we're enabling John Entwistle? Rather than helping him, what we're actually doing is sending him home with, after tax, probably a million dollars, half of it's probably gonna go up his girlfriend's nose." God rest her soul, she's dead now. I thought, "I don't need to play old Who songs. I could sell them to fucking CSI."'
And this next bit is, for my money, the most brutally honest and direct statement to come out of any rocker of his generation in what - 30 years? (Take notes Sir Mick, when you're done shtupping 25 year old models!) From Rolling Stone:
'I don't think that the big boomer bands are going to be able to do this much longer. I really don't. We're fucking lucky to be able to do it, but I don't think we'll be able to do it much longer. I don't want to go out and see Bob Dylan. I don't want to go out and see the Stones. I wouldn't pay money to go see the Who, not even with new songs. I wouldn't pay money to go see Crosby, Stills and Nash. They fucking make me sick. When I say that, what I mean is I'm ageist about it. I don't want to look at these old guys in their self-congratulatory mode. Somebody gave me tickets for Marlene Dietrich's last concert in London, and apparently she came out and she looked fantastic under the lights, but you know that she's an eighty-year-old woman held together by glue and string. Why would you want to do that? I'd prefer to come and see Elaine Stritch down in the bar here. My point is, I don't think it will go on much longer.
Our audience, our boomer audience, are sustaining it. It's not young kids. People say, "Oh, I went to a Rolling Stones concert and there were lots of young people there!" Once. They come once. I went to see Jimmy Reed once. I went to see John Lee Hooker once. I went to see Jimmy Smith once. I went to see Ray Charles once. I just wanted to be able to say I saw him. If Charlie Parker had been alive, I would have seen him once. I saw Roland Kirk once. I saw them all once. I wouldn't follow them around the fucking world. There's a lot of people that come and see bands like the Who once.
RS: It works out fine, right? Because those same artists aren't going to be touring forever. It's not like fifteen years from now you're going to be like, "Oh, I guess nobody wants to come to our shows anymore."
'No, my point is when you look at the commerce behind the music business, what's running the whole thing is live shows. The problem for the Who is because we can go out and generate hundreds of millions of dollars in ticket grosses, we're a commodity and treated as such. It would be nice if it was the same with the record, but it won't be. Universal are probably stamping around today thinking, "Oh, my God, not another fucking Who record. Oh, my God, what do we do? Thank God for the Scissor Sisters!"'
The last bit is as funny as it is true - acts of the Who's vintage often put out new albums just for a hook to hang a tour on. The bands I'd hail as honourable exceptions would be few - Neil Young (NOT CNSY - when I went to see them, I pretty much sold it to myself as Young + 3), Dylan and I can't think of anyone else. Townshend will be well aware that he himself released two very average 'new songs' as part of the 73rd Greatest Hits compilation from The Who two years ago and then went on tour ...
Still - bracing stuff.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Civil discourse???
Since I make no bones about being a Liberal, it makes me laugh my lunch out of my mouth when I hear Right wingers of any description or nationality talk about how shrill, intolerant and downright uncivil Liberals are.
Watching the Republicans get ready to re-enact the Hindenburg landing, it is amusing enough to make a cat laugh that some of the most divisive, deranged figures of the Republican Right are already making noises about how intolerant of dissent Liberals are!!!
I guess I must have misunderstood when Ann Coulter claimed that all Liberals and Democrats were treasonous, when Bush creates imaginary straw men to knock them down in ever more desperate campaign speeches across the country, when someone who says something uncomplimentary to Darth Cheney at a public appearance is arrested by the Secret Service, when the Republicans got a CBS TV film on Reagan cancelled because it had a soupcon less fawning admiration and a dash too little of hero worshipping than they demanded! Silly me - Liberals are intolerant *and* stupid as well, I guess.
Or - hang on, having made a dog's breakfast of actually governing the US, now that any possible notion of the Republicans having any more integrity than junkie pimps hanging around outside an elementary school, the competence to run even a swimming school for ducks or even as much honesty as a hyena has well and truly been blown to bits, they're preparing the story for their tenure in opposition. 'Restoring civility' to American politics - when they get investigated, censured, impeached, barred from office and just plain imprisoned, the meme will be in place. It's not their fault - it's the Democrats' fault for lowering the standard of discourse in American politics.
We all know that left to themselves, George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Tom de Lay, Bill Frist and Antonin Scalia like nothing better than to kick back over a grapefruit juice, discuss Plato's Republic, have Don Rumsfeld hold a pop quiz on Thomas Paine and even throw in a little more Thomas More once in a while... Of course, it can get rough sometimes - I hear they once raised their voices to each other when discussing the Federalist Papers, but hey, that's quality discourse!
Not this - Jack Abramoff's going to jail for scamming Native American tribes, Duke Cunningham's going to jail for taking whopping bribes, Bob Ney's going to jail for taking bribes, David Safavian's going to jail for taking bribes, Mark Foley's resigned for grooming kids for sex, Dennis Hastert's hiding out because he was hiding Foley's shenanigans, Bill Frist is being investigated for insider trading, Jim Kolbe's being investigated for inappropriate contact with minors, Susan Ralston's resigned and being investigated for corruption, Scooter Libby's going to jail for leaking classified info to discredit administration critics, Darth Cheney's company has been proved to have ripped off American taxpayers for millions - but this all just goes to show much Liberals have dirtied American politics!
Here's an excellent piece that's required reading for anyone who ever fell for that line.
Watching the Republicans get ready to re-enact the Hindenburg landing, it is amusing enough to make a cat laugh that some of the most divisive, deranged figures of the Republican Right are already making noises about how intolerant of dissent Liberals are!!!
I guess I must have misunderstood when Ann Coulter claimed that all Liberals and Democrats were treasonous, when Bush creates imaginary straw men to knock them down in ever more desperate campaign speeches across the country, when someone who says something uncomplimentary to Darth Cheney at a public appearance is arrested by the Secret Service, when the Republicans got a CBS TV film on Reagan cancelled because it had a soupcon less fawning admiration and a dash too little of hero worshipping than they demanded! Silly me - Liberals are intolerant *and* stupid as well, I guess.
Or - hang on, having made a dog's breakfast of actually governing the US, now that any possible notion of the Republicans having any more integrity than junkie pimps hanging around outside an elementary school, the competence to run even a swimming school for ducks or even as much honesty as a hyena has well and truly been blown to bits, they're preparing the story for their tenure in opposition. 'Restoring civility' to American politics - when they get investigated, censured, impeached, barred from office and just plain imprisoned, the meme will be in place. It's not their fault - it's the Democrats' fault for lowering the standard of discourse in American politics.
We all know that left to themselves, George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Tom de Lay, Bill Frist and Antonin Scalia like nothing better than to kick back over a grapefruit juice, discuss Plato's Republic, have Don Rumsfeld hold a pop quiz on Thomas Paine and even throw in a little more Thomas More once in a while... Of course, it can get rough sometimes - I hear they once raised their voices to each other when discussing the Federalist Papers, but hey, that's quality discourse!
Not this - Jack Abramoff's going to jail for scamming Native American tribes, Duke Cunningham's going to jail for taking whopping bribes, Bob Ney's going to jail for taking bribes, David Safavian's going to jail for taking bribes, Mark Foley's resigned for grooming kids for sex, Dennis Hastert's hiding out because he was hiding Foley's shenanigans, Bill Frist is being investigated for insider trading, Jim Kolbe's being investigated for inappropriate contact with minors, Susan Ralston's resigned and being investigated for corruption, Scooter Libby's going to jail for leaking classified info to discredit administration critics, Darth Cheney's company has been proved to have ripped off American taxpayers for millions - but this all just goes to show much Liberals have dirtied American politics!
Here's an excellent piece that's required reading for anyone who ever fell for that line.
Friday, October 13, 2006
Ridiculously good guitar playing...
This kid, whoever he is, is just phenomenal. There's a million clips of wannabe Malmsteens (ugh!) wanking on their guitars in their bedrooms. This guy is special. He's playing an obscure classical piece for starters, for another, he's just unbelievable.
Apparently, he's a Korean high schooler, around 14 or so.
Watch this.
Apparently, he's a Korean high schooler, around 14 or so.
Watch this.
The Roxbury Boys
This was one of the better long-running gags on SNL. Will Ferrell and Chris Kattan were always these gormless ex-yuppie clubbing types, woefully out of step with whatever trends were blowing past them, stuck on some early 90s dance track, never ever managing to score with a single woman and given to much gurning.
Every once in a while, a guest star would join them on their 'adventures'. Jim Carrey was of course a special special guest, because if anyone can out-gurn Kattan and Ferrell, it's him.
Take a look.
Every once in a while, a guest star would join them on their 'adventures'. Jim Carrey was of course a special special guest, because if anyone can out-gurn Kattan and Ferrell, it's him.
Take a look.
And some more ...
For those who're not obssessive about SNL, here's a take on one of the spoof commercials that they insert quite slyly! I've been taken in a few times and I know people who'd swear they're real...
Convergence ...
Neatly bringing my last two themes together, here's Will Ferrell as George W Bush, a role he was absolutely *born* to do!
In any case, the SNL Bush probably did as much to catch Osama as the real one did...
In any case, the SNL Bush probably did as much to catch Osama as the real one did...
More Will...
This seems to have started out as a parody of the dinner scene in American Beauty and then gets better and better ...
Ana Gasteyer on the left was one of the best performers I've ever seen on SNL - she was a brilliant foil to Will Ferrell across a whole range of characters and skits. I only wish I could find the 'Bobby & Marty Culp' sketches online somewhere.
Sarah Michelle Gellar is no slouch either...'Shut up you drunken witch'!
Ana Gasteyer on the left was one of the best performers I've ever seen on SNL - she was a brilliant foil to Will Ferrell across a whole range of characters and skits. I only wish I could find the 'Bobby & Marty Culp' sketches online somewhere.
Sarah Michelle Gellar is no slouch either...'Shut up you drunken witch'!
More Ferrell on SNL...
This clip starts off brilliantly - Will Ferrell doing the creepy over-tactile professor in a hot tub and bonus: Wynona Ryder in the hot tub!
This clip has bits where things are beginning to go obviously wrong - skits being broadcast live on tv don't leave much room for error, so the way they pull out of the dives and still have the audience in splits is just superb!
This clip has bits where things are beginning to go obviously wrong - skits being broadcast live on tv don't leave much room for error, so the way they pull out of the dives and still have the audience in splits is just superb!
Will Ferrell and SNL
People who've only seen Will Ferrell in Anchorman, Old School or Elf always look quizzical when I insist he's one of the finest comic actors I've seen in a long time.
I was heartbroken when I heard he was leaving Saturday Night Live, because I thought he was consistently superb on the show.
He could do almost anything - any character, any kind of skit - and take it further and further than you'd believe possible.
Watch this one - after this, you can't listen to Neil Diamond without spraying your food across the room.
I was heartbroken when I heard he was leaving Saturday Night Live, because I thought he was consistently superb on the show.
He could do almost anything - any character, any kind of skit - and take it further and further than you'd believe possible.
Watch this one - after this, you can't listen to Neil Diamond without spraying your food across the room.
Freedom of speech (with exceptions)
Olbermann shines a light on Dubya's shifty attempts to conflate anyone in the media who questions him with Al Quaeda.
It's hilarious to hear Bush try to quote Mein Kampf - if he even heard the name of this book before 2001, he'd have thought it was a ski camp in the Austrian Alps.
As for Bush bringing up this comparison, it's interesting to note that his own grandfather, Prescott Bush, was hand in glove with businesses who financed the Nazis.
Not that you'll ever hear about it..
It's hilarious to hear Bush try to quote Mein Kampf - if he even heard the name of this book before 2001, he'd have thought it was a ski camp in the Austrian Alps.
As for Bush bringing up this comparison, it's interesting to note that his own grandfather, Prescott Bush, was hand in glove with businesses who financed the Nazis.
Not that you'll ever hear about it..
Did I mention...
...Olbermann for President?
This is one more of his Special Comments, reacting to Donald 'Freedom's Messy' Rumsfeld, who was trying to compare anyone who questioned him to Nazis and their appeasers.
As always, enjoyable for being blistering, but depressing because he's almost the only one doing this in the mainstream media.
This is one more of his Special Comments, reacting to Donald 'Freedom's Messy' Rumsfeld, who was trying to compare anyone who questioned him to Nazis and their appeasers.
As always, enjoyable for being blistering, but depressing because he's almost the only one doing this in the mainstream media.
Olbermann for President!
Keith Olbermann has single handedly cast doubt on the near confirmed theory that all mainstream American media figures are spineless, unprincipled greedheads who have elevated the art of fellating the Right wing to an art form. This is one of his 'Special Comments', after Fox News tried to play the next move in the 'Clinton was responsible for 9-11' game, but came badly unstuck.
His Special Comments have grown more and more direct, pointed and honest. The blistering venom of these segments is made all the more lethal by the fact that unlike Faux News, he sticks to the proven facts. This is one of the best.
Just in case, here's the interview in question.
Part I:
and here's Part II:
His Special Comments have grown more and more direct, pointed and honest. The blistering venom of these segments is made all the more lethal by the fact that unlike Faux News, he sticks to the proven facts. This is one of the best.
Just in case, here's the interview in question.
Part I:
and here's Part II:
Happy Jack
How many great pop hits have been written about a seaside donkey? With a promo film featuring Keith Moon? Only one, of course.
Enjoy
Enjoy
Lazy lazy lazy ...
Since I'm pathologically lazy, I thought I'd get back to posting by doing some light linking at first:
Friday, July 14, 2006
Funniest blog on the Net?
This has to be a leading contender for the funniest post on the funniest blog on the Net - http://www.alzarqawismomsblog.com/?i=317
This one seems to be from the same person(s) and is rather good as well - http://www.keiraknightleysjaw.com/
This one seems to be from the same person(s) and is rather good as well - http://www.keiraknightleysjaw.com/
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Some new reading...
This is one of those books that was in every shop window a while back, got great reviews and has been sitting in my 'Next' pile for a while. I'm usually suspicious of books that are supposed to be at that perfect intersection of commercial success and critical acclaim, but 'Carter Beats the Devil' is very good indeed.
I had always thought this must be a thinly-veiled takeoff on Houdini, but it's nothing of the sort. Even if you've never been a particular fan of magic or magicians, it draws you in and takes you along. And no, it's not a sword-and-sorcery type trip.
The key plot device of the opening chapters turns out to be a bit of a Macguffin, while the great secret at the heart of it may not strike us as all that important, but the book is well-written, it does move well and while others have complained of the sentimentality of the ending, Gold does make you care for the characters, so a happy ending is quite all right by me.
I had always thought this must be a thinly-veiled takeoff on Houdini, but it's nothing of the sort. Even if you've never been a particular fan of magic or magicians, it draws you in and takes you along. And no, it's not a sword-and-sorcery type trip.
The key plot device of the opening chapters turns out to be a bit of a Macguffin, while the great secret at the heart of it may not strike us as all that important, but the book is well-written, it does move well and while others have complained of the sentimentality of the ending, Gold does make you care for the characters, so a happy ending is quite all right by me.
Saturday, July 01, 2006
Tintin in the land of the Critics
I was extremely happy to wake up and open this morning's Guardian to find a long, loving article on Tintin. It's always struck me as curious, bordering on bizarre, that most mentions of Tintin in the Western media has somehow always been coupled with discussion of Herge's supposed collaboration with the Nazis and the even more insubstantial taints of anti-Semitism and his cheerleading for imperialism.
Having grown up revering Tintin and everything about his universe, I have never found common ground with these criticisms. There has been enough said for and against Herge re: the charges of collaborating with the Nazis - read this. Anyone who has read 'Ottokar's Sceptre', 'Land of Black Gold' and 'The Blue Lotus', encountered characters like Mueller, Musstler and various assorted Bordurians and still makes the case that Herge was sympathetic to the Nazis is guilty at least of severe inconsistency. As for Herge returning to occupied Belgium to work, it was after King Leopold's appeal and in any case, there was an entire continent that could be charged with the same offence, beginning with the Vichy regime, something that gets discussed a whole lot less than De Gaulle's broadcasts.
The charge of anti-Semitism seems to be based on even less substantial evidence - one of his villains is called Bohlwinkel (which was Herge's idea of the name of a typical American tycoon, ironically changed from Blumenstein because he didn't want it to be perceived as anti-Jewish!) and the villanous tycoon running through the series - Rastapopoulos has a large nose!
Herge's position on empire is much more complicated. Reading 'Tintin in the Soviet Union' and the first version of 'Tintin in the Congo' is an eye-opener. 'Soviet Union' features more one-dimensional caricatures of hook-nosed 'Commisars' than you can shake a stick at - taken on its own and out of context with the rest of Herge's ouevre, it is appallingly simplistic and stuffed with every bad anti-Communist caricature there is. Bad as this might be, this only reflected the prevalent attitudes in the West in 1929, especially considering that Herge created Tintin for Le Petit Vingtieme, which was a Catholic magazine for youth, determined to stave off the 'scourge' of creeping Communism.
'Congo' is even more complicated - Herge seems to be an unapologetic cheerleader for the Belgian empire and its rule of the Congo. King Leopold the IInd's antics in the Congo, treating it as his personal bank and its inhabitants as his personal slaves, is regarded by historians as possibly the most brutal and exploitative colonial regime ever, which is some distinction given the competition available. In this book, Tintin is shown teaching adoring dark-skinned Congolese children that "King Leopold is our father" and is generally shouldering the 'White Man's Burden' in black and white. Personally, the low point of the entire Tintin series is a toss between this and the moment when Tintin goes rhino hunting - his simple, yet elegant method being to drill a hole in the rhino's hide and plant a stick of dynamite in it!
That Herge grew in his viewpoints and certainly changed his mind is not in doubt - while many of his early, almost crudely drawn books were redrawn, recoloured and almost completely rewritten in some cases, he gave up 'Soviet Union' as irretrievable and never brought out a colour version. 'Congo' was redrawn and coloured, but also rewritten drastically - the famous classroom scene has Tintin taking an innocuous addition lesson, while the rhino is saved from appearing altogether.
But there is more to Herge's attitudes than just a recanting of his positions on the Belgian empire. His denunciation of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and his clear sympathy for the Chinese runs throughout 'The Blue Lotus', 'The Broken Ear' details American and European shenanigans in Central and South America with piercing detail (including a portrayal of an international arms dealer called Sir Basil Baharoff, getting rich off both sides of any conflict, not a million miles from the real Sir Basil Zaharoff) and the last published Tintin adventure 'Tintin and the Picaros' is more in his continuing interest in the instability and pointless coups of Central/ South America.
Taken as a whole, only the most determinedly short-sighted observer can deny the essential humanism and optimism of Herge's work. Whether it's the newly moneyed Captain Haddock indignantly offering a band of Gypsies a meadow in his grounds to camp on, where the local villagefolk had banished them to a rubbish dump, Tintin taking the side of the Arabs against multinational oil companies or eventually ensuring that General Alcazar's revolution succeeds while extracting promises of not shooting the losing side en masse - as a whole, his work stands up as a positive, optimistic and above all insatiably curious look at a world that had changed out of all recognition in his own lifetime.
Having grown up revering Tintin and everything about his universe, I have never found common ground with these criticisms. There has been enough said for and against Herge re: the charges of collaborating with the Nazis - read this. Anyone who has read 'Ottokar's Sceptre', 'Land of Black Gold' and 'The Blue Lotus', encountered characters like Mueller, Musstler and various assorted Bordurians and still makes the case that Herge was sympathetic to the Nazis is guilty at least of severe inconsistency. As for Herge returning to occupied Belgium to work, it was after King Leopold's appeal and in any case, there was an entire continent that could be charged with the same offence, beginning with the Vichy regime, something that gets discussed a whole lot less than De Gaulle's broadcasts.
The charge of anti-Semitism seems to be based on even less substantial evidence - one of his villains is called Bohlwinkel (which was Herge's idea of the name of a typical American tycoon, ironically changed from Blumenstein because he didn't want it to be perceived as anti-Jewish!) and the villanous tycoon running through the series - Rastapopoulos has a large nose!
Herge's position on empire is much more complicated. Reading 'Tintin in the Soviet Union' and the first version of 'Tintin in the Congo' is an eye-opener. 'Soviet Union' features more one-dimensional caricatures of hook-nosed 'Commisars' than you can shake a stick at - taken on its own and out of context with the rest of Herge's ouevre, it is appallingly simplistic and stuffed with every bad anti-Communist caricature there is. Bad as this might be, this only reflected the prevalent attitudes in the West in 1929, especially considering that Herge created Tintin for Le Petit Vingtieme, which was a Catholic magazine for youth, determined to stave off the 'scourge' of creeping Communism.
'Congo' is even more complicated - Herge seems to be an unapologetic cheerleader for the Belgian empire and its rule of the Congo. King Leopold the IInd's antics in the Congo, treating it as his personal bank and its inhabitants as his personal slaves, is regarded by historians as possibly the most brutal and exploitative colonial regime ever, which is some distinction given the competition available. In this book, Tintin is shown teaching adoring dark-skinned Congolese children that "King Leopold is our father" and is generally shouldering the 'White Man's Burden' in black and white. Personally, the low point of the entire Tintin series is a toss between this and the moment when Tintin goes rhino hunting - his simple, yet elegant method being to drill a hole in the rhino's hide and plant a stick of dynamite in it!
That Herge grew in his viewpoints and certainly changed his mind is not in doubt - while many of his early, almost crudely drawn books were redrawn, recoloured and almost completely rewritten in some cases, he gave up 'Soviet Union' as irretrievable and never brought out a colour version. 'Congo' was redrawn and coloured, but also rewritten drastically - the famous classroom scene has Tintin taking an innocuous addition lesson, while the rhino is saved from appearing altogether.
But there is more to Herge's attitudes than just a recanting of his positions on the Belgian empire. His denunciation of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and his clear sympathy for the Chinese runs throughout 'The Blue Lotus', 'The Broken Ear' details American and European shenanigans in Central and South America with piercing detail (including a portrayal of an international arms dealer called Sir Basil Baharoff, getting rich off both sides of any conflict, not a million miles from the real Sir Basil Zaharoff) and the last published Tintin adventure 'Tintin and the Picaros' is more in his continuing interest in the instability and pointless coups of Central/ South America.
Taken as a whole, only the most determinedly short-sighted observer can deny the essential humanism and optimism of Herge's work. Whether it's the newly moneyed Captain Haddock indignantly offering a band of Gypsies a meadow in his grounds to camp on, where the local villagefolk had banished them to a rubbish dump, Tintin taking the side of the Arabs against multinational oil companies or eventually ensuring that General Alcazar's revolution succeeds while extracting promises of not shooting the losing side en masse - as a whole, his work stands up as a positive, optimistic and above all insatiably curious look at a world that had changed out of all recognition in his own lifetime.
Friday, June 30, 2006
Rodrigo Y Gabriela
Please please please check out Rodrigo Y Gabriela! Look here first, then go and buy their new album. I saw them first in a brief snippet on Channel 4, one of those ten minute filler things. I had heard of them before, but nothing had really registered. Then I saw them play - my god!
I guess since they play acoustic guitars and come from Mexico, there is a temptation to call them flamenco-based, but since they started off playing in a thrash metal band and throw in covers of Metallica's Orion and Stairway to Heaven as well on their new album, they defy classification.
Go to their website (www.rodgab.com) and watch the live video of them playing the first track - it's just two guitars, a girl and a guy, but it's like nothing you've heard before. Phenomenal virtuosity, but unlike the deeply, deeply boring playing of the thrash scene they came from, they're not in thrall to technique over emotion or groove. Their songs are fantastically rhythmic without saying 'look at me, I can play in 13/19' or some such meters, have fabulous playing from both of them and make every track a joy. I thought the gold standard for albums like this was 'Friday Night in San Francisco', but this might make me change my mind.
P.s. I didn't know whether to be amused or angry at one of the reviewers who posted about this album on iTunes. I paraphrase, but the gist of it was - 'they're from Mexico, but they're way better than Cheech and Chong, so buy this album'!!! So what if these guys are good enough to be compared to John McLaughlin, all that Americans know of Mexican music is a stoner comedy duo from the 70s??? Surely not? Oh well, I guess that person meant well...
I guess since they play acoustic guitars and come from Mexico, there is a temptation to call them flamenco-based, but since they started off playing in a thrash metal band and throw in covers of Metallica's Orion and Stairway to Heaven as well on their new album, they defy classification.
Go to their website (www.rodgab.com) and watch the live video of them playing the first track - it's just two guitars, a girl and a guy, but it's like nothing you've heard before. Phenomenal virtuosity, but unlike the deeply, deeply boring playing of the thrash scene they came from, they're not in thrall to technique over emotion or groove. Their songs are fantastically rhythmic without saying 'look at me, I can play in 13/19' or some such meters, have fabulous playing from both of them and make every track a joy. I thought the gold standard for albums like this was 'Friday Night in San Francisco', but this might make me change my mind.
P.s. I didn't know whether to be amused or angry at one of the reviewers who posted about this album on iTunes. I paraphrase, but the gist of it was - 'they're from Mexico, but they're way better than Cheech and Chong, so buy this album'!!! So what if these guys are good enough to be compared to John McLaughlin, all that Americans know of Mexican music is a stoner comedy duo from the 70s??? Surely not? Oh well, I guess that person meant well...
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
It shouldn't surprise you at all ...
I first heard Billy Joel around the age of 14 or 15, growing up in Calcutta in India. We had one state-run broadcaster and the only western pop you would hear on it was either at lunchtimes or late at night. 'Lunchtime Variety' on Sunday usually featured some interesting DJs and one of them used to play this interesting piano-driven track called 'Surprises' endlessly.
The first collection of his I heard was a 'Greatest Hits' cassette, which of course did not even feature 'Surprises', which was on 'The Nylon Curtain'. This was the first real album I heard, full of little gems like 'Allentown', with its steam-whistle intro, 'Pressure', with the immortal non-sequitur 'All of your life is Time magazine, I read it too' and the cod-Beatles-psychedelic 'Scandinavian Skies' that is much less irritating than it sounds.
Fast forward to New Year's Eve 1999/ 2000, years after Billy Joel had either decided to become a 'serious' classical musician or hit a serious case of writer's block, he decides to play some New Year's shows at Madison Square Garden, which was interesting, but not half as much as the prices for the show - top tickets around $ 3000!!! For a guy who used to sign off on stage saying 'Don't let the bastards grind you down', it was a depressing little segue into 'Exclusive pre-booking for American Express cardholders' or some such. I think it was The Eagles' neverending 'Reunion/ Farewell' tours that started to set my teeth on edge and longing for 1977 all over again (this was of course before Johnny Rotten appeared on 'I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here'), but this was up there with the greediest of them.
When I saw he was touring again this year, on the strength of the success of 'Movin' Out', the musical based on his songs, it seemed like another bad cash-in by someone whose best days are clearly behind them. Having said that, I have to confess I was struck by the live album that's come out of his 12 nights at Madison Square Garden earlier this year - '12 Gardens Live'.
Unless there has been a vast amount of studio overdubbing added on (think Led Zeppelin's Song Remains The Same...), his voice, singing and playing are all surprisingly strong. It's not as if there are any huge surprises in the arrangements, but when I heard 'Miami 2017', I was ready to love the album. He's dipped deeply into a very strong songbook and played some of my personal favourites - 'Zanzibar', with the great 'I got a jazz guitar, I got my old man's car, I got a tab at Zan-zi-bar!'; 'Everybody loves you now'; 'Keepin' the Faith' - 'I got a fresh pack of Luckys and a mint called Sen-Sen'; 'Big Shot' and of course 'Movin' Out'. With these, you can even forgive clunkers like 'Always a woman' and 'River of Dreams'.
I'm still not going to watch the show when it rolls around - I refuse to be the sheep that gets sheared for the pension fund or the second alimony (There's an idea for a tour - 'The Summer 2006 Alimony II Tour!'), unless there are some new songs or a new album that at least proves the artist in question is trying to do some new work. (The exception being The Rolling Stones, who put out new albums just to have a name for the tour. If you sat Keith Richards down and asked him for the name of the last three Stones albums, I think you might wait a long time.) But by all means, run out and buy '12 Gardens Live'.
By the way, on the subject of topping up pension funds, I was rolling over with laughter when I read the name of 'The Eagles'' latest tour - it's called 'Farewell 1' - ha ha ha! How brazen do you have to be to make it so bleeding obvious - why not call it the 'Blatant Cash-in till we come round again' tour? More 'authentic', isn't it?
The first collection of his I heard was a 'Greatest Hits' cassette, which of course did not even feature 'Surprises', which was on 'The Nylon Curtain'. This was the first real album I heard, full of little gems like 'Allentown', with its steam-whistle intro, 'Pressure', with the immortal non-sequitur 'All of your life is Time magazine, I read it too' and the cod-Beatles-psychedelic 'Scandinavian Skies' that is much less irritating than it sounds.
Fast forward to New Year's Eve 1999/ 2000, years after Billy Joel had either decided to become a 'serious' classical musician or hit a serious case of writer's block, he decides to play some New Year's shows at Madison Square Garden, which was interesting, but not half as much as the prices for the show - top tickets around $ 3000!!! For a guy who used to sign off on stage saying 'Don't let the bastards grind you down', it was a depressing little segue into 'Exclusive pre-booking for American Express cardholders' or some such. I think it was The Eagles' neverending 'Reunion/ Farewell' tours that started to set my teeth on edge and longing for 1977 all over again (this was of course before Johnny Rotten appeared on 'I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here'), but this was up there with the greediest of them.
When I saw he was touring again this year, on the strength of the success of 'Movin' Out', the musical based on his songs, it seemed like another bad cash-in by someone whose best days are clearly behind them. Having said that, I have to confess I was struck by the live album that's come out of his 12 nights at Madison Square Garden earlier this year - '12 Gardens Live'.
Unless there has been a vast amount of studio overdubbing added on (think Led Zeppelin's Song Remains The Same...), his voice, singing and playing are all surprisingly strong. It's not as if there are any huge surprises in the arrangements, but when I heard 'Miami 2017', I was ready to love the album. He's dipped deeply into a very strong songbook and played some of my personal favourites - 'Zanzibar', with the great 'I got a jazz guitar, I got my old man's car, I got a tab at Zan-zi-bar!'; 'Everybody loves you now'; 'Keepin' the Faith' - 'I got a fresh pack of Luckys and a mint called Sen-Sen'; 'Big Shot' and of course 'Movin' Out'. With these, you can even forgive clunkers like 'Always a woman' and 'River of Dreams'.
I'm still not going to watch the show when it rolls around - I refuse to be the sheep that gets sheared for the pension fund or the second alimony (There's an idea for a tour - 'The Summer 2006 Alimony II Tour!'), unless there are some new songs or a new album that at least proves the artist in question is trying to do some new work. (The exception being The Rolling Stones, who put out new albums just to have a name for the tour. If you sat Keith Richards down and asked him for the name of the last three Stones albums, I think you might wait a long time.) But by all means, run out and buy '12 Gardens Live'.
By the way, on the subject of topping up pension funds, I was rolling over with laughter when I read the name of 'The Eagles'' latest tour - it's called 'Farewell 1' - ha ha ha! How brazen do you have to be to make it so bleeding obvious - why not call it the 'Blatant Cash-in till we come round again' tour? More 'authentic', isn't it?
Reality-based vs BS-based...
Ron Suskind has quietly risen to some prominence in the last few years as one of the few journalists to take any kind of in-depth look at the shenanigans of, what we must call for lack of any other words, the Bush Administration.
I first read his excellent piece on the sham that was Compassionate Conservatism - my personal opinion has always been that anyone who believed those two words fitted together deserved what they were going to get, but this was a long, calmly written article that was all the more damning for the unpartisan, reflective nature of the piece.
His book, The Price of Loyalty, was excellent - for the first time, there was conclusive evidence that Iraq was always on the agenda for Bush II. If 9/11 hadn't happened, something else would have, to enable them to pursue their dream of taking down one of the easiest targets in the Middle East. The rather flattering portrait painted of Treasury Secretary Paul O' Neill (who after all oversaw the ballooning of gigantic budget deficits fuelled by extraordinarily illogical tax cuts) can be at least excused by O' Neill's defiance in going on the record with his criticisms.
Then, this came out before the 2004 Presidential elections. While Suskind could not in any light be mistaken for a Bush supporter, the careful, even tone of his writing keeps it from sliding into hoarse polemic, though the message could not have been clearer. This was an administration that was led by a profoundly incurious son of privilege, used to getting his own way not through his own accomplishments, but his family name, his connections and lately, the trappings of the power he had acquired. It was also remarkable for his continuing to unravel the lies behind Bush's pose of being a man of faith, not an angle most liberal commentators were comfortable pursuing.
This new book, however, seems to call a spade a spade quite unflinchingly. It is a hard-eyed look at the GWOT (Global War on Terror, if you haven't been keeping up) and what it's been yielding. Apart from anything else, it is worth the price of admission for this: When his CIA briefer led George W. Bush through that famous daily briefing of 6th August 2001, which told the President that Bin Laden was determined to strike inside the US, how did the great defender react? What was his comment on it? Perhaps a stirring message to his troops on the need to fight? A thoughtful comment on how it would take years of struggle to defeat such an enemy?
Not even close. Apparently, it took the form of a sharp comment to the CIA employee in question - 'All right, you've covered your ass, now.' And no further questions or comments.
But surely, 9/11 changed everything? Since then, he has risen to the occasion?
Um, here's Sidney Blumenthal in Salon - "At one briefing in 2002, Suskind writes, Bruce Gephardt, deputy director of the FBI, told Bush that a group of men of "Middle Eastern descent" in Kansas had been discovered offering "cash for a large storage facility." "Middle Easterners in Kansas," said Bush. "We've got to get on this, immediately." Bush is reported to like barking orders, almost at a shout. The next day, he demanded a report. "Mr. President, the FBI has Kansas surrounded!" "That's what I like to hear," Bush replied. But it turned out that the men of Middle Eastern descent were operators of flea markets, not would-be terrorists. The diligent FBI had closed in on their accumulated piles of old clothing and Sinatra records."
Not much else left to say, except that I'm rather glad I haven't visited Kansas since 2000!
I first read his excellent piece on the sham that was Compassionate Conservatism - my personal opinion has always been that anyone who believed those two words fitted together deserved what they were going to get, but this was a long, calmly written article that was all the more damning for the unpartisan, reflective nature of the piece.
His book, The Price of Loyalty, was excellent - for the first time, there was conclusive evidence that Iraq was always on the agenda for Bush II. If 9/11 hadn't happened, something else would have, to enable them to pursue their dream of taking down one of the easiest targets in the Middle East. The rather flattering portrait painted of Treasury Secretary Paul O' Neill (who after all oversaw the ballooning of gigantic budget deficits fuelled by extraordinarily illogical tax cuts) can be at least excused by O' Neill's defiance in going on the record with his criticisms.
Then, this came out before the 2004 Presidential elections. While Suskind could not in any light be mistaken for a Bush supporter, the careful, even tone of his writing keeps it from sliding into hoarse polemic, though the message could not have been clearer. This was an administration that was led by a profoundly incurious son of privilege, used to getting his own way not through his own accomplishments, but his family name, his connections and lately, the trappings of the power he had acquired. It was also remarkable for his continuing to unravel the lies behind Bush's pose of being a man of faith, not an angle most liberal commentators were comfortable pursuing.
This new book, however, seems to call a spade a spade quite unflinchingly. It is a hard-eyed look at the GWOT (Global War on Terror, if you haven't been keeping up) and what it's been yielding. Apart from anything else, it is worth the price of admission for this: When his CIA briefer led George W. Bush through that famous daily briefing of 6th August 2001, which told the President that Bin Laden was determined to strike inside the US, how did the great defender react? What was his comment on it? Perhaps a stirring message to his troops on the need to fight? A thoughtful comment on how it would take years of struggle to defeat such an enemy?
Not even close. Apparently, it took the form of a sharp comment to the CIA employee in question - 'All right, you've covered your ass, now.' And no further questions or comments.
But surely, 9/11 changed everything? Since then, he has risen to the occasion?
Um, here's Sidney Blumenthal in Salon - "At one briefing in 2002, Suskind writes, Bruce Gephardt, deputy director of the FBI, told Bush that a group of men of "Middle Eastern descent" in Kansas had been discovered offering "cash for a large storage facility." "Middle Easterners in Kansas," said Bush. "We've got to get on this, immediately." Bush is reported to like barking orders, almost at a shout. The next day, he demanded a report. "Mr. President, the FBI has Kansas surrounded!" "That's what I like to hear," Bush replied. But it turned out that the men of Middle Eastern descent were operators of flea markets, not would-be terrorists. The diligent FBI had closed in on their accumulated piles of old clothing and Sinatra records."
Not much else left to say, except that I'm rather glad I haven't visited Kansas since 2000!
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Corners being turned
This is essential reading (From the Washington Post - free registration required). At the end of the day, even assuming the civil war were to magically disappear, what Bush, Blair and assorted other jokers have done is created another unstable fundamentalist state in the Middle East.
Iraq is so screwed up that none of their neighbours will tolerate any arrangement that might lead to peace. Iran and Turkey will not tolerate an independent Kurd state, Iran will not tolerate a Sunni-majority south, the Saudis will not tolerate a Shiite-majority Iraq and the possibility of the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias reconstituting a unified Iraq is as likely as Christmas in July - but George the Fourth won't be around to pick up the pieces, will he?
Iraq is so screwed up that none of their neighbours will tolerate any arrangement that might lead to peace. Iran and Turkey will not tolerate an independent Kurd state, Iran will not tolerate a Sunni-majority south, the Saudis will not tolerate a Shiite-majority Iraq and the possibility of the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias reconstituting a unified Iraq is as likely as Christmas in July - but George the Fourth won't be around to pick up the pieces, will he?
Monday, June 19, 2006
Making Hay in the mud
Finally managed to go to the literary festival at Hay-on-Wye this year. The town itself has always seemed to have that slightly magical aura that very few places in the world seem to retain. I mean, there is hardly a town in the country that doesn't have an identikit High Street with identikit burger bars and spotty teens in hoodies just getting there from Central Casting.
Actually, that's unfair - there are at least two or three basic models of High Street. At the more tasteful, 'upper-income' end, you have the Henley-on-Thames/ Windsor model, where the thrift shops have better books, even the burger chains have mock-Tudor frontages and there isn't a 'Texa Fried Chicken' within smelling distance. Further down, you have the Reading/ Croydon model, where there is still a pedestrian area, the Waitrose has been downgraded to a Sainsbury's and Cafe Rouge is a hotbed of exciting cuisine. And then, at what we can euphemistically call the 'cash-efficient' end of the market, we have the Hayes model. Here, the FARA thrift shop looks like Selfridges, you pop into Argos but not too often because you might go dizzy with the excitement, there's a guy at the Barclays ATM complaining to his friend about the lack of information on his receipt ('It said "Do you want an Advice Slip?". I thought it was going to give me some advice - this is just a receipt!') and the culinary choices veer between Greggs, Baker's Choice and ... um, that's it!
How did I get on to this? Ah Hay.
Yes, that there is still a town in this country where there really isn't much of a High Street and there are more book stores than any other kind put together, now that's something! Small book stores, large book stores, second hand book stores, new book stores - heaven! Every time I dipped into one, I swore blind that it would be the last store I even entered. And then I'd come to the next one. It was when I hit the store which was selling new books for £ 1, every book! that I really lost it. Carrying the whole lot back from Cardiff by train was much less fun. Much much less.
Highlights:
1. A 1930s, large format compilation of H. M. Bateman's elaborate cartoons. The first work of his I ever saw was the memorable 'The Boy Who Breathed On The Glass At The British Museum'.
2. 'The Dictionary of National Celebrity'. Superbly funny stuff. Co-written by William Donaldson, who died recently at a ripe old age after a rich career of boozing, shagging and all round debauchery. He was also the author of the Henry Root letters and the excellent 'Brewer's Rogues, Villains and Eccentrics'. It cost me £1, but I would happily pay five times that for a volume that enriches my life with the knowledge that 'Victoria and David Beckham' also forms the acronym 'Bravo! Victim and dickhead'.
The festival itself - as a first time visitor, I loved it. J and I went up to Cardiff, met up with her cousin and his partner and drove up to Hay-on-Wye. In spite of the crowds, we managed to take in at least one talk each - I attended a talk by one of the few Britons to come out of Guantanamo Bay - Moazzam Begg. I had in fact seen him arrive earlier in the afternoon. In the middle of the busy ticketing tent, a short, darkish, bearded Asian man with his young son and a folded umbrella was wandering around slightly confusedly - only because I had seen photos of him did I realize that this slight, innocuous man had actually been through experiences and hardship that would make most of our lives look like a gentle stroll in the park.
His talk was fascinating not just for the content, on which more at a later time, but because I found myself in an interesting position. The strength of his religious beliefs as well as his stated conviction on the issue of Kashmir, both of these were points on which I disagreed strongly and with as much conviction. However, even to my mind those did not in any way even begin to justify what he had to go through with the Americans, especially at Guantanamo. He's written a book which I intend to pick up, even if I see myself arguing with it loudly on public transport. What I did find remarkable was his even-tempered dry wit, even when talking about what must be his darkest hours.
A sample was this anecdote he offered: At one meeting/ interrogation where representatives of the British Secret Service where present, they offered him a copy of Jeremy Paxman's 'The English', apparently as a peace offering. According to Begg, it provided him a great deal of comfort in trying to reconcile his identities as a Muslim and a Briton. When he was out and actually met Paxman, he mentioned this to him and even showed him the copy in question, with a stamp of 'Approved by U.S. forces' on the flyleaf. Begg said that for once, Paxman was open-mouthed and stunned into silence, before recovering enough to point to the book and say 'Well, there's evidence of torture right there!'
On a related, rather ridiculous note, I see from a Village Voice report that the US Army says that detainees being interrogated at Guantanamo sit on a chair that looks like a more comfortable version of the Barcalounger. I am reminded of the Spanish Inquisition sketch from Monty Python - are these 'evildoers' really being interrogated with an American version of 'Bring out the comfy chair'?
Tom Lehrer is supposed to have retired as a satirist after he learned Kissinger had won the Nobel Peace Prize, declaring that satire was dead. This looks like the remains were exhumed, spat on and then rendered for burger meat at the local meatpackers.
Actually, that's unfair - there are at least two or three basic models of High Street. At the more tasteful, 'upper-income' end, you have the Henley-on-Thames/ Windsor model, where the thrift shops have better books, even the burger chains have mock-Tudor frontages and there isn't a 'Texa Fried Chicken' within smelling distance. Further down, you have the Reading/ Croydon model, where there is still a pedestrian area, the Waitrose has been downgraded to a Sainsbury's and Cafe Rouge is a hotbed of exciting cuisine. And then, at what we can euphemistically call the 'cash-efficient' end of the market, we have the Hayes model. Here, the FARA thrift shop looks like Selfridges, you pop into Argos but not too often because you might go dizzy with the excitement, there's a guy at the Barclays ATM complaining to his friend about the lack of information on his receipt ('It said "Do you want an Advice Slip?". I thought it was going to give me some advice - this is just a receipt!') and the culinary choices veer between Greggs, Baker's Choice and ... um, that's it!
How did I get on to this? Ah Hay.
Yes, that there is still a town in this country where there really isn't much of a High Street and there are more book stores than any other kind put together, now that's something! Small book stores, large book stores, second hand book stores, new book stores - heaven! Every time I dipped into one, I swore blind that it would be the last store I even entered. And then I'd come to the next one. It was when I hit the store which was selling new books for £ 1, every book! that I really lost it. Carrying the whole lot back from Cardiff by train was much less fun. Much much less.
Highlights:
1. A 1930s, large format compilation of H. M. Bateman's elaborate cartoons. The first work of his I ever saw was the memorable 'The Boy Who Breathed On The Glass At The British Museum'.
2. 'The Dictionary of National Celebrity'. Superbly funny stuff. Co-written by William Donaldson, who died recently at a ripe old age after a rich career of boozing, shagging and all round debauchery. He was also the author of the Henry Root letters and the excellent 'Brewer's Rogues, Villains and Eccentrics'. It cost me £1, but I would happily pay five times that for a volume that enriches my life with the knowledge that 'Victoria and David Beckham' also forms the acronym 'Bravo! Victim and dickhead'.
The festival itself - as a first time visitor, I loved it. J and I went up to Cardiff, met up with her cousin and his partner and drove up to Hay-on-Wye. In spite of the crowds, we managed to take in at least one talk each - I attended a talk by one of the few Britons to come out of Guantanamo Bay - Moazzam Begg. I had in fact seen him arrive earlier in the afternoon. In the middle of the busy ticketing tent, a short, darkish, bearded Asian man with his young son and a folded umbrella was wandering around slightly confusedly - only because I had seen photos of him did I realize that this slight, innocuous man had actually been through experiences and hardship that would make most of our lives look like a gentle stroll in the park.
His talk was fascinating not just for the content, on which more at a later time, but because I found myself in an interesting position. The strength of his religious beliefs as well as his stated conviction on the issue of Kashmir, both of these were points on which I disagreed strongly and with as much conviction. However, even to my mind those did not in any way even begin to justify what he had to go through with the Americans, especially at Guantanamo. He's written a book which I intend to pick up, even if I see myself arguing with it loudly on public transport. What I did find remarkable was his even-tempered dry wit, even when talking about what must be his darkest hours.
A sample was this anecdote he offered: At one meeting/ interrogation where representatives of the British Secret Service where present, they offered him a copy of Jeremy Paxman's 'The English', apparently as a peace offering. According to Begg, it provided him a great deal of comfort in trying to reconcile his identities as a Muslim and a Briton. When he was out and actually met Paxman, he mentioned this to him and even showed him the copy in question, with a stamp of 'Approved by U.S. forces' on the flyleaf. Begg said that for once, Paxman was open-mouthed and stunned into silence, before recovering enough to point to the book and say 'Well, there's evidence of torture right there!'
On a related, rather ridiculous note, I see from a Village Voice report that the US Army says that detainees being interrogated at Guantanamo sit on a chair that looks like a more comfortable version of the Barcalounger. I am reminded of the Spanish Inquisition sketch from Monty Python - are these 'evildoers' really being interrogated with an American version of 'Bring out the comfy chair'?
Tom Lehrer is supposed to have retired as a satirist after he learned Kissinger had won the Nobel Peace Prize, declaring that satire was dead. This looks like the remains were exhumed, spat on and then rendered for burger meat at the local meatpackers.
He goes purple in the face so you don't have to ... and Seinfeld on the car stereo
Continuing the Daily Show theme, check this out. I saw him first on guest appearances on The Daily Show, in a segment called 'Back in Black' and just got hold of one of his live albums, when he appeared at Carnegie Hall.
On The Daily Show, he's always one last syllable this side of a fatal apoplectic fit, while on the live album, he's more evenly paced. I always find him spot on in terms of his targets (his riff on how gay marriage is 'destroying' marriage in America is rather good) and am always heartened that there are some liberals who are willing to amp up their feelings to the volume that the loony right always subjects us to.
He's the first standup who I've put on my iPod since one J Seinfeld.
Speaking of whom, I still remember listening incessantly to 'I'm telling you for the last time' on my car stereo in the summer of 2001, when I was living in Chicago. I was living an upside down life, in an upside down year (about to get a lot worse) and it seemed fitting that I lived in downtown Chicago and commuted an hour out into the sticks, near Schaumburg. The trip into work could take anywhere from an hour to an hour and a half and when I got to work, it would be time to sit by the phone and start a day of cold-calling! Controlling the all-too-natural impulse to lie down and die in a quiet corner was possible only because I would listen to the Seinfeld live album all the way in and bound into work with a grin on my face.
Another album of that summer was 'Roxy and Elsewhere' by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, but more on that later.
On The Daily Show, he's always one last syllable this side of a fatal apoplectic fit, while on the live album, he's more evenly paced. I always find him spot on in terms of his targets (his riff on how gay marriage is 'destroying' marriage in America is rather good) and am always heartened that there are some liberals who are willing to amp up their feelings to the volume that the loony right always subjects us to.
He's the first standup who I've put on my iPod since one J Seinfeld.
Speaking of whom, I still remember listening incessantly to 'I'm telling you for the last time' on my car stereo in the summer of 2001, when I was living in Chicago. I was living an upside down life, in an upside down year (about to get a lot worse) and it seemed fitting that I lived in downtown Chicago and commuted an hour out into the sticks, near Schaumburg. The trip into work could take anywhere from an hour to an hour and a half and when I got to work, it would be time to sit by the phone and start a day of cold-calling! Controlling the all-too-natural impulse to lie down and die in a quiet corner was possible only because I would listen to the Seinfeld live album all the way in and bound into work with a grin on my face.
Another album of that summer was 'Roxy and Elsewhere' by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, but more on that later.
Media Matters - more than ever
The inexplicable cravenness of the US media coupled with their strange fondness for balancing the Right Wing Republican point of view with a Right Wing Republican point of view drives better men than me insane.
This series in Media Matters is indispensable. Depressing and tends to enrage you, but still indispensable.
People like Jon Stewart and Keith Olbermann who're trying to stem the tide of whoredom deserve thanks and ratings in equal measure.
This series in Media Matters is indispensable. Depressing and tends to enrage you, but still indispensable.
People like Jon Stewart and Keith Olbermann who're trying to stem the tide of whoredom deserve thanks and ratings in equal measure.
Random Rants...
I liked:
- 36 Quai des Orfevres: French thriller, starring Daniel Auteuil and Gerard Depardieu, as well as the lovely Valeria Golino, known unfortunately in the English speaking world only for Hot Shots! Depardieu might be more famous, but Auteuil can claim to be an even better actor. From The Closet to Hidden and now 36, he has the range and the chops to act anyone off the screen. Excellent film.
- Zappa presents Zappa: I didn't think I would get to see anyone competent ever play the music of the late, great Frank Zappa live. So, when his son Dweezil announced a tour including Napoleon Murphy Brock (from his phenomenal Seventies touring band), Terry Bozzio (from one of the better Eighties' lineups) and Steve Vai, I was on. Great show at The Royal Albert Hall, including two songs on the massive pipe organ! No Terry Bozzio, but as Dweezil said, a better show than the last time his dad played that venue. (For those less obssessive, in 1971, when Zappa played there, an audience member charged him and knocked him into the orchestra pit. A drop of 15 feet. The subsequent year or so that Zappa spent in a body cast and a wheelchair for a broken back did not increase his affection for playing live in London). Here's a review for the previous night's show in Manchester - London went off without a hitch and seemed to be even tighter. If I had one gripe, it was that Frank's arrangements were never as conventional as Dweezil's seemed to be - it was never obviously intro-chorus-solo-chorus-outro, but full marks to Dweezil for putting on a very good show. And Steve Vai has more charisma to burn than whole cities full of people ...
I loathed:
- Fanaa: Every once in a while, you can tell Aamir Khan's private banker has called recently. You want to know what this film is like? How about - there's one of those obnoxiously sweet Hindi film kids, with a full hour of screen-time ( at least it felt like an hour to me!) who insists on referring to himself in the third person. As in 'Rehan wants milk mama', or 'Rehan wants a colonoscopy, mama', or some such. Is that enough for you? What about the fact that this mediocre piece of crap goes on for three and a half long long hours?
The 10 - no, make that 3 - Commandments
One of my few regrets about living in London is that we do not get to see The Colbert Report on this side of the pond. I was a fan of Stephen Colbert way back when, when Jon Stewart's The Daily Show was already becoming the only news show in the US worth watching.
His own show is fantastic. As he proved at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the man has no fear and seems to value the truth more than his access to the 'Dick and me go hunting' club.
This is child's play for him, really, but great stuff nonetheless.
His own show is fantastic. As he proved at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the man has no fear and seems to value the truth more than his access to the 'Dick and me go hunting' club.
This is child's play for him, really, but great stuff nonetheless.
Protest music?
This is a particular bugbear of mine. I often go off on these jags on 'how come Dylan/ Young/ fill-in-a-name have to write protest songs forty/thirty/twenty years after they first started? How come no one's interested in doing that any more' and then descend into a foaming rant in which the words 'sellout', 'wankers', 'greedheads' and such can barely be made out before J kindly leads me away from polite company into a darkened room and my favourite straitjacket.
But I digress.
The point is, it's not that simple. Read this.
But I digress.
The point is, it's not that simple. Read this.
Conservatism
Excellent article by Alan Wolfe in the Washington Monthly - Why Conservatives Can't Govern. Now that Ann 'Kill 'em all' Coulter is what passes for a Conservative Intellectual (kind of like horse poop passing for Chanel no 5, but that's a debate for a different day) and any pretensions along the lines of 'Conservatives are more efficient' have been blasted to hell and back, the grey hairs of the movement are wringing their hands at the 'hijacking' of the Conservative movement.
It takes me back to a childhood spent in Bengal, in India, where the collapse of the Soviet bloc was dismissed by leftover Stalinist types with one simple retort - what was in practice was never 'true Marxism' as Marx would have defined it. If it were 'true Marxism', it would never have collapsed. Apart from the elegant circularity of the logic, in this case it is the delicious irony that you have to love - ideological opposites resorting to using the same scraps of tattered dogma to keep reality out.
Wolfe has a simple premise - if someone with an ingrained belief in the evil of government runs government, the results are exactly what we see in the US today. All the guff about how this is not 'true Conservatism' is just that - guff. I'm curious as to why there haven't been more furious, Bill O' Reilly style denunciations of this article - but then one of the conditions of joining Faux News or the NRO could be an inability to focus on one thing for more than two seconds. I would expect the worthies of the Standard to weigh in on this though.
It takes me back to a childhood spent in Bengal, in India, where the collapse of the Soviet bloc was dismissed by leftover Stalinist types with one simple retort - what was in practice was never 'true Marxism' as Marx would have defined it. If it were 'true Marxism', it would never have collapsed. Apart from the elegant circularity of the logic, in this case it is the delicious irony that you have to love - ideological opposites resorting to using the same scraps of tattered dogma to keep reality out.
Wolfe has a simple premise - if someone with an ingrained belief in the evil of government runs government, the results are exactly what we see in the US today. All the guff about how this is not 'true Conservatism' is just that - guff. I'm curious as to why there haven't been more furious, Bill O' Reilly style denunciations of this article - but then one of the conditions of joining Faux News or the NRO could be an inability to focus on one thing for more than two seconds. I would expect the worthies of the Standard to weigh in on this though.
Reading...
The joys of a three hour commute on London's commuter rail network are few and far between, so I should thank the fact that it lets me read for extended stretches of time. I weave in and out of periods when I don't touch fiction at all, but I stumbled on a couple of authors lately who have repaid the effort.
(My usual tactic for discovering new authors is to pick up interesting looking titles during my thrift shop browsing [God bless Oxfam Bookshops, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research and all of the others!] and then follow up on the author if it seems worthwhile. )
The first was Jasper Fforde, who's whimsical without being twee, inventive without being a complete showoff about it and often quite funny. At the same time, there is a level of commentary underneath it that's quite sharp as well.
Start with 'The Eyre Affair', work your way through 'Lost in a Good Book' and 'The Well of Lost Plots' and finish with 'Something Rotten' - all of which feature his heroine Thursday Next. She's a cop or a detective of sorts, in an England (and occasionally Wales) that is ever so slightly different. Well, different enough that the Crimean War was still going into the 1980s... He's recently started another series, with 'The Big Over Easy' and 'The Fourth Bear', which I haven't gotten to yet.
Given the growth of his writing across the successive books in the Thursday Next series, he seems to be just getting started, so he should be fun to watch. He has an excellent, if rather busy, website that's well worth a visit, at www.jasperfforde.com
The second author who's not new by any means, but new to me, is Jonathan Coe. At last count he had at least six novels in print, but he made his mark with 'What a Carveup', 'The House of Sleep' was well-acclaimed and 'The Rotters Club' was a huge success. There is a sequel to 'The Rotter's Club' as well - 'The Closed Circle'.
I bought 'The Rotter's Club' and started it - halfway through I ran out to the shops to pick up everything else by him! I then went on to 'What a Carve-up' and am halfway through 'The Closed Circle'.
He's ambitious, expansive, funny and quite pointed in his social commentary. 'What ...' brought out comparisons to Dickens, but for me, he's a lot closer to Robertson Davies, who had the misfortune to be Canadian and thus almost obscure for today's readers. He has the same effortless sweep, encompassing families and mini-dynasties, stretching across decades and creating characters who you can care for. Very highly recommended.
(My usual tactic for discovering new authors is to pick up interesting looking titles during my thrift shop browsing [God bless Oxfam Bookshops, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research and all of the others!] and then follow up on the author if it seems worthwhile. )
The first was Jasper Fforde, who's whimsical without being twee, inventive without being a complete showoff about it and often quite funny. At the same time, there is a level of commentary underneath it that's quite sharp as well.
Start with 'The Eyre Affair', work your way through 'Lost in a Good Book' and 'The Well of Lost Plots' and finish with 'Something Rotten' - all of which feature his heroine Thursday Next. She's a cop or a detective of sorts, in an England (and occasionally Wales) that is ever so slightly different. Well, different enough that the Crimean War was still going into the 1980s... He's recently started another series, with 'The Big Over Easy' and 'The Fourth Bear', which I haven't gotten to yet.
Given the growth of his writing across the successive books in the Thursday Next series, he seems to be just getting started, so he should be fun to watch. He has an excellent, if rather busy, website that's well worth a visit, at www.jasperfforde.com
The second author who's not new by any means, but new to me, is Jonathan Coe. At last count he had at least six novels in print, but he made his mark with 'What a Carveup', 'The House of Sleep' was well-acclaimed and 'The Rotters Club' was a huge success. There is a sequel to 'The Rotter's Club' as well - 'The Closed Circle'.
I bought 'The Rotter's Club' and started it - halfway through I ran out to the shops to pick up everything else by him! I then went on to 'What a Carve-up' and am halfway through 'The Closed Circle'.
He's ambitious, expansive, funny and quite pointed in his social commentary. 'What ...' brought out comparisons to Dickens, but for me, he's a lot closer to Robertson Davies, who had the misfortune to be Canadian and thus almost obscure for today's readers. He has the same effortless sweep, encompassing families and mini-dynasties, stretching across decades and creating characters who you can care for. Very highly recommended.
A Huge Improvement...
Already this blog is a huge improvement over others (two? three?) that I started and never went back to. The reason was simple and the same in each case - after spending hours thinking of a phenomenally apposite title for my blog, I would forget it and never manage to get back into it again! This time should be different....
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
