Incorrigible

Yes, I am incorrigible. Allow me to introduce you to the three newest (to me) artists on my Ipod. Yes, some of this may be old news, and no, none of it is "fresh", or "avante garde". It's the same stuff I always listen to, and I love it.
First, the most sophisticated stuff is from How to Destroy Angels. Basically, this is Trent Reznor's new band. I do not miss his voice whatsoever, having never been enamored with it. But, his wife has an excellent haunting little girl voice, like Hope Sandoval, and the music is much more concrete, and closer to a sound collage than a melody, and so I like it. I've always liked pretty voices with noise. But, let's face it, that's no more challenging than a Timbaland track. Still, I like the notion of "music" that cannot be notated.
Second, I've liked the Gallows, and Kid Dynamite, and the Bronx and other latter day thrash bands- mostly because I liked the former day Thrash bands. (Oh, and no, the so called "thrash metal" of the late 1980's means nothing, nada, zilch to me. I'm talking about speedy hardcore punk rock, based on the "three letter band" codex, and the straight edge beat). So, it's a bit sad to me that I was late to the party with The Steal. It's too bad they're gone, but really, download, or buy "Bright Grey" which is about as fine a thrash record as I can recall from the past ten years. It's not up to the glories of The Capaces, mind you, but they're on another level. If you had a buzz cut and skate shoes in 1986, you'll probably dig it, if only for nostalgia.
Third, I won't say much, because you've probably heard them already- I think they even have records in Target, but I have to admit I finally gave The National a fair shot, and they're decent. They're certainly breaking no ground that Wilco, or a host of canadian bands haven't already done (basically a mix of New Wave and Americana) but I hummed along to enough tunes that I finally downloaded some. Call it a reluctant thumb shakily pointing up.

Nostalgia, anyone?

I don't know why but I was thinking about the mid 1990's. More specifically, I was thinking about "never was" bands like The Nymphs Hammerbox Greta Basehead (arguably) Black Grape Still good stuff...

I-Rash

I married an Irish woman and, more than 10 years after my divorce I'm just about ready to forgive the irish people.
Yes, that's a joke. But, I think I need to make a distinction that's serious. I don't mind Irish people; People born in Ireland, people simply of Irish descent. I don't like, and never have liked what I'd call "I-rash" people. You know, the drunk at the bar who is claiming he's obnoxious because he's Irish, and plays house of pain on the jukebox before causing a scene by bashing into people as he "jyumps erown"? I-Rash. You know the girl who wants to tell you the secret pagan meaning behind every holiday , and how it's all a big conspiracy to put down the Wiccans, even though she doesn't speak the slightest amount of gaelic? I-Rash. You know the idiot redhead who plans about a month in advance for "St Paddy's Day", and has seen Riverdance about 12 times? I-Rash. All those Celtic knot tattoos? I-Rash. "Back to Eyre" travel packages? I-Rash. Green Effing Beer? I-capital- RASH. I have no love for all that I-Rash crap.
Why do I bring this up? I saw Denis Leary's Rescue me comedy show this past week, and my wife is off the see Riverdance, today. Incidentally, the best part about the comedy show? Adam freakin' Ferrara- the guy just killed. I say this as a huge Denis Leary Fan. Adam was by far the funniest thing all night. Go see him, next chance you can. Oh, and whatever else you do, support the Firefighters. That was half the reason I went.

As Lost Turns

So, they're hyping the heck out of the Lost Finale. I'm interested, but I think it went from being a really good TV show, to a mildly entertaining show, to a chore in relatively short order. I think a three season show minus a whole bunch of the claptrap would've been better, but hey, they're rich, so they must be right- right?
I bring it up because of this interview . Specifically, there's bit where Carlton Cuse says
We want people to have a chance to digest, discuss, debate and interpret the events of the finale. And we think there’s going to be plenty of things for people to discuss and debate, just like every year. We don’t want to be out there saying, no no no, you must think this or you must think that. We don’t want to sort of spoil the process, which is to let people process the finale and arrive at their own conclusions about it.
Then, Damon Lindelof says
The interpretive element of "Lost," the fact that you immediately need as soon as the episode is over to seek out a community of people to express your own thoughts about it, understand what they thought about it and form an opinion, that’s the bread and butter of the show. The more we talk about what our intention was, the more we take it away from the audience. And we have no interest in doing that ever.
Now, in theory, I can get behind that- the notion of Art being a process of communication between the Artist and the audience is a dear one to me. But, it seems to me they're using a kind of misinterpretation of that process of communication to justify and rationalize their artlessness. The interpretive element works if you're talking about non-narrative art. If it was some kind of visual tone poem, they might have something there. But, they're engaged in a pulpy form of genre-writing that's dependant upon narrative form. They're combining Science Fiction and mystery writing. That's it. It's the same combination that both "Twin Peaks" and "The X Files" employed. So, what kind of postmodern nonsense is it to say "Oh, we're leaving interpretation up to the audience"? Quite frankly, that's simply not so- they're just lacking the courage to answer the mysteries they tried to invoke, and now, they're dodging continuity and logic, and structural bullets by caveat, hoping that the audience will rationalize it for them. They didn't write Haiku's, here- they produced a genre show! Narrative Art depends upon the narrative-which is to say, upon the Artist knowing (Gno- look it up) what they're saying. In other words, they can say "oh, we've explained the numbers" by citing a scene or two where they are discussed, but that doesn't mean they've explained the narrative function of them-and therefore by not completing the function, they're copping out. This is why the (original) Prisoner is still a work of Art, and Lost is still just a TV show. Watch any of the first 16 episodes of the Prisoner, and it both serves as a poetic metaphor for a societal force, and a fully formed narrative story. The last, 17th episode is precisely a visual Tone Poem that abandons narrative function in order to achieve a truly meta- narrative about the show itself, and the process in creating it. That's high Art, and it left no questions hanging- Number 6 was a prisoner both of himself, and of his culture. The Village was a system of control, just as all cultures are system of control. Along the way, it was determined that neither absolute control, nor absolute autonomy was truly desirable, but that a bargain must be struck between the individual and society. Yes, all of this was demonstrated clearly. Faith and Reason both played into this equation, as did love and war. Meanwhile, Lost cannot even resolve whether Faith or Reason is even valid, it cannot decide whether the individual or society is important- it cannot answer any of the narrative questions it has posed, it simply exists as commercial entity. Which means, again, it's just a genre show, like a soap opera, or a situation Comedy. That means talk of the function of Lost being some kind of facilitator of interpretive creative communication between the audience, the Art and itself is just a pretentious cop out.
Now, I've got friends and family who think that Lost is the best TV show, ever. I'm not here to say they're wrong, exactly. I'm just here to say that it's not high art, and it's pretty deeply flawed on its own terms. Now, the argument can be made that all Art is flawed, and that the distinction between high and low art is a false one, and that since all art is therefore destined for failure, it's not a question of if the show succeeds, only if it entertains- and that's a valid point of view. I just don't buy it, myself. I think that the show jumped the proverbial shark somewhere in the 4th season, and went from a good show to a poor one. By now, I think the fans really could write a better show ( which is another possible subtext of what the shows own producers are saying, and, if so, what better evidence that they have failed at the narrative imperative is there?) and I hope somebody does. By far, the best elements of the show have not been of the show in a long time- between the Blogs, the ARG's and the fan-generated speculation some truly innovative storytelling has been constructed- but doesn't that derive more from people's dissatisfaction with the paltriness of the show's construction than from its design?

Dio's Dead

I wasn't a real fan, but some of my friends were. Too bad. Stomach cancer, that's a rough way to go. I know it wasn't painless, but I hope it was peaceful.

Review

So, I finally got an Ipod. Not an Mp3 player, no, the apple product. I'm still a PC type of guy, but, apple really does have the superior product with the Nano. In some ways, it's an amazing product- 600 songs easily stored, right? Oh, and a few pod casts, and maybe a few photos, and did I mention it's also a video recorder? But, on the other hand Itunes is clunky, and difficult, not to mention invasive. Also, the product is a bit of a magic box- you cannot customize how it works, and you cannot so much as replace the battery, yourself.
All in all, though, it's good.
This is how it relates to this blog, though- it's encouraged me to listen to a bunch of music I had in the collection, not explore new stuff. In other words, a lot of review. As with any review, it's only interesting for the new connections. So, I leave it on shuffle a lot. I discover things like The Mescaleros' "All in a Day" blends nicely with The Tubeway Army's "Are 'Friends' Electric?", and I discover just how narrow my tastes really are- it turns out there really isn't that much space between Billie Holiday and Spearhead, nor is there all that much difference between Willie Nelson and Mark Lanegan. So, I'm still processing this new information. I am re-evaluating much of my tastes- not changing those tastes- but re-evaluating- I'm realizing that I'm much more of a rockist than I thought, that I enjoy keyboards more than guitar solos, but I love guitars more than voices (Except Mark Lanegan's voice, which is still a perfect instrument. No, I don't have a man-crush on him, I just love his voice. The man, himself, seems a bit of an Ass.) I'm realizing that the only real use I have for lyrics is aphoristic, and that a sweeping melody means more to me than a well-turned phrase. All the same, Joe Strummer's words are some of the best poetry I will ever hear.
There is a value to reviewing beyond analysis, however- the connection between the present and the past becomes more transparent, and, if you're at peace with who you are, that can be a comfort, and in those areas where you are not at peace with yourself, that connection can serve as inspiration to achieve that peace. (Incidentally, this is one of the three reasons I cannot be a Buddhist. I believe that the past is real, as well as the future is knowable- I don't believe we're in an eternal present. The other two reasons? I believe in an external god, and I believe that the full, absolute truth is both real and unknowable.)

But, it's not entirely been about the Ipod- I've been watching a couple of movies, listening to a couple of Cd's, and reading a few things-
The movies? What we do is Secret, Raising Arizona, and Feast.
The less I say about What we do is Secret, probably the better. I have people who know me who knew Darby/Bobby/Jan better than I ever will, and I don't want to offend them with my impressions. What I will say, however, is that I only saw him as Darby, and only saw him at shows, and even so- the biography drawn up in What we do is Secret is far too kind to him, far too harsh at people who deserve better, and far too neat to be anything like the truth. At best, it's the impression that his friends might want to give their kids. However, if you take away the non-fiction aspect, and view it as a myth, or a story, it's well done. It's a slightly more true story than your average biopic, in that while it does show that drugs were bad, it shows more clearly both the ambition, and mental anguish that were the reasons for the drug use did the real damage.
As for Raising Arizona- What can I say? I like about half of the Coens' movies- this one, and Miller's Crossing are my favorites-and it's a modern classic. The distillation of cartoon slapstick, Guys and Dolls-esque patter, and redneck mysticism has a legion of imitators, but none offer up such a sincere, genuine heart. Well worth your time.
Finally, Feast. Yes, the project greenlight horror franchise. Again, what can I say- it's not really a "horror" movie- it's an extreme slapstick comedy with low budget special effects. That's how I see a lot of these things, and that's what I'm a fan of watching. I do like a real "horror" movie, and I don't like torture porn, but slasher-style gorefests? They are their own kind of comedy. I don't wish harm on (nearly) anyone- and it's only because I know it's special effects that I can view it that way- and I think Feast is more fully aware that it's not real than most, hence I can enjoy it more.
The Cd's? The Bronx (III) and Isobel Campbell/Mark Lanegan's The ballad of the Broken Seas.
The Bronx have mellowed out from from their start as a hardcore band, without genuinely changing their style. Basically, what they do is a somewhat metallic version of the garage punk that a band like Rocket From the Crypt did, or that The Riverboat Gamblers still do. That "garageiness" is the appeal for me. They sound like smart guys rocking out after a few beers, aware of both how stupid they are, and how little they want to give it up, nonetheless. In that respect, they are the Cynics for the Jackass crowd.
As for the Belle and Sebastian girl, singing with the former Screaming Tree- yes, it's gentle, ramshackle ballads, but informed by a Gaelic ( not "irish" sensibility) From Richard Thompson to Glasvegas, I'm a sucker for the Gaelic lilt and reel. My belief is that Rock and Roll is based on two things, equally- the "rock" of African rhythm and the "roll" of Gaelic harmony. I think the "blue note" of the Blues traces ancestry directly to Scotland, and the high, lonesome of Country swing traces directly from Wales. So, this is still a rock and roll record. That's what lends it swing, and heft. What makes it pretty are the two voices, but what makes it cool is the Gaelic ghost underneath it all.
Anyway, this is long enough, I'll continue later...

What's Going on with Spain?

Seriously, I'm hearing a lot of very diverse, high quality music coming out of Spain, as of late... Everything from the brilliant old-school hardcore of The Capaces, to the world-fusion rap rock of After Many Days to the electro hard pop of Echovolt . You've got the punk rock of Atrako a Mano Armada , the strange decayed metal of Los Cuatrocientos Golpes , and the surf rock of Los Tiki Phantoms , and the D-beat thrash of D R A M A . Defintely much more varied than the Garage rock scene I recall from the 1990's. It's a big world, folks- don't limit yourself to one country, but dang, Spain has something going on....

In the New York Times...

I've been following Michael Kimmelman's column . I think he's got some interesting things to say, even if he's basically deconstructing a straw man argument. He defines "globalization" in a way I haven't really seen it defined- basically, it reads like he thinks of it as some kind of cultural cross-pollenizing- so as to attack people who don't like corporate globalization, which is a far more hedgemonic thing than I think he's allowing. Still, as I wrote, some very interesting points along the way. I sincerely hope he continues bringing this argument to such interesting places....

Kowloon Eletrika

I listen to a pretty wide variety of music. Always have. Always will. On top of having a brain, I'm a musician, and I worked in the industry. So, music is an Art that I relate easily and well to my life. It seems silly to me to limit my listening then, to one style or another.
That having said, of course I have tastes and preferences. A Big preference is for guitars, and that's probably been pretty obvious. Guitars, at this time in history, means you're going to end up in "rock" territory, so, yeah, I hear a lot of rock music. That still allows for a lot of diversity. Take the two bands I've been listening to, today: Kowloon Walled City and EletriKa. About the only thing they really have in common would be guitars.
Kowloon Walled City start with an amazing name, if you read history. If you don't, it'd be like naming the band "real-life anarchic city of sin and reward". The band do a kind of sludgey avant-metal that owes to black Sabbath, King Crimson, Black Flag and Neurosis. In other words, like other bands I like (Kylesa, Kyuss, Killing Joke- what is it with the letter "k"?) this is grimy very heavy, very hard rock done by some very brainy people. Nothing "pop" about this. But, yet, still very musical, and very engaging. If you're a bit of a metal-head, but you feel guilty about it- here's your band. Also, if you're too smart to listen to Zakk Wylde, and you think he's really a wuss hiding behind a musclehead physique, yeah, this is a band for you. Downtuned, loud stuff that isn't processed; raw and vibrant but challenging music for people with an education.
None of that makes EletriKa a dumb band, by any means. But, where KWC are like a Grad student's Stoner-metal tribute band, EletriKa are like an older professional's hobby. Maybe they aren't quite a "hobby", but they are a "second" band for Claudio David, who you should know from Overdose, the long-running brazillian Thrash-metal band. I have been an Overdose fan since the mid 1990's, when it seemed like Brazil could do no wrong between them and Sepultura. Seriously, the mix of poly rhythm and technical thrash metal is a really good listen- try out "Rio Street Progress" or "Zombie Factory". So, the thought of a techno-enhanced version of Overdose was really enticing for me (hey, I like technology. I am not afraid of pro-tools or keyboards) However, EletriKa take a different approach. They're more standard "alternative rock" with some seriously tweaked production (guitars compressed within an inch of their frequency spectrum, for a start). I'm open to everything, so, no, I'm not disappointed, but I guess I'm still waiting for a band that sounds like a combination of Pitchshifter and Soulfly. EletriKa sound more like mid-90's Alt-rock (Alice in Chains, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Candlebox) meets late-90's production. In effect, they have more in common with a band like The Exies than they do with, say, Fear Factory. And you know what? I still like it. I'm good with Alice in Chains style vocal harmonies with compressed guitars playing a white-boy funk rock. The lyrics aren't too special, and there's a definitely lack of concern for a truly conveyed "message" but Claudio still knows his way around a fretboard, and can roll out a cavalcade of false harmonics in a way to create a still hummable melody that's impossible to notate- which requires a lot of Art, in and of itself.
So, what about me? What's my message? The same as always- my taste, your taste, any one's taste can be worthwhile, it just has to be recognized for its own terms. That's the difference between "mass culture" and the culture of the many....

Influence

One of the worst interview questions that can be asked is "What are your influences?" It's a bad question because it draws attention away from the interview subject, it's unnatural, and it forces the interview into a formal exercise, instead of a conversation. In other words, it actually makes it harder to understand the interview's subject. Yet, what could be more important for understanding an artist than knowing where they draw inspiration? So, is it more important to understand the artist, or is it more important to know them?
Well, you'll note I'm not doing interviews on this blog, and with a little digging, you'll find that I have done my share of music journalism, so I'd like to take enough credit to say that I have made a choice- I think it's more important for me as a fan to understand the Artist than to know the people. I mean, consider this- I cannot talk with Joe Strummer. He's dead. I cannot know John Mellor, the man who created Joe Strummer. But, I can understand the Artist known as Joe Strummer, and one way to do that is to know where he drew inspiration from.
Sometimes, influences are crucial. One of my favorite bands from the old Los Angeles punk scene would be TSOL. One listen to them, and you can hear a similarity to the Damned . So, why don't I just listen to the Damned? Because on the one hand, Jack, TSOL's singer, clearly is just as influenced by lounge/Easy listening music as he is by rock music. He sings like he's been on a Burt Bacharach bender as much as Dave Vanian (the Damned's singer) sings like Jim Morrison. But, on the other hand, Ron, TSOL's guitarist, clearly has listened to Johnny Thunders, a lot. Easily as much as Captain Sensible listened to Daevid Allen in the Soft Machine. It's the difference in those influences that makes TSOL sound like a more relevant musical entity to me. No knock on the Damned, who I like as well, but I prefer Bacharach to the Doors, and I prefer Johnny Thunders to the Soft Machine. Plus, the musical thought of the connections between Easy listening and Glam rock is far more compelling than simple psychedelic music, played at Punk tempo (Again, no knock on the Damned, but Hawkwind was doing that, already).
Music is Art, to me. I realize that it can be many other things, and it has been many other things to me. As Art, however, music is part of a conversation of ideas that has been going on as long as civilization. So, as part of that conversation it's important to know where the quotes come from.