25 December 2009
My top 20 records of 2009
Merry Christmas! Here are my favorite albums of the year, courtesy of my new (old) Olivetti Lettera 22.
17 December 2009
The real inconvenient truth
Being a "skeptic" of climate change is both intellectually dishonest and dangerously out of sync with reality.
"Skepticism" assumes at least a token nod to rational thought which is absent in the climate "debate." In this context, skepticism is a particularly craven form of objection. In an attempt to salvage some form of credibility, "skeptics" adopt this pseudo-scientific (yet another hijacking of science in the name of anti-science) stance, in which the "skeptic" acknowledges that the climate changes (the term "natural cycles" is often bandied about), but that they are awaiting more evidence (perhaps from on high?) regarding the human contribution. This lacks logical ground on which to stand. The definition of climate is that, over time, it changes. True. However, their logic fails on the second argument due to an inherent lack of scientific literacy. The "more evidence" they are waiting for is already here. Humans are unequivocally causing climate change. What the skeptics are waiting for is a smoking gun. Well, there are numerous "smoking guns" of climate change, but by their nature, they require at least some familiarity with science to understand. The evidence they are looking for is here, today. It just takes the right tools to properly see it.
But a misunderstanding of science is not the real reason for this pervasive skepticism. The real reason is a fear of change. This fear reflects the false pretense of one who believes that this country is no longer great. It is a form of cowardice premised on the erroneous belief that to mitigate climate change somehow means a reversion to a less fulfilling quality of life. It shows the hubris of a once great country, a country where people look inward not in self reflection, but out of an uncertain longing for a way of life they know (deep, deep in their hearts) to be untenable.
Taking meaningful action on climate change and prospering as a country are not two mutually exclusive notions. Thus far, not addressing climate change has led to our economy shedding manufacturing jobs that will likely never be replaced, our universities seeing grad students in science and engineering leave for jobs overseas, and many of our greatest companies historically faltering. By addressing climate change, we can create new employment sectors and revive our technological prowess on the world stage.
The industrial revolution, the space age, and the internet age were all ushered in on the power of American innovation. Have we exhausted our resources? Must we take a backseat for the next "age"? To creep inward as a country, to cling to our so-called way of life would be the easy option. Easy like crowding around our televisions watching Walter Cronkite narrate as Soviet cosmonauts plant their hammer and sickle on the moon's surface. We are not a country accustomed to taking a back seat and I believe that we still possess the measured self-confidence required to tackle the problem of climate change head on.
Other problems in history, be they wars, dictators, countries, are but trees compared to the immense forest of a problem we now face. Unfortunately, we may not be wired to address problems on this scale. We address problems that we can readily identify -- another country invades us? Fight back! Problems that affect people we can identify with -- they harmed who? Sally from down the street? Well, let's catch that criminal! With climate change, we cannot easily label the villain because, on many levels, we are all responsible for its effects. And its effects, though severe and accelerating, are not as visceral as seeing Hitler sack Paris. Or watching a ghostly image of a Soviet cosmonaut orbiting the planet. The "skeptics" are reacting to this strange, unprecedented situation in a very human way -- by denying it exists. But if there is to be any hope of a solution, we cannot let fear and uncertainty trammel our resolve.
"Skepticism" assumes at least a token nod to rational thought which is absent in the climate "debate." In this context, skepticism is a particularly craven form of objection. In an attempt to salvage some form of credibility, "skeptics" adopt this pseudo-scientific (yet another hijacking of science in the name of anti-science) stance, in which the "skeptic" acknowledges that the climate changes (the term "natural cycles" is often bandied about), but that they are awaiting more evidence (perhaps from on high?) regarding the human contribution. This lacks logical ground on which to stand. The definition of climate is that, over time, it changes. True. However, their logic fails on the second argument due to an inherent lack of scientific literacy. The "more evidence" they are waiting for is already here. Humans are unequivocally causing climate change. What the skeptics are waiting for is a smoking gun. Well, there are numerous "smoking guns" of climate change, but by their nature, they require at least some familiarity with science to understand. The evidence they are looking for is here, today. It just takes the right tools to properly see it.
But a misunderstanding of science is not the real reason for this pervasive skepticism. The real reason is a fear of change. This fear reflects the false pretense of one who believes that this country is no longer great. It is a form of cowardice premised on the erroneous belief that to mitigate climate change somehow means a reversion to a less fulfilling quality of life. It shows the hubris of a once great country, a country where people look inward not in self reflection, but out of an uncertain longing for a way of life they know (deep, deep in their hearts) to be untenable.
Taking meaningful action on climate change and prospering as a country are not two mutually exclusive notions. Thus far, not addressing climate change has led to our economy shedding manufacturing jobs that will likely never be replaced, our universities seeing grad students in science and engineering leave for jobs overseas, and many of our greatest companies historically faltering. By addressing climate change, we can create new employment sectors and revive our technological prowess on the world stage.
The industrial revolution, the space age, and the internet age were all ushered in on the power of American innovation. Have we exhausted our resources? Must we take a backseat for the next "age"? To creep inward as a country, to cling to our so-called way of life would be the easy option. Easy like crowding around our televisions watching Walter Cronkite narrate as Soviet cosmonauts plant their hammer and sickle on the moon's surface. We are not a country accustomed to taking a back seat and I believe that we still possess the measured self-confidence required to tackle the problem of climate change head on.
Other problems in history, be they wars, dictators, countries, are but trees compared to the immense forest of a problem we now face. Unfortunately, we may not be wired to address problems on this scale. We address problems that we can readily identify -- another country invades us? Fight back! Problems that affect people we can identify with -- they harmed who? Sally from down the street? Well, let's catch that criminal! With climate change, we cannot easily label the villain because, on many levels, we are all responsible for its effects. And its effects, though severe and accelerating, are not as visceral as seeing Hitler sack Paris. Or watching a ghostly image of a Soviet cosmonaut orbiting the planet. The "skeptics" are reacting to this strange, unprecedented situation in a very human way -- by denying it exists. But if there is to be any hope of a solution, we cannot let fear and uncertainty trammel our resolve.
16 December 2009
Cratedigger
I enjoy a vinyl album from time to time. Nothing beats flipping through endless, dusty records, cycling through the clunkers to find that hidden gem. I had a lot of those moments this year, some of them coming at the most unexpected times. Here are my favorites from 2009: 
"Physical Graffiti" by Led Zeppelin (antique store near Davenport, IA) | I found this classic Zep album visiting a friend in the famous Quad Cities. We were down by the shore of the Mississippi, the site of a large tug-of-war contest, Iowa against Illinois. My friend loves antiquing so I trusted her when she suggested we stop in. I'm glad we did. The first thing I looked for upon entering the smallish store was their vinyl collection, which was located, as I expected, on a nondescript milk crate on a nondescript shelf amongst other knickknacks. There were just three small cartons sitting in a tidy little row. I was fully resigned to the fact that all of the albums would be in bad shape and well, of the kinds of music you would expect to find at a hole-in the wall antique store in the middle of America. Lots of Righteous Brothers, Engelbert Humperdinck, Andy Williams and the like. But all I found was classic vinyl from the 70's and 80's. I walked out smiling with the Zeppelin album, Derek and the Dominos (Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs), Prince (1999), and David Bowie (Let's Dance). Let's just say that it was the highest density of quality vinyl I've yet found and it was in Davenport, Iowa. Never underestimate Middle America. 
"Get Happy!" by Elvis Costello (record store, downtown Davenport, IA) | Thanks to Emily for taking me to find the second great discovery in Iowa. This one was a full fledged record store, spanning three rooms in an old building in downtown Davenport. We found a lot of good records, but none better than Elvis Costello's homage to soul. "Get Happy" was made after Costello made some drunken comments about Ray Charles to get a rise out of his drinking buddies. It somehow got to the press and a bit of a row ensued. Well, turns out he really likes soul music and he's really good at performing it. It is the fourth of his first five amazing albums (My Aim is True, This Year's Model, Armed Forces, and Trust) and it's a spastic twenty songs that establish Costello as one of the most flexible pop performers of the past 30 years. [Note: producer Nick Lowe assures LP owners that the sound quality will not be degraded due to "groove cramming" resulting from putting 10 tracks per side. Remember when sound quality/album sequencing mattered?]
"Rhythm of Resistance: Music of Black South Africa" (Cheapo Uptown) | I found this in the new arrivals bin one day and, I don't know, maybe I was feeling adventurous, but I bought it (hey, records are only $3). Ladysmith Black Mambazo have a few tracks on the B-side which are graceful and powerful as they were on the B-side of "Graceland." The first side has these funky guitar songs that kind of drone on in a groove...it's hard to explain, but that's the best part about finding new music -- sometimes it's just fun to listen to!11 December 2009
Paul's Boutique
Albums don't usually floor me.
Sure, it's happened before ("In the Aeroplane Over the Sea" by Neutral Milk Hotel, "Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain" by Pavement, "Separation Sunday" by the Hold Steady, and "Is This It? (this an amazing video...Julian Casablancas walks off stage, comes back just in time -- or, why the Strokes were about to save rock and roll in 2001)" by the Strokes all come to mind), but more often than not, I'm just mildly impressed by what comes my way. It's not snobbery, just a high musical bar. Or narrow taste.
The Beastie Boys up 'till this point have always been a caricature of who they really are. This part of me still sees them as most people did after License to Ill (a great album just good enough to escape novelty) -- frat-rap jokesters somewhat like the 80's version of the Bloodhound Gang. Not a group to take seriously. I couldn't figure out why some of my friends held them in such high esteem. The song I most associated with them was "Intergalactic," a song that was included on one of those Grammy Nominees CDs I got every year in the mid-90's for my birthday. Next to Seal, Celine Dion, and Coolio, Beastie Boys seemed just too weird for my PBS-raised self. I didn't have MTV growing up, so I missed "Sabotage" playing on endless repeat. I didn't have self-awareness in 1989, so I missed Paul's Boutique. I missed a lot of things.
Well, I have both (MTV and self-awareness) now, so there's really no excuse not to give those crazy white guys from NYC a fresh look. My interest was piqued when I was scrounging around for Elvis Costello's appearance on Saturday Night Live in 1977. The back story: his label and NBC wanted him to play "Less than Zero," his single from his amazing (add this to the "albums that floored me" list) album, This Year's Model, but partway through the opening, he stopped his band and played, "Radio, Radio," which sends a decidedly anti-commercial message to listeners. NBC apparently does nothing but threaten litigation upon anyone who dares post the original performance online. I can't find it anywhere. But I did find this clip, from 25 years later, of another "sabotage" by Elvis...
Two artists who define their generations' "I just don't give a fuck" attitude (with Pavement following in the 90's and I would argue Lil' Wayne in the 00's), one a dapper Englishman, the other a group of slacker New Yorkers, both erudite, funny and cynical as hell, is an undeniably intriguing combination. My love of Elvis Costello is transferable to anyone who shares the stage with him, even if it is in a wholly corporate, contrived stunt on a late-night show. Welcome to the working week, I guess.
So I decided to partake in some good ole late-80's hip hop. A genre of which the entire breadth of my knowledge arises out of cheaply produced VH1 specials. Specials that feature too much Ken Burns-style panning in and out of photographs and way too many retrospective interviews from coked-out has-been rappers who never left that decade... The first listen was to the aforementioned Licensed to Ill, their debut on Def Jam released in 1986 and produced by Rick Rubin (the scary-looking guy fat with a full beard you sometimes see riding beach cruisers with Jay-Z. Also president of Columbia Records. Seriously.). I liked it, especially the many Led Zep samples sprinkled throughout. But then I started to see how latter "artists" (see P.O.D., Linkin Park, Offspring) interpreted this tongue-in-cheek accidental hit wholly without irony. It began to sour after that.
Next stop for me was their universally adored follow-up, Paul's Boutique. There are countless reviews out there in online-land, so I won't bore you with the details. I'll just say this: no album will ever be made quite like this one. This album literally changed the way music is made. It's sample-heavy production (by the Dust Brothers, of later Odelay fame (can't Beck do anything original?)) influenced other artists to sample in their songs. Another prolific sampler that preceded the Dust Brothers is Brian Eno. He's famous for his work with the Talking Heads, but he might be more famous in some circles for the work he did in 1981 with David Byrne, the lead singer of the Talking Heads. This strange collection of spiritual vocals (a exorcism, an apology, and other strange chanting frequent this album) played over looped samples is amazing, considering that it was recorded almost 30 years ago. You can definitely hear a lot of the Dust Brothers in Eno's album. The golden age of prolific samplers lasted only about a decade, although you could make the argument that it just got more subtle...
So these crate-digging musicians got other musicians angry (the ones whose snippets were being blatantly sampled) and they sued. Eventually, sampling became far too expensive and it was left somewhat dormant until the rise of the internet, where music samplers can get away with a lot more. Danger Mouse's (one half of Gnarls Barkley) brilliant mashup of Jay-Z's Black Album with the Beatle's White Album, aptly titled The Grey Album, comes to mind. Another recent example of this is Girl Talk. Or the Field. Or Madlib. But it will never have the organic appeal that Paul's Boutique has twenty years after its release.
Definitely a headphones album, the dense layers of sound shimmer nimbly around the sometimes shrill lyrics of Ad-Rock, MCA, and Mike D that exhibit an MF DOOM predilection for obscure pop culture references and crass proclamations. The whole album is a highlight, it's like a 53 minute love letter to funk, the 70's and NYC. These songs are standouts:
"Shake Your Rump" A nice way to kick off an album: drum roll into a funky 70's riff and the line, "My man MCA's got a beard like a billy goat" Apparently true (see the video).
"High Plains Drifter" My second-favorite use of the sound of a gun cocking (next to MIA's "Paper Planes"). This song is sinister, well, a smart-ass kind of sinister. But the wordplay among the three is completely overwhelming.
"Hey Ladies" This was the one single Capitol released. I would say that it's a grandaddy to Eminiem's "one blatant single per album," but that woudn't be doing this song justice. The Dust Brothers certainly didn't substitute innovation for commercial appeal. Listen to the new funk sample after each cowbell. By this point, they're just showing off. Wow.
"Shadrach" The last full song (more on this next) begins with a rollicking beat followed by a soulful female vocal loop followed by an apt lyric, "The music washes over and you're one with the sound..." The video is also a work of art -- each frame was hand painted.
And, as if the comparisons to to the Beatles weren't already forthcoming...the album ends with a 10 minute suite (a la Abbey Road) of song snippets. Both groups are working at such a high level in these albums. The Beatles knew they had nothing more to give when they recorded Abbey Road. The Beastie Boys knew the had nothing to lose when they recorded Paul's Boutique.
It shows.
Sure, it's happened before ("In the Aeroplane Over the Sea" by Neutral Milk Hotel, "Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain" by Pavement, "Separation Sunday" by the Hold Steady, and "Is This It? (this an amazing video...Julian Casablancas walks off stage, comes back just in time -- or, why the Strokes were about to save rock and roll in 2001)" by the Strokes all come to mind), but more often than not, I'm just mildly impressed by what comes my way. It's not snobbery, just a high musical bar. Or narrow taste.
The Beastie Boys up 'till this point have always been a caricature of who they really are. This part of me still sees them as most people did after License to Ill (a great album just good enough to escape novelty) -- frat-rap jokesters somewhat like the 80's version of the Bloodhound Gang. Not a group to take seriously. I couldn't figure out why some of my friends held them in such high esteem. The song I most associated with them was "Intergalactic," a song that was included on one of those Grammy Nominees CDs I got every year in the mid-90's for my birthday. Next to Seal, Celine Dion, and Coolio, Beastie Boys seemed just too weird for my PBS-raised self. I didn't have MTV growing up, so I missed "Sabotage" playing on endless repeat. I didn't have self-awareness in 1989, so I missed Paul's Boutique. I missed a lot of things.
Well, I have both (MTV and self-awareness) now, so there's really no excuse not to give those crazy white guys from NYC a fresh look. My interest was piqued when I was scrounging around for Elvis Costello's appearance on Saturday Night Live in 1977. The back story: his label and NBC wanted him to play "Less than Zero," his single from his amazing (add this to the "albums that floored me" list) album, This Year's Model, but partway through the opening, he stopped his band and played, "Radio, Radio," which sends a decidedly anti-commercial message to listeners. NBC apparently does nothing but threaten litigation upon anyone who dares post the original performance online. I can't find it anywhere. But I did find this clip, from 25 years later, of another "sabotage" by Elvis...
Two artists who define their generations' "I just don't give a fuck" attitude (with Pavement following in the 90's and I would argue Lil' Wayne in the 00's), one a dapper Englishman, the other a group of slacker New Yorkers, both erudite, funny and cynical as hell, is an undeniably intriguing combination. My love of Elvis Costello is transferable to anyone who shares the stage with him, even if it is in a wholly corporate, contrived stunt on a late-night show. Welcome to the working week, I guess.
Next stop for me was their universally adored follow-up, Paul's Boutique. There are countless reviews out there in online-land, so I won't bore you with the details. I'll just say this: no album will ever be made quite like this one. This album literally changed the way music is made. It's sample-heavy production (by the Dust Brothers, of later Odelay fame (can't Beck do anything original?)) influenced other artists to sample in their songs. Another prolific sampler that preceded the Dust Brothers is Brian Eno. He's famous for his work with the Talking Heads, but he might be more famous in some circles for the work he did in 1981 with David Byrne, the lead singer of the Talking Heads. This strange collection of spiritual vocals (a exorcism, an apology, and other strange chanting frequent this album) played over looped samples is amazing, considering that it was recorded almost 30 years ago. You can definitely hear a lot of the Dust Brothers in Eno's album. The golden age of prolific samplers lasted only about a decade, although you could make the argument that it just got more subtle...
So these crate-digging musicians got other musicians angry (the ones whose snippets were being blatantly sampled) and they sued. Eventually, sampling became far too expensive and it was left somewhat dormant until the rise of the internet, where music samplers can get away with a lot more. Danger Mouse's (one half of Gnarls Barkley) brilliant mashup of Jay-Z's Black Album with the Beatle's White Album, aptly titled The Grey Album, comes to mind. Another recent example of this is Girl Talk. Or the Field. Or Madlib. But it will never have the organic appeal that Paul's Boutique has twenty years after its release.
Definitely a headphones album, the dense layers of sound shimmer nimbly around the sometimes shrill lyrics of Ad-Rock, MCA, and Mike D that exhibit an MF DOOM predilection for obscure pop culture references and crass proclamations. The whole album is a highlight, it's like a 53 minute love letter to funk, the 70's and NYC. These songs are standouts:
"Shake Your Rump" A nice way to kick off an album: drum roll into a funky 70's riff and the line, "My man MCA's got a beard like a billy goat" Apparently true (see the video).
"High Plains Drifter" My second-favorite use of the sound of a gun cocking (next to MIA's "Paper Planes"). This song is sinister, well, a smart-ass kind of sinister. But the wordplay among the three is completely overwhelming.
"Hey Ladies" This was the one single Capitol released. I would say that it's a grandaddy to Eminiem's "one blatant single per album," but that woudn't be doing this song justice. The Dust Brothers certainly didn't substitute innovation for commercial appeal. Listen to the new funk sample after each cowbell. By this point, they're just showing off. Wow.
"Shadrach" The last full song (more on this next) begins with a rollicking beat followed by a soulful female vocal loop followed by an apt lyric, "The music washes over and you're one with the sound..." The video is also a work of art -- each frame was hand painted.
And, as if the comparisons to to the Beatles weren't already forthcoming...the album ends with a 10 minute suite (a la Abbey Road) of song snippets. Both groups are working at such a high level in these albums. The Beatles knew they had nothing more to give when they recorded Abbey Road. The Beastie Boys knew the had nothing to lose when they recorded Paul's Boutique.
It shows.
03 December 2009
Well, How Did I Get Here?
We all find ourselves in different situations where we ask ourselves, "Well, how did I get here?" I know David Byrne wondered this. I'm sure you have too. One interesting (and gentle combination of self-realization and self-justification) approach to answering this question is to take a Meyers-Briggs personality test (take one here). It's a stretch to justify a large chunk of life through the lens of a 15 minute online questionnaire. It's also hard not to feel like a high school career counselor when espousing such a test. But whatever, as you'll find out, I'm an INTJ and therefore don't put a lot of stock into "feelings." And so it goes.
Introvert
iNtuitive
Thinker (though not a stinker)
Judging
This is me. After reading more about this type (here, here, here) I've come to the conclusion that this characterization is apt. But, then again, maybe it's because as an INTJ and it's my "just my type" to come to this conclusion. Too confusing! This is why I went into engineering/law and not psychology. I like answers (and employment). And it fulfills the aspirational career goals of my type. Though, as a non-conformist/anti-authority figure (while maintaining an facade of conformity on the surface), I should really rail against this type of generalization. But I won't (probably the whole 'conformity on the surface' thing creeping up again).
Some of the traits I'm supposed to possess are complementary and, thus, obviously fitting:
Introvert
iNtuitive
Thinker (though not a stinker)
Judging
This is me. After reading more about this type (here, here, here) I've come to the conclusion that this characterization is apt. But, then again, maybe it's because as an INTJ and it's my "just my type" to come to this conclusion. Too confusing! This is why I went into engineering/law and not psychology. I like answers (and employment). And it fulfills the aspirational career goals of my type. Though, as a non-conformist/anti-authority figure (while maintaining an facade of conformity on the surface), I should really rail against this type of generalization. But I won't (probably the whole 'conformity on the surface' thing creeping up again).
Some of the traits I'm supposed to possess are complementary and, thus, obviously fitting:
- Self-confidence and knowledge when it comes to a specific field, usually esoteric (transmission-line speakers, headphones, vinyl records, energy policy, Iguanadon (killer thumbs!), and, more recently, vintage typewriters)
- "Do" what they "know" (engineer/lawyer, yup)
- Introspective, analytical, intellectual (sometimes?)
- Don't grasp social "rituals" like small talk and flirtation (yikes! But, true. I often find myself asking, "Why am I talking to this person?" "What function does it serve?" But I'm not a robot. I has gots feelings too....)
- Personal relationships, especially romantic ones can be INTJ's "Achilles Heel" (low blow)
- Perfectionist (ok, I know this is what bad career counselors say to list as a "weakness" when potential employers ask during interviews, so I feel a bit shady putting this down as a downside in my next-day TB diarrhea category. But I think the INTJ analysts consider it a weakness more than a strength, so that's why it landed here. But I would never say that being a perfectionist is a true, true downside. Everything in moderation. I also like lists of three, so I needed the third prong to fill in the gap. So maybe by scoffing at this point, I'm also reinforcing it subconsciously. Shit.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)