Signing Off...

...for Yuletide. I think the Christmas holiday should be used for some contemplation and looting. I shall return after the New Year, primed and pointed, and full of that mysterious entity called "pep." Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Spiffy Kwanzaa, and a Jolly New Year to all.

"The Enemy is NOT at the Airport"

So far Saddam is still denying everything. But the tone of the story suggests he's going to get a thorough going over from undisclosed interrogators in an undisclosed location before he stands trial. His briefcase has already been a mine of intelligence, according to the military. We'll see how long it takes us to get him to tell us what we want to know.

Ace of Spades

It's good news today, kids. The Butcher is caught, and the butcher is going to face what Hitler and Stalin never faced: the wrath of the people he raped. And all because he had nowhere to go, no friends who dared help him, nothing except a pistol he dared not use. Amazing how much fear and devestation can be caused by such a weak little man...

Jonah Reams us One

Full disclosure: Jonah Goldberg is one of my favorite columnists, for style, wit and content combined, he's topped by very few. And his summation of the Supreme's upholding of McCain-Feingold is dead-on. But he also takes some folk to task:

By the way, where the hell is this much-vaunted blogosphere? If three freshman congressmen from Wisconsin hinted that they wanted to regulate the use of umlauts on the internet in honor of Leif Ericson's birthday, bloggers would be on the steps of Congress up-ending cans of gasoline on themselves in protest at such an infringement on free speech. But here we have all three branches of the government severely restricting independent speech outside of the dinosaurs of Old Media and the relative silence — minus a few noble exceptions (The Volokh conspiracy, Instapundit) — is deafening

Okay, big fella ("Hey, don't steal my material!" said an unnamed couch, who left shortly thereafter), we get the point. So we dropped the ball on this one. It happens -- the NYT barely noticed that there was an anti-terror demonstration in Baghdad yesterday. In fairness, Instapundit did hit it, and he's kind of like the blogosphere's Washington Post (Drudge being our New York Times). So, for that matter, did my evil twin at Skeptical Notion, albeit with a favorable stance toward McCain-Feingold. If we aren't leaping at this one, it may be because a level of cynicism has crept into the 'sphere regarding the SCOTUS. Of late it's been on an activist bender; perhaps "insane ruling fatigue" is creeping in.

Can We PLEASE Define Our Terms?

Here's a minor editorial arguing somewhat roundaboutly that the exploration of space needs to be opened up to private hands: to use commerce and some capital liquidity as a means to getting to Mars and beyond. You know, allow folk to make some use of what's up there. Obviously, I don't have an ideological problem with that (practicality and safety, that's another matter). My objection is one of syntax:

abundant evidence from history should teach him that greed is one of the primary human motivators, the other being fear.

Will someone do me the favor and tell me why the profit motive is evidence of greed? It's become one of those maddening rhetorical habits of our society: anyone who seeks material reward for material investment is morally bankrupt. Now, I know that not even the liberalest liberal would phrase it that way. They'd say that of course nothing is wrong with seeking profit, but don't you think that, as a whole, our society, is overly interested in money? And shouldn't we be discouraging rather than encouraging that? I mean, look around at all the stuff we have! Isn't that enough?


I'm not going to use that strawman to argue that societies can't be greedy. They can, and often are. I'm going to argue that greed is a specific failing, and one which we should apply carefully, and as a condemnation, not casually as a whine. To wit: greed is the excessive love of material wealth, to the detriment or even exclusion of higher values. The key terms there are "excessive" and "higher values". Now, maybe them "deregulated CEO's with their short-term, self-serving accountant mentality," have crossed that threshold. Or maybe they're just looking for a revenue stream, and intend to make use of the extraterrestrial property without raping it. If only their were some moral code known and agreeable to all, which put ideas like this in context...

Somewhere in Iraq

I'm calling your attention to the new link on ze blogroll, Healing in Iraq. It's done by a fellow named Zeyad, an Iraqi who: a) was formerly a member of the Baath party (albiet reluctantly), b) lives in the "Sunni Triangle", and c) has family members who were intimately connected to the regime. He supported the war in April and still does, even when the power keeps going out. Today he covered the Anti-Terror demostration in Baghdad, with photos. Good fly-on-the-wall stuff, and more than CNN plans on telling you.




UPDATE: CNN did, in fact, cover the demonstration. Huzzah for them.

Music Review: the EP Double Secret Edition

The difference between an EP (Extended Play) and an LP (Long Play, or what we call an album) is primarily economic, EP's are cheaper. Back when all records were on vinyl, there was also physical difference: the former was generally shorter and smaller than the latter. Now that everything's digital, the difference is more subtle. The fourth Led Zeppelin album, comprising 8 tracks, costs at least $15 on CD, depending on where you shop. The Raveonettes EP, Whip it On, also comprising 8 tracks, cost me $7.99 at Border's. The idea is that albums, being the premier unit of musical product, put a great deal of money into their production, and thus demand a higher return, whereas EP's, generally functioning as musical advertisements for up-and-coming bands, cost less to make and package. As certain people like their music with as little hype as possible, EP's can be the more interesting buy.

As part of my shameful giving-in to RIAA in October (don't worry, I've climbed back on the wagon. Everything else I buy will be independent releases, until the beast backs down. I swear), I bought two EP's from the cusp of the New Rock scene: that of the aforementioned Raveonettes, and the eponymous release by the Yeah Yeah Yeahs. Herein I shall review them both:


Whip It On by the Raveonettes has an interesting gimmick: all songs are deliberately under three minutes, using three chords, and recorded in B Flat Minor. While the first two restrictions are not that interesting, the last one did catch my fancy. A great many bands, especially punk bands, have ridden the three-chord-three-minute wagon to utter forgettableness. It basically means you don't really wanna bother learning to play, either out of artistic obstinance or sheer laziness. But to specifically record everything in the same key, and as obtuse a key as B Flat Minor, is suggestive of something else: the desire to create a continuous mood, examining a sound from many sides, like the facets of a diamond. I love this disc, but I can only listen to it at certain times, and in certain moods. It is the perfect CD for driving at night, the tunes are all somber yet fast, and cool as pavement in January. On the rare occasions when I find myself on the DC Beltway after dark, this is the bad boy I want with me. It's become a niche CD, which are usually your favorites.

Yeah Yeah Yeahs only has 5 tracks, and cost me two dollars more (you figure it out). But it's the more impressive of the two. The Spin-telligensia have blown this group up to be THE punk band of the new millenium, and for once they've been right about something other than their own hipness. The songs on Yeah Yeah Yeahs are each originally anarchic, well within the punk tradition yet working it's own alchemies of rythmn and texture.

Like the White Stripes, the YYY's are only drums, guitar and vocals, but being a threesome, one person handles each. Nick Zinner on guitar makes good mojo, fusing blues and punk and dead space into a powerful groove. Brian Chase is likewise bangingly minamist (think Scott Asheton's son who went to Julliard). Most critics get excited about Karen O(rzolek), the band's vocalist, and with reason: she's strikingly varied, able to scream in Dionysiac self-immolation, yet also able to chirp poppily along, and only half-ironically. And that's only when she isn't drone-crooning with such an erotic ache that I find myself wanting to...well, never mind.

They're a bold band, and they get your attention, and after 5 tracks, you want more. That's the perfect EP. But word around the campfire is that their album Fever to Tell, disappoints. Other rumours, that Karen O is having a hard time adjusting to the demands of a professional touring pop band, and is even beginning to rethink her status as a role model for girls (good for her. Would that Madonna had such intellectual honesty), might point the way to the Icarus path for this group. But sometimes failure can be more interesting than success, if the failure aimed higher.


That's it.

Gore-asm

When you think about it, there's really nothing surprising about Al Gore endorsing Howard Dean. Gore is the symbol of The Stolen Election, the lightning-pole around which liberal dreams of révanche collects. As such, he was bound to pick the angriest candidate. Also, Gore was noted for transforming himself into a leftist, for breaking with centrism to arouse the party base. As David Brooks points out today, so is Howard Dean.


Given that, I'm hoping even more that Dean gets nominated, and that Bush beats the pants off of him next year. It might shut the Left up for a few years.

Dead Presidents

Not to be a defender of a guy who makes insane amounts of money rhyming about himself, what a badass he is and how much certain people piss him off (but look! He's white!), but I'm not sure that Eminem's New Lyrics mean what people think they mean:

"F--k money. I don't rap for dead presidents.

I'd rather see the president dead.

It's never been said,

but I set precedents and the standards

and they can't stand it. ...

We as Americans. Us as a citizen.

We've got to protect ourselves ..."

The first line is an obvious lie. The second might mean he wants Bush to die, but it might also mean that he'd rather see the U.S. President shot in the street than submit his Amazing Talent™ to the crudity of commerce (which is, as I said, a lie). I could be wrong about this. Lines 3-5 are the typical Marshall Mathers self-idolization-and-paranoia routine (in case you were wondering why teenage boys should like him so much). The last two lines could be interpreted several different ways.




Honestly, I don't see Em cozying up too much with the liberal anti-war crowd. His last video showed Osama Bin Laden getting chased around by rappers who discovered his underground lair. We might just have to wait for the whole song and video to judge. If it turns out the the guy is mouthing sedition, string the sumbitch up. But someone hose Drudge down in the meantime.

Oh, That Other War...

In case anybody at the U.N. was paying attention, the Chechnyan mess is going on as robustly as when Yeltsin started it. How many years is this now? How many dead Chechnyans and Russians? And how many times has Chirac or ANSWER called Putin a grave threat to world peace?


In fairness, we haven't exactly been jumping down the bear's throat about it, either. But why Russia gets a pass for something as grotesque as the Chechen war has become, while the world focuses all it's attention on our far younger (and more successful at this stage) effort in Iraq, I cannot fathom.

Music Review - The Strokes: Room on Fire

When I quoted Lester Bangs a few weeks ago and said that no one listens to music, I realized that such a statement was to a degree ludicrous on its face. Of course people listen to music; it's not like it's good for anything else (sans LSD). What I meant was that very few (in elitist exaggerationist language, very few = none) listen to music charitably or unselfishly. This statement borders on ludicrosity (if it's not a word, then I just invented it) as well; I will explain. Most people put a piece of music in their respective audio systems and wait to be moved. The music is judged on one thing; whether it affects you in the way you want to be affected. The musicians themselves are non-entities; one's opinion on them as artists or human beings is based on whether their work pleases.

I'm not going to say that there's anything wrong with this; in one respect it's essential to approach music on a primal level. But in another respect, it's solipsistic. A piece of music touches more lives than just the ears that hear it. Every song has a creator who believes in it as art, and a promoter who believes in it as product. Every song was trying to achieve something intended at the same time to be personal to the artist and relevant to the world at large. Not all music achieves this goal. But unless you consider the goal, you can't judge it as a success or failure.

This goes for all music, even the kind you hate. Michael Bolton has devoted fans. KoRn says things in their music that a lot of kids appreciate. Some people find a great deal of truth in Snoop Dogg's ryhmes, and dig his beats besides. You can dismiss the fans of each as semi-literate sheep who are just to sheltered and intellectually lazy to get into "real" music, but you should keep in mind that they're saying more or less the same thing about you.

With that in mind, we proceed to reviewing the new Strokes album. The Strokes got a lot of attention with their debut, Is This It, two years ago, mostly because people were starving for something that didn't sound like N'Sync or the aforementioned KorN, something that sounded like, you know, rock. Call it the Nirvana Syndrome. Critics praised them as the New Velvet Underground (all bands from New York are VU clones in the minds of the superficial), and hailed Is This It as the biggest things since "Blitzkrieg Bop." The backlash set in just as fast, and before the Christmas season had begun, the Strokes, far from being rock's saviours, had become it's scapegoat: yet another collection of unoriginal wannabes sailing by on hype.

So far, so typical. The album underneath all this hooplah was actually quite a good one, not earth-shattering, but demonstrative of depth, poise, and liveliness. You can listen to it after the initial interest wears off, either deliberately or as background music, and it suits many moods. No, it wasn't revolutionary, but it was what people like me have been wanting to hear.

The second album, Room on Fire, released last month, hasn't met anything like the noise afforded the debut. The fans bought it and liked it, the detractors grumbled and soused and went back to fawning over Modest Mouse (not that there's anything wrong with that). This is typical as well. The problem is that both fans and critics of Room on Fire said basically the same thing about it: that it was essentially the same as Is This It. And that proves that people don't listen to music.

Superficially, yes, the albums are similar, both undeniably by the same band. But careful listeners will not the distinction: if Is This It was the band's homage to the late 70's new wave and punk scene (owing fare more to the Modern Lovers than the Ramones, but never mind), then Room on Fire is the Strokes' 80's album, full of trebly, almost synthesized tones as opposed the previous effort's constant garagey riffage. The songs are cooler, slower, and more comfortable, kept from degenerating into Who-level mod wussiness by Casablanca's vocals, which, in contrast to the rest of the band, are louder and hoarser, the sound of a man whose chill demeanor is starting to come undone.

Moreover, Room on Fire is more of an album than it's predecessor, a more cohesive whole. Several of the songs on Is This It were too thematically close together, which is probably the reason they were called "unoriginal". The new album doesn't have that problem; ideas abound and every song stands more or less distinct. That's an important improvement.

As you might surmise, I'm not going to try and determine which album is "better." Such objectivity is simply not possible. I can say that the Strokes are turning out worthwhile product, and under a good deal of pressure, are still playing with their sound. That's the sign of a band that is going somewhere. I'm definitely interested to see what they come up with next.

Blessings

Today is the feast of St. Francis Xavier, one of the earliest Jesuits and the patron of the Xavierian order. Today I expect I'll be asking the old boy to pray for us all. We could use it.


That's all. No snotty commentary today. Mayhaps tommorrow.

Thank Goodness

When I walk into any Urban outfitters, I start seeing the cool kids dressing in styles that I find quite visually appealing: classic-cut T-shirts and jeans, denim jackets, the simple, unaffected American look. I've been dressing that way for a few years now, wearing Atari and CBGB T-Shirts before they were massively cool, with floppy hats and old-school sneakers and such. Now everyone is dressing like me (except for the trucker hats. I saw John Deere hats on sale for $18. $18! Are you people stupid? Would you pay $18 for something that you'll be embarrassed to own in five years?).


Same with music. For years I'd been hoping that rock n' roll would stage a comeback, that some band or other would make a great noise and remind folk what it's all about. Now it's happened, and everybody's in on it. I feel so...trendy.


But I am saved. For according to GQ, the goatee is dead. I just grew a good-sized one this summer. Now I have one more reason to keep it. The fashion is not to be baby-faced. I won't be. So there!

Well, That Took No Time At All

A Utah polygamist who likes the young girls just claimed protection under the Texas Sodomy Law decision. The guy's lawyer says that with no compelling state interest, bigamy can hardly be a crime. This dillweed's a bit too unsavory to win, but how long before a man (or woman) with several adult spouses makes a photogenic appearance in court, and gets all the sympathy that well-dressed, personable gay couples get now? And will anyone now arguing for gay marriage care?

Rambles...

I got bored so I decided to write in Haiku:




Iraq is a mess

Unless it just looks that way

Believe what pleases you




Economy is good

Manufacturing is up

What is it we make?




I got new music

I want to post some reviews

Bet it won't happen.




Cheers.