Socialist Saturday in the park

Yesterday I was riding in a cab driving by Hakim, a young man who came to the U.S. eleven years ago from Kenya. During the cab ride to downtown KC, we discussed the many businessmen who treat professional sports like a religion. Many of them spend several thousands of dollars per year for the privilege of showing up several times per week to watch millionaire-athletes play games while eating $6 hotdogs and drinking $8 cups of beer. The conversation then turned to some of the many things one can do without spending much money, as well as many alternative ways to spend the $4,000 you might spend to watch a package of baseball games over the course of a season. Hakim works to support his family here in the United States, but he sends an extra $200 per month to Kenya each month, which fully supports his widowed sister and her three children. Hakim is also going to school to learn computer programming. He was a thoughtful and enterprising fellow and I really enjoyed our conversation. I continued thinking about money and healthy ways of spending discretionary time this morning at the Tower Grove Farmer's Market, in Tower Grove Park, near my home in St. Louis, Missouri. But then it struck me that there was a lot of ugly low-priced socialism going on all around me. You see, the government runs the park, inviting families to come swim in a big fountain and shop for food directly from farmer-vendors, no corporate middle-men and no heavy-handed corporate sponsors taking control of the natural ebbs and flows of those who attend (though a few good-hearted local businesses pitch in to make the event possible). I took the following photo of the many socialists splashing in the fountain (I tweaked it with Photoshop, trying to make it artsy and also because I wanted to obscure the identities of the folks in the photo. BTW, feel free to click to enlarge the image). fountain-rendered-as-sponge-drawing As I drove to the park on a government-paid road, I had passed a government-paid (socialist) police officer. It occurred to me that this sort of socialism is not unusual. There is both a socialized fire department and a a socialized library near the park, as well as many socialized (public) schools. Then, to exacerbate the situation, Steve Albers showed up, unpaid, to provide live music (disclosure: Steve is my brother-in-law). Steve, who is an excellent blues musician but a confused capitalist, decided to put out a bucket for cash donations--all of it to go to the organizer of the market so that it could hire out other local professional music acts on future weekends. Image by Erich Vieth Bottom line: a government operated park, no heavy-handed corporate sponsors, free music, free fountain, donations for future non-profit endeavors. People self-organizing without the assistance of any corporate mascot, without anyone telling them how to have fun. Lively and thoughtful conversation everywhere. Children spontaneously dancing, with dedicated parents nearby. Tall trees, fresh air and the recurring thought that this is what life is really about. Ubiquitous healthy food. The honest and spontaneous power of the grass roots--people choosing to be the people they are. I'm hearing Chicago's "Saturday in the Park" as I write this. I've seen the dour faces of the people who attend high-priced "fun" at corporate entertainment, while slurping their $8 beer. They are people who are barraged with advertisements all over the stadium, and they are constantly being told when to applaud by a corporate-sponsored scoreboard and PA. Image by Erich Vieth They are carefully searched on the way into the stadium to make damned sure that they don't bring in their own alcoholic drinks (oh, year, 12% of this expensive and unnecessary new stadium was constructed using taxpayer money). I can guarantee that the fun per dollar spent was much higher today. That's my thought for this morning: that we don't need to be told how to have fun by big corporations. We are better off spending next to nothing creating our own low-priced entertainment.

Continue ReadingSocialist Saturday in the park

…and now for something completely different

It's time for some Gratuitous Self-Promotion! Yes, in lieu of having anything interesting to say about anything interesting, I shall talk about myself. Apart from being an interweb crank and having been described, just the once, as an "in-your-face modern atheist" (whatever that's meant to mean - I'll take it as a compliment though, because people say that kind of thing about Richard Dawkins and I think he's a top bloke), I'm also a musician. Specifically a singer and lyricist. Since the age of 15 I've been in numerous bands, starting off playing metal & hard rock covers in a high school band named Mothdust in 1992 and joining my first original act, Roger The Band, in 1996. In 2000 Mothdust reformed and we started writing our own stuff. Having those two bands on the go was awesome if a little challenging, especially considering I was doing some acting with a small Adelaide theatre company at the time. In 2001 both bands released six-track EPs within a month of each other and it was a tiny thrill seeing both records in the local Adelaide charts! Both bands managed to attract a small but loyal following and many, many great times were had. Eventually though, Roger The Band gradually started falling apart, as bands sometimes simply do after six years. I decided to move to Melbourne with the members of Mothdust in 2003, to see if we could make a go of it in Australia's rock city. This also was not to be though, with one member going back to Adelaide after nine months and another getting married and buggering off to Manchester with his new bride six months later. After the final member and his wife returned to Adelaide to spawn, my lady Jo and I were left alone. I thought I'd be happy just strumming my guitar and writing electronic music on my computer for my own amusement, but I really missed collaborating with other musicians and playing really loud music, so I started looking online for Melbourne musos who were at a similarly loose end. Long story short: after many woeful demos I found a highly motivated and creative guitarist (Jiz) and drummer (Mike) who had been writing and performing together for a couple of years. We hit it off instantly, shared many of the same musical inspirations and attitudes and starting writing straight away. Eventually we found a bass player (Lachie) to round out the quartet (no mean feat - good bassists who aren't in bands are hard to find in Melbourne) and Jiz named the band From The Ashes. This was 2005. Last month From The Ashes released our debut independent album entitled Incendiary. We're launching the record officially on July 31 at Melbourne's famous Esplanade Hotel in St Kilda. DI's own Mike Pulcinella is featuring one of our tracks, Said & Done, on his latest documentary, Raising The Bar 3 (which I'm looking forward to seeing and no, not just because our song's on it - Mike makes a mean doco). What do we sound like? I never know how to answer that question. We're a rock band with diverse influences - everything from Elvis Costello, Paul Simon & The Police to The Mars Volta, Faith No More & Smashing Pumpkins. That doesn't mean we sound anything like any of those artists, it just means we like musicians who put a lot of thought into their music, especially into constructing interesting melody & mood, and who aren't afraid to be a little bit self-indulgent. Sometimes. That being said, we also just love bands that rock the f* out like Queens Of The Stone Age and Foo Fighters. Now, I'll do what I always do when asked what we sound like: invite the questioner to have a listen to the gear, decide for themselves what we we sound like and maybe leave some feedback. Here are some links containing preview tracks and other assorted rubbish:

myspace

Last.fm

iTunes

Thanks for your attention & I hope you like the material. Cheers Hank L to R: Mike, Lachie, Jiz, Hank Mike, Lachie, Jiz & Hank Corporate Logo 1.0

Continue Reading…and now for something completely different

What is obscene?

I was watching TV recently. At the climax of one of my favorite shows a man was murdered. He was stabbed twice in the chest. I watched as the blade entered his chest two times, piercing his lungs and heart. The man fell to the ground and was kicked into a nearby fire where he burst into flames as he was dying. This was shown on television, during prime time, with no outcry from the public or the censors. And why would there be an outcry? One can witness murders of this kind and worse on TV many times a week. Now imagine this scenario... Prime time TV. A loving husband and wife wish to have children. They take off their clothes and get into bed, as married couples do. We then clearly watch his erect penis enter her vagina two times as he tells her he loves her. Cut to nine months later and she gives birth to a healthy baby boy. The couple rejoices. The husband kisses his wife on the forehead and we...Fade to Black. Can you imagine the outrage? Can you imagine the FCC fines and the righteous letters of condemnation? In the first case we see the brutal, senseless ending of a life, and we get to see it in great detail. In the second scenario we are witnessing the loving, natural creation of life between two married adults. Which one is obscene?

Continue ReadingWhat is obscene?

Suggestion for Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian. Hire real script writers.

My family doesn't go to many movies at theaters. In our experience, modern movie theater audiences tend to be far too talkative during the shows and prices are not cheap. Netflix is the default option for my family. I made an exception for Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian (2009). On Friday, I had heard an director interviewed on NPR. She indicated that the producers had to work hard to earn the trust of those who run the various Smithsonian Museums, the setting for the movie. Plus the movie featured Robin Williams and other notable actors. Thus, I gathered up my willing daughters (aged 8 and 10) and assumed that even though this was a movie geared for kids, there was a decent chance that it would have some take-home value. I was sorely disappointed. The problem is that this movie, despite the almost-constant high-quality special effects, had no meaningful plot and no meaningful resolution, even for someone willing spend disbelief for the duration. I was already dissatisfied with the movie while the credits ran, but now that I have had further chance to consider the work both as a parent and a member of the audience, I'd have to say that I'm all the more disappointed. Those special effects constituted eye-popping pyrotechnics, but it's an old story for so many American movies: the producers forgot to hire a real script writer. Thus, the movie was merely one damned thing after another, with Ben Stiller and company dashing here and there, in a wacky and barely-connected series of scenes that continually threatening to break out into needless violence. What especially aggravated me is that the attention-deficit afflicted characters made almost no effort to think things through, quite a feat for 105 minutes. There was no sustained effort at problem solving, but only a constant need to drop buckets of wise-cracks and put-downs and to keep on the movie moving--to keep doing something, anything. This movie exemplifies one of the most prominent social illusions: that movement is necessarily progress. Here's my bottom line: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian presents a collection of paper-thin characters running amok, somehow not getting each other killed. Most notable is the prominent appearance of the character of heroic aviator Amelia Earhart (played by the fetching Amy Adams), who was quickly reduced to a woman who became all-too-willing to take orders from a numbskull ("Larry," played by Stiller) while maintaining her schoolgirl crush on him for most of the movie's 105 minutes. This movie must have cost many tens of millions of dollars to produce. Whatever it cost, the producers of Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian could have spent a pittance more ($50,000??) to hire a real writer so that all of those special effects could have told some sort of story. Sheesh. [Hint: there are many good writers looking for work.] It was like the producers were concocting the scenes even as they were shooting them, even though this couldn't have been true, since big teams of computer artists had to be finessing in those dozens of special effects. What an embarrassment it must be for them to see their first-rate special effects put to such piss-poor use . . . .

Continue ReadingSuggestion for Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian. Hire real script writers.