Historical Image of the Day

FBI agents talking on field phone, 1940s.

I find this picture hilarious. Those guys don't look enough like FBI agents. That phone is awesome. Very subtle too. And I am sure they are fighting against some true menace to American society, like moderate leftists or something.

This is also the period during which the FBI took to TV and the movies, creating propaganda to serve Hoover's purposes. Some of it is actually pretty good though, particularly The Street With No Name, a 1948 film starring Richard Widmark.

Movie Review - Kill Your Idols (Now It's Free!!!)

For those with about an hour to kill, PitchforkTV has the no wave documentary "Kill Your Idols" up for viewing in its entirety until this Friday (the 24th). I admit up front that I'm biased, because there have been few musical movements that have hit me quite as personally as no wave. That said, it's an excellent little documentary about the creation and legacy of no wave.

It starts off as most generic music-movement documentaries, going through the (in this case rapid) rise and fall of no wave as a musical expression. It has some really good interviews with some of the "biggest" names from the scene (Arto Lindsay of DNA, Lydia Lunch, Jim Sclavunos, J.G. Thirwell, Glenn Branca) as well as Lee Ranaldo and Thurston Moore of Sonic Youth and Michael Gira of the Swans, both of whom were big fans of the no wave bands and who were clearly influenced by no wave on their early albums (indeed, Moore and Ranaldo both played in some of Branca's early guitar symphonies). The interviews alone are great, not for the insider's information they provide (though that can be fun, too), but for the wildly differing attitudes of people, from the soft-spoken, reflective Lindsay, to Sclavunos's humorous take on things, to Lunch's still-hot anger, to Thirwell's disdain.

After this first portion (roughly a half hour), though, the film really picks up on the originality, immediately juxtaposing recent New York bands the Liars, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, A.R.E. Weapons, Gogol Bordello, Flux Information Sciences, and Black Dice on top of the no wavers. With no narration or interviews guiding you, it's patently clear how much the latter owe to no wave bands. In the wake of the no wave sound, the newer bands' efforts to make a claim to be doing something "new" and "different" isn't necessarily that accurate. They all sincerely admit to being huge fans heavily influenced by at least some of the no wave movement, and everybody cites Sonic Youth as being a major influence (I forget now who, but one of the new bands' members says Sonic Youth really formed the bridge between No Wave and what the new bands are doing). You can really see how much bands like the YYYs and Black Dice admire no wave even while they apparently remain youthfully naive about how "new" their sound is (and in case you didn't get the point, Crary named one section of film "Amnesia").

From that point on in the film, Crary does a great job tracing how the two generations simultaneously respect and condemn the other. Many of the no wavers (especially Lunch and Thirwell) have thinly veiled criticisms for the "New York" movement of music, even while admitting to liking individual bits. Lunch particularly comes off as a bit of a rock curmudgeon, insisting that anybody who dares pick up a bass, guitar, and drums now simply is incapable of offering anything "new," and suggests trying a tuba if you really want to be new, even while what Gogol Bordello's combination of Eastern European music and the Stooges hasn't really been done before. And somewhat incongruously, everybody gets in their digs on the Strokes, who clearly do not have no wave as their influence and who are completely outside of the narrative arc until all the no wavers start digging in on them. It's not all mean (Lee Ranaldo has some insightful comments on how the Strokes' "explosion" is symbolic of a strange and not necessarily good new way of hyping music nobody's heard yet). At the same time, while singing their elders' praises, the younger generation clearly bristles at being labeled inauthentic in any way, and occasionally reveal the youthful mistrust and anger towards what they view as a bit of snobbery.

Crary does a pretty good job of staying out of the way of this. Certainly, there are flashes where he seems to be more sympathetic with the no wavers (who are, after all, the main focus of his film). I'm not sure Crary is "out to get" the new bands, but he doesn't jump to their defense, either. The juxtaposition of the claims of new-ness stacked on top of no wave acts live in the 1970s really points towards the naivete of the newer groups in their earnestness to do something "new," and in case you didn't get the point, he titles that chapter of the film "Amnesia." Later on, in discussing the "success" of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs after their first album, he points to them as "An American Success Story." While the Yeah Yeah Yeahs are fairly well known, I'm not sure calling them an American Success Story is terribly fair or accurate. Sure, they're more famous than the Theoretical Girls ever would be, but it's not like you can say their name or mention Karen O and almost all of America stops and says, "oh, what now?" Still, Crary doesn't really reveal any open antagonism to the new bands, either, leaving it mostly up to the viewer to sympathize with them or the no wavers (or both).

At any rate, it's a really well done documentary. If you're into pretty wild music, the really rare live footage of bands like DNA and Teenage Jesus and the Jerks in the 1970s is great, and although not nearly as rare in the Youtube era, live stuff from the Liars, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, and others is great too, and the interviews are really interesting. Overall, it's a good film for anybody interested in New York music, the avant-garde, or just music documentaries. And hey, it's free - it doesn't get much more no wave than that.

Quick Political Snark

As regular readers to our blog must be aware by now, Obama's latest supporter is clearly racist.

Random Anecdotes from Mindless Surfing While at Work

So, I was surfing the tubes today, and typed in the address to visit our good friends over at Lawyers, Guns & Money. However, my fingers, in their flurry of typing, got their timing off, and instead of typing "lefarkins.blogspot.com," I ended up typing "lefarkins.blogpsot.com" (getting my "p" and "s" in the "blogspot" reversed). Having mis-typed, it didn't just re-direct me to a "page not found" site. Instead, I got this.

So my question to our good friends at LG&M and throughout the internet is, are they aware of this crass exploitation of their site name among those who can't spell? And if so, which of them has a degree from said site?

....UPDATE: Acting on what Venha Futuro said in the comments, I did a little more (3-second) investigating, and apparently, it's not just LG&M that has this problem (note the address on the new link). So, Erik...you pursuing another backup degree, just in case crazy evangelicals end up outnumbering college students? I'm sure "I Need Jesus," "7 Seals, Trumpets, Vials," "Revival - Is It Coming?," "Abortion," and "Antichrist" Parts 1 AND 2 would all be valuable for the future.

What Is Wrong With My Generation?

According to the Daily Kos tracking poll, the only age group McCain leads is the 30-44 group.

What is wrong with my age group? This is not new. A big reason for the Republican dominance from 1994 to 2006 was that young voters were much more conservative than they usually are. What is up with this? I could totally feel this in college. Even at the University of Oregon in the early to mid 1990s, one of the most liberal public schools in the nation, there was a definite rightward feel, particularly within student elections. Old left-leaning student-funded programs were cut and the place felt like it was changing. I guess this is some kind of reaction to the 1960s, but it is shocking to find that my age group is more conservative even than senior citizens.

Mister Trend's Random 10

I love the little amusing shuffles you get with music sometimes. This week, I'll simply note my bemusement at the fact that Sonic Youth was followed by one of their two namesakes, Big Youth (Fred "Sonic" Smith of the MC5 providing the other half).

1. Music for 18 Musicians - Section 1 - Steve Reich
2. "Raisans" - Dinosaur Jr.
3. "The Shepherd" - Culture
4. "Statesboro Blues" - Blind Willie McTell
5. "Androgynous Mind" - Sonic Youth
6. "Ten Against One" - Big Youth
7. "Polygyne" - Efterklang
8. "Girl Is On My Mind" - Black Keys
9. "Not What You Want" - Sleater-Kinney
10. "Gota de Sangue" - Maria Bethania

Gargoyles

I have a question concerning gargoyles.

A topic on which I don't believe I have ever asked a question in my life.

Anyway, so many of these churches have gargoyle images in them, staring down on the interior of the monstaries usually.

Why? What is the significance of the gargoyle? I assume there are people out there who have more knowledge on this than me. I know nothing on medieval Europe and my tolerance for the kind of contemporary writing that uses gargoyles and other such things is extremely low.

Eloquence, Performatives, and the Presidency

So I have 8000000000000 things to do right now, but I'm going to take just a moment to comment on something because I think it's important to note.

The New Yorker's Obama endorsement makes many excellent points. You should read it. But to my mind, the most important point it made was this one:

Although his opponents have tried to attack him as a man of “mere” words, Obama has returned eloquence to its essential place in American politics. The choice between experience and eloquence is a false one––something that Lincoln, out of office after a single term in Congress, proved in his own campaign of political and national renewal. Obama’s “mere” speeches on everything from the economy and foreign affairs to race have been at the center of his campaign and its success; if he wins, his eloquence will be central to his ability to govern.

See, the presidency is largely a symbolic office. Congress is the body that's going to have to actually make and pass these tax cuts and health care policies--all the president can do is encourage and sign. One of the reasons I was an early Obama supporter was that he seemed to have a much better grasp of and less warmongering slant on foreign relations. And foreign relations are carried out by, yes, talking. Words. Speeches.

There's a huge place for performative language in all of this. Timothy Cook outlines this whole process expertly in Governing With the News. The president makes a speech, and policy changes. Need an example? Remember the "Axis of Evil" comment, and how suddenly after that we seem to be dealing with North Korea and Iran increasing their nuclear capacities?

Every time the president makes a speech, it is news. Even now, when the candidates make a speech, it is news. That news gets carried not just to voters, but to other countries and other governments. The reason McCain keeps harping not on Obama's willingness to go into Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, but his willingness to talk about it, is that he knows that by making a statement the president has to back it up.

A popular president's speeches could buoy Wall Street just by pledging support; it is a measure of Bush's lame duckitude that he can't. Any president can screw foreign policy up majorly just by mistaking the names of countries or leaders; just ask Richard Nixon about Mauritius and Mauritania.

The president has to know when to speak and when to shut up, what to say and what not to say, and yes, be willing to talk to other leaders. Talk doesn't prevent action, or require some sort of soul-selling to Ahmadinejad like McCain seems to think it does. But it does indeed have an effect on what happens.

So having a president who is a man of "mere" words, as opposed to one who regularly mistakes one country for another (or one Supreme Court Justice for another--ask Justice Breyer if he's slightly insulted at being confused with Alito this morning) is actually rather important when you think about it.

And after watching those debates, which candidate do YOU think is more likely to shoot himself in the foot while attempting diplomacy, whether it's face to face or through the press?

Some Sage Advice for the Tampa Rays and Their Fans from a Grizzled Veteran of Pain and Suffering

Dear Joe Maddon and the Tampa Bay Rays,

You're a great story. I mean, really great. I've never felt that Florida should have professional baseball - that's what spring training is for - and the Florida teams and fanbases have never done much to convince me otherwise. But seeing a Florida team that's built a good, young, team, and is succeeding and could keep it up for years, instead of holding a fire-sale and losing 104 games the year after winning it all (yes, I'm still bitter), well, that's just beautiful. It's just good to see that at least one of the two Florida teams is going about things the right way, and I wish you all the success this year. A lot of people, myself included, are genuinely pulling for you.

But please, be careful, and don't get cocky. Boston has been here before.

Best wishes,

Mr. Trend

More Media Snark

Boy - CNN is making it too easy today, though this time is much more serious. In an election in which racial tensions are running high already, is it really necessary to put up a headline like this? I understand the article's point (that Obama's candidacy could lead to even more African-American votes, and every vote will matter in this election). I don't agree with that point; it's not like African-American votes aren't usually important, nor is it exactly fair to vaguely portray African Americans as people who normally don't turn out to vote, but are doing so for Obama this time, but hey, whatever - I guess you just ran out of white micro-demographics to break down how whatever tiny little fraction of the (white) population will "swing the election.

But for the love of God, if you are going to run such a story, could you at least try to avoid headlines that will scream to the racist and/or nutty, "Don't like the potential new president? Well, if he wins, you can blame the n----s!!!"

NFL @ Week 6: NFC Edition

Last year, I wrote one of these every week and, boy, did it get boring fast. This year, I plan to do three: one at each (approximate) third of the season, and in much shorter form. Normally, I’d do the two conferences alphabetically (to talk about the Broncos first, naturally which, incidentally, I still just managed to do…GO BRONCOS!) but, since the single move of the trade deadline is so hilarious, I will eschew my incessant alphabetizing for one week.

NFC EAST:
It’s Joey Galloway all over again! Now, it’s been a bad week the Cowboys, no doubt (and I’m totally crying over it), but gambling away their future for another top receiver is classic Jerry Jones stupidity. Their 1st, 4th & 6th round picks next year to the Lions for Roy Williams and their 7th? Wow…. Since Pacman’s done, likely for good this time, my suggestion is to play this Williams at corner on the same side as the other Roy Williams, hopefully confusing quarterbacks about which one is the fast one. Hell, it can’t be any dumber than that trade.

As far as the rest of the conference is concerned, they’re as competitive as ever. The Redskins have picked up Shaun Alexander to replace Ladell Betts, which is a great move. Even if Alexander isn’t a starter anymore, there was no reason to expect he wouldn’t have a job until now. He’ll be fine in that role if he doesn’t have aims to take Portis’ slot. The Eagles could be anywhere in the next few weeks. They’re inconsistent but, when they look good, they look great. McNabb looks very strong again and calls for his head will stop for, at most, two weeks. Eli Manning looked like the old slack-jawed, short bus Eli I remember before the Super Bowl last year. While this is nice to see from a personal perspective, my fantasy football team cannot handle another quarterback meltdown so they’re who I’m picking to roll over their division.

NFC NORTH:
These teams may be a bunch of losers, but at least they’re competitive with each other. Adrian Peterson still looks great this year but, if you have to depend on the dumbest move an opposing quarterback can possibly make, your team has problems. In their comeback win, the fans are calling for Childress’ job during the game…hilarious. The Lions, working with Dan Orlovsky and praying for him to stay out of the back of the endzone should bode real well for the rest of the season. At least they have Dallas’ entire draft next year. I know the Matt Millen era is over, but I’m making the bold prediction that they’ll use their first pick in the draft on Oregon’s Jaison Williams. More crappy receivers to Detroit is just what they need to build their future. Did I actually see Devin Hester catch a pass for the Bears? Yessir, he’s arrived. Aaron Rodgers continues to look solid, even when hurt, for the Packers. I’m glad because it means I don’t have to hear the ridiculous talk about Brett Favre regardless of the conference I’m watching. Favre sucks.

NFC SOUTH:
You’ve got to love the reporting on Reggie Bush’s stats. He gets 20 yards rushing and 20 yards receiving and is scarcely an NFL running back. Yet, because he gets two touchdowns and 200 yards on returns against a terrible secondary, they report 240 total yards and two touchdowns, making him great. Well, he isn’t. He’s a returner only and, while that is an important role, he’s terrible behind the quarterback…terrible. Matt Ryan is looking very good for the Falcons. They’re not a playoff team, but with his continued progression and continued good play from Michael Turner and Roddy White (by whose name could moonlight as a game show announcer), they may be the team to beat in the South next year. I’m wishing for all the success in the world for Jonathan Stewart in Carolina but, if they keep playing like they did last week, I’m praying for a trade.

NFC WEST:
These are the Seahawks I remember: laughing stocks. On paper, they look better than they are, but this team is pretty well finished and Mora won’t help as new coach next year. With Charlie Frye under center, they can expect at least three more touchdowns this season. They’ve given up to the power of Arizona, whose receivers are still hugely powerful even with Boldin out. The receiver group must hang out in Sedona in the offseason to draw from the catching power of the vortex. Finally, we have the Niners and the Rams. Indeed, they are teams in the NFL and, by that very fact alone, they are in this post. Let’s see, Mike Nolan still wears a suit and the Rams have a new coach, who is perfect since he did ever so well with the ‘Aints and guiding St. Louis’ “defense” at the first part of this year.

Well, It's a Start

Now if he'll just apologize for each and every one of his other albums...

More political snark (geeky wordplay style!)

I thought I would get in on Trend's trend of snark.

First, we have the Sarah Palin Baby Name Generator. Her kids' names are Track, Trig, Bristol, Willow, and Piper (I really feel bad for Trig; how can you grow up and not be a total douchebag with a name like that?). With the above tool, you can enter your name and find out what your name would be had you been born to Governor Palin.

Apparently, I would have been Revolver Trooper Palin. Ironic, no? Take that, Crop Schooner Palin!

And then there are the anagrams.

"Sarah Louise Palin: Hail, Pious Arsenal!"

Or my favorite, "Vote McCain - Palin: Manic. Vocal. Inept."

Strange New Frontiers in News Marketing

It's not news that news networks (see what I did there?) have pushed non-news stories for years. Still, I must say I'm puzzled by the apparently new idea of selling t-shirts advertising the fact that you run BS stories and chronicling exactly when you did it. "News" networks really will do anything to see if they can get a few extra bucks. Plus, I guess if people with mind-numbing jobs (or people who are trying to do something other than work on their own dissertation) were looking for a way to use their clothing to say to the world, "Hey! I was actively looking at the most banal shit pretending to be "news" in order to avoid work!", then I guess that opportunity that they've been waiting for has finally arrived.

Seriously, who would buy this, and why?

Quick Political Snark

Apparently, yesterday Sarah Palin sent out an e-mail claiming "we can't leftist groups...steal this election."

Her concern is probably fair. If any leftist group "stole" an election, it would break the monopoly of the right on stealing elections.

Twitter and the election

I've been digging into this book for one of my classes, and I think I'd recommend it to anyone concerned with the state of journalism (which I assume, since you're reading political blogs, that you are).

In any case, as I was winding up the 150 or so pages I had to finish today, I got to a mention of the "social production of journalism."

So far, McChesney hasn't mentioned Twitter, (the book is from this year) but I'm going to.

I've mentioned before, I think, that I've been sucked into live-Twittering the debates. I got addicted to reading live Twitter feeds during the DNC, when I was all over the place and rarely at home in front of a television. My first two experiences live-Twittering myself were at Karthika's, in front of her TV, with the computer open in front of us, giving us two levels of social production: the interpersonal, with the two of us discussing in real time, face to face, as the debates went on, and then of course the interaction with my Twitter-buddies (mostly bloggers, a few real life friends, and even some comics industry folk that I follow because of my other gigs covering comics for Newsarama and Bust).

Twitter runs a feed now specifically for the election, with hot political topics across the top of your home screen any time you go to the Twitter page. I've gotten some news from this--I wondered why the Flyers were a hot political topic on Saturday, so I clicked the link to find out that Sarah Palin got booed at a Flyers game. (Which begs the question, why did she think that Philly would be a good city to drop a puck at? Not only are we overwhelmingly Democrats here, but we boo at anything. Really.)

But more importantly, I get a lot of my news from my Twitter buddies. People will post a link along with a short synopsis of the story they're linking, and I can check it out. I found out about my bank's buyout through Twitter, found out that the bailout bill passed the House through Twitter, and many other things.

The people I choose to follow on Twitter are a self-selected group. Like I mentioned, it's mainly bloggers, a few real-life friends, and comics industry folk. They are to a person liberal, though some are to the right of me and some to the left (if that's possible). They are smarter than the average bear--I don't hang out with dumb folks. Yet not all of them are journalists or even journalism students. They are artists, fiction writers, editors, photographers, and students of diverse subjects. They are scattered across the country (and a few outside of it).

What they have in common is a tendency to use Twitter to communicate not only personal details, but larger issues. And with most of them, we communicate back and forth. We share blog posts that we've written and articles that others have written. We provide support for each other when we're having a bad day, and often a Twitter post will lead to me emailing or texting or even calling to see what's up with a friend.

But most importantly, as I've noted, the use of Twitter to socially construct media is the primary interest. Our discussions during live-Twittering the debates shape our views and contribute to what we write. It's a community not in the sense of geography, but in the sense of like minds coming together. Not all of the people that I follow know each other, but I'll retweet a point made by someone the others aren't following, and they'll retweet me. We pass information along, rippling outwards, and with the hash tags feature you can make sure your political posts are encompassed into the Twitter timeline.

I get new followers with each liveTwitter debate.

Last Thursday I started trying to fact-check the candidates in real time. It's hard for just one person to do, but imagine if we'd organized that sooner? If each of us were trying to fact-check one statement, to pull up documentation to prove it true or false, and tossed that into the mainstream?

I have plans to be in New York for a friend's art opening/debate watch party on Wednesday, but you can bet I'll have the Crackberry out and twittering.

I don't know if this is exactly what McChesney was meaning by social construction of journalism, but it comes close, in my mind. Because though it starts out in our little echo chamber, it spreads outward, gets pulled into the main stream of data, and with a little help...who knows?

Any of you on Twitter? Talk to me. Follow me. Join my experiment and help live-fact-check the debate. Or just listen to me rant occasionally about Vikings, back pain, family, and Sarah Palin.

One Down

The first American history that I had applied for was cancelled because of the financial crisis. How many more will it be? I hope those unemployment checks pay OK. Or maybe I'll end up living with my parents....

Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize Winner

That's right, everybody's favorite proponent of universal health care in the pages of the Times is now a Nobel Prize winner.

I'll take this as a good sign, thanks.

Congratulate him.

Palin, Petitions, Pulling out, Polling down...

Just for the record, I'm not angling for a job at Variety.

The McCain-Palin campaign's recent decision to suspend operations in Michigan was widely reported this past week, as was the latest poll that shows Obama with a very healthy 16 point lead (Rasmussen's October 8th poll).

Michigan Republicans are feeling a little abandoned and have started a petition to convince Sarah Palin to come back to Michigan.

No to be outdone, the Michigan Democratic Party has started a petition to bring Tina Fey to Michigan.

As my good friend and frequent commenter Sator Arepo might say, "an hilarious development".

On the Palin ethics probe

Once again, I have more up at GlobalComment.com

It’s official. Sarah Palin was found to have abused her authority in the firing of a public official who would not fire her state trooper ex-brother-in-law, according to the probe released Friday.

Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan refused to fire Trooper Michael Wooten, who was involved in a divorce and custody dispute with Palin’s sister. The report cites repeated attempts and pressure by Palin’s husband, Todd, the “first dude” of Alaska, to have Wooten removed from his job.

The real question is, is this having any effect on the race?

The investigation has been under way since July, and Palin originally promised to cooperate. Yet after McCain asked her to join his ticket, Republicans began to claim that the investigation was politically motivated, even despite Republican dominance in Alaskan politics.

The Wooten probe has been, until now, just another punchline in the story of McCain’s largely unvetted Veep pick: the pretty conservative with the sharp tongue and folksy manner who couldn’t name a single newspaper she reads and didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is.

Now that it’s out, will it change anyone’s mind?

Read the rest.