Album of the Day

Dancing, by Mike Keneally and Beer for Dolphins (2000): When this album initially came out, I gushed all over it (as the linked review indicates) and six years later I still love it. If you own just one Keneally album (and if that's all you have, really, you're just being silly) this is it. It covers so much stylistic ground that if this one does nothing for you, none of Mike's stuff will.

Album of the Day

Half Alive in Hollywood, by Mike Keneally & Beer for Dolphins (1996): For all his productivity, Keneally is not exactly big on live albums. In fact, until the release of the upcoming Guitar Therapy Live album (order yours now!), Half Alive . . . was the only official live album in Mike's catalog. And it's a bit of a weird one, as you might expect from the title. It covers two discs, recorded a year apart, in very different situations at the Musicians Institute in Hollywood. Disc One is a "live in the studio" recording of the then three-piece BFD (Keneally, bassist Bryan Beller, and drummer Toss Panos) that was conceived as a learning process for the Institute's engineering students. As such, it's a bit rough and Mike retained the starts, stops, rehearsals, and declarations of impending demise to spice things up. The vocals are also a bit off, as Keneally expected to go back and redo them but never got the chance. Disc Two has the same trio raging in front of a live audience at the MI ("Live on a Stage" it's called) and is a little more cohesive.

I like this album a bunch because (a) it covers material from the supposedly fabulous-but-out-of-print Boil That Dust Speck, which I don't own; and (b) Keneally's liner notes are really funny and show what a neat easy going guy he is.

The Price of Trials

Monday's edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had an interesting article about an aspect of federal criminal law that most outside of the system don't know about: the great incentive for defendants to give up their right to a trial. It all stems from (as most evil things do in the federal system) from the Sentencing Guidelines. One of the few offense level decreases available in the Guidelines is called "acceptance of responsibility." While it is not directly tied to whether or not you go to trial, in the vast majority of cases it is available only to those who plead guilty.

The theory behind that setup is fairly good - in a system that still at least pays lip service to rehabilitation, it is good to reward a criminal defendant for stepping up and admitting his illegal conduct, as that is the first step on the road to redemption. The reality is somewhat different, however, as the prospect of losing acceptance causes many defendants to not risk going to trial, lest they lose (whether a trial is a "close case" or not is largely irrelevant to whether a defendant gets acceptance - you lose it if you go to trial). As a result, the decision about whether to go to trial is not made on the basis of the evidence available to the Government or what that evidence might prove, but on the risk/reward analysis of going to trial.

Album of Yesterday

Kansas, by Kansas (1974): 1974 was a banner year for prog in Europe, so it's a little odd that the most successful of the American quasi-prog bands was only just getting going then (as was Canada's entry, Rush). Kansas was never really a full-on prog band, throwing in lots of AOR-style rock and blues inflected tunes. Still, when they turned their attention to the more symphonic aspects of their repetoire, like "Journey from Mariabronn" and "Apercu," lots of good things happened. Their straddling of prog and more radio-friendly genres set a template still in use today by several bands.

Album of the Day

Live from Austin TX, by Eric Johnson (2005): For a lot of people, their first exposure to guitar master Eric Johnson was on public TV's Austin City Limits. In fact, legend has it that EJ's first appearance on ACL was seen by Prince, who convinced his record label (Warner Brothers) to sign EJ to a contract. Another appearance, after his major-label debut Tones was released, cemented his status. It's that performance that's cataloged on this CD (there's also a companion DVD). This disc is a clear example of EJ's talent.

Children, Open Your Bibles . . .

The state of Georgia is on the verge of passing a law requiring that schools develop a curriculum to teach the Bible in elective classes, using the "good book" itself as the text. On the surface, it seems like not a bad idea: teach the Bible as an academic subject, not an object of worship, discussing its origins, interpretations, and influence on the world. Heck, one of the most interesting classes I took in college was an Old Testament class. But is that how it will really work? Maybe not:

The trouble is that for the classes to be thoughtful, intellectually rigorous, and educationally valuable, they'd have to deal with lots of things that many students (and others) might find quite troubling. If you teach the Merchant of Venice as literature, you probably ought to discuss criticisms of the moral view that the Merchant of Venice seems to express. If you teach classic-era histories (e.g., Livy) in a class on Roman history, you certainly ought to discuss whether the historians are reliable, and whether they might be repeating myth as truth. If you teach historical legal systems in a class on ancient law and culture, you need to discuss ways in which those legal systems may have been unjust by today's standards, or inconsistent even by their own standards.

Are Georgia voters and legislators prepared to have Georgia high school teachers raise these hard questions about the Bible? If so, great. But if the hope is that the teachers will teach the Bible without the same willingness to critique the work -- and to encourage students to think critically about the work -- that we'd expect in serious classes on other works, then that would be a pretty bad step for the Georgia school system to take: It would suggest that the school system is just trying to reinforce students' existing beliefs, rather than teaching them to analyze historical sources carefully and thoughtfully.

In other words, will the right-wing pols who support getting the Bible back in schools be quiet if the text is taught critically, rather than in a praiseworthy way? I agree with Prof. Volokh and don't expect they'd be too happy about that.

The Only Royals I Like

Congrats to English football team Reading FC (aka The Royals), who won promotion to the Premier League over the weekend. I've followed Reading for a couple of years due to the fact that two Americans, midfielder Bobby Convey and keeper Marcus Hahnemann, played critical roles in the team. Next season will mark the first season of top-flight footy for Reading. You can read more about their, um, illustrious history here.

That's Some Pillow Talk

CNN.com has a weird story from India about a man who divorced his wife - in his sleep. Apparently while he slumbered the man murmured "talaq" three times one night. "Talaq" in Arabic means "divorce," apparently:

When local Islamic leaders got to hear, they said Aftab's words constituted a divorce under an Islamic procedure known as 'triple talaq.' The couple, married for 11 years with three children, were told they had to split.

The happy couple are not going quietly into that good night:

The couple, who live in the eastern state of West Bengal, have refused to obey the order and the issue has been referred to a local family counseling center.

But that might not be necessary, according to Islamic scholars:

'This is a totally unnecessary controversy and the local 'community leaders' or whosoever has said it are totally ignorant of Islamic law,' said Zafarul-Islam Khan, an Islamic scholar and editor of The Milli Gazette, a popular Muslim newspaper.

'The law clearly says any action under compulsion or in a state of intoxication has no effect. The case of someone uttering something while asleep falls under this category and will have no impact whatsoever,' Khan told Reuters.

What I want to know is who turned the husband in? Who exactly would have heard his slumbered saying aside from his wife?

Album of the Day

Roots to Branches, by Jethro Tull (1995): When I was in college, my friend and I went to a local music store for a clinic featuring uber bass player Vic Wooten. Neither of us were bass players, but we figured it might still be cool to see Vic strut his stuff up close. As it turns out, it was a joint clinic with another bassist named Steve Bailey, whom I'd never heard of before. He seemed talented enough, but as we stood in line to talk to Vic, I was confronted with the daunting task of making small talk with this musician who I didn't even know existed 90 minutes earlier. My honesty got the best of me, and I simply told him that I hadn't heard any of his work. At that point, he told me that he was on, what was then, the newest Jethro Tull album, Roots to Branches. Hey, I said, I actually had that one. What I didn't say is that I didn't notice anything all that interesting about the bass playing. But it passed the time and eased a weird interlude.

Thats what I think of anytime I pull this disc out.

What Are We Fighting For?

Remember when we went into Afghanistan after 9/11? While the main motivation was to strike back at the closest thing to a nation that was behind the attacks (and to track down bin Laden - marvel at our lack of success on that note), a secondary benefit of our invasion was to boot out the Taliban and move the country towards something vaguely resembling the 20th century. Well, it looks like it's not taking. Our first experiment with democracy in the Islamic world has created a nation where a Christian man may soon be executed because he has rejected Islam. While the Bush administration hems and haws about what could be done in this situation, the local religious leaders are not standing still:

'Rejecting Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This
man must die,' said cleric Abdul Raoulf, who is considered a moderate and was
jailed three times for opposing the Taliban before the hard-line regime was
ousted in 2001.

Holy shit - if he's a moderate, what must the extremists be thinking?

Album of Yesterday

Crossing the Desert, by Iris (1996): Iris is a side project shepherded by the guitar player from the French band Arrakeen. It came to my attention because he recruited Marillion's Pete Trewavas and Ian Mosley as his rhythm section. The album could basically be categorized as instrumental neo-prog, although with a much more prominent focus on guitar (the Frenchman doubles on keys). No long Banksish widdly synth solos here, and no real extended bits of guitar hero stuff, either. The compositions are all fairly strong, but only a few ("Tap on Top" and the title track) really stand out.

Album of the Day

Dark Matter, by IQ (2004): The latest release from these neo-prog pioneers is just what you would imagine it is - a solid slice of streamlined prog. To be fair, the band does indulge some new influences here and there. But they are at their best when Martin Orford channels Tony Banks, Mike Holmes does Gilmour/Hackett, and Pete Nichols is, well, Pete Nichols. All epic and such. And there's enough of that here to enjoy.

Rich and Stubborn - Bad Combination

When a party in litigation refuses to do something a court orders, the court can hold that party in contempt, placing him in jail until the party submits to the court's will. The idea is not to punish the recalcitrant party, but to make life so unpleasant as to compel the party to change their tune. That usually takes a period of days (months, at most), at which point either the party submits or the court decides that no amount of jail is going to change things. At that point, everybody goes home.

But it doesn't always work that way. Read the story of H. Beatty Chadwick, a wealthy attorney who has been held in contempt for refusing to comply with the order of a divorce court judge for 10 years! At some point, don't you just have to admit that Chadwick's won and go on?

Album of the Day

Children, by Illuvatar (1995): When I first got back into prog, I bought almost everything I could find that was described as "sounds like mid-period Genesis." As a result, I ended up with a sort of neo-prog overload and turned off to the genre for a while. Children was one of the discs I got during that time. I was a little underwhelmed and filed it away. But recently, I've been listening to some of these things with new ears and really enjoying them. Children still isn't the best example of neo I can think of, but it's solid enough to merit repeated listenings.

Album of Yesterday

Spirit Trail, by Bruce Hornsby (1998): When I think of the first phase of Bruce's post-Range days (Harbor Lights through the live album, Here Come the Noisemakers), I usually overlook this one. It's not as paradigm shattering as Harbor Lights or consistently excellent as Hot House, and it's easy to skip over it to the superb Noisemakers. But it's still got some very good stuff on it. Some judicious editing could have improved things by getting it all on one disc.

Album of the Day

Hatfield and the North, by Hatfield and the North (1973): One of the "aha" moments in my prog renaissance in college was when I discovered Hatfield's second album, The Rotter's Club. It is, in a word, brilliant. Light and jazzy with staggeringly complex arrangements and a well voiced sense of humor. More recently, I discovered their eponymous debut album (in the local FYE, no less) and eagerly snapped it up. It's got lots of great moments, but it seems a little more rough and uncohesive compared to the follow-up. Still, it's hard not to like an album with song titles like "Going Up to People and Tinkling," "Licks for the Ladies," "Lobster In Cleavage Probe," and "Gigantic Land Crabs in Earth Takeover Bid." Plus, one of the bonus tracks is an early B-side version of The Rotter's Club's "Fitter Stoke Has a Bath."

Album of the Day

Crafty Hands, by Happy the Man (1978): For a lot of prog fans, Happy the Man are the American prog band. Working in the wake of prog's high water mark in Europe, the band incorporated lots of symphonic and Canterbury influences for this mostly-instrumental album. When it clicks, it's really good ("Ibby It Is" or "Wind Up Doll Day Wind"). Sometimes, however, it gets so laid back as to verge on New Age ("Morning Sun"), which is a bad thing. In addition, none of it strikes me as being distinctly "American" prog in the way, say, that The Dixie Dregs stuff does.

E tu, Howard?

I've never been a huge fan of Howard Stern. His radio show wasn't on the air around here (when it was actually "on the air") and the bits of it I saw on E! were more dumb and juvenile than actually funny. I did like his autobio Private Parts, however, particularly as it played up his struggle with "the man" and his fight to allow obnoxious jerks everywhere to be, well, obnoxious jerks. I put him in the same pantheon of First Amendment heroes as Larry Flynt - scumbags who provide objects lessons in how and why freedom of speech works. Alas, it was all an act on Howard's part. During his current anti-CBS media tour, Howard told (of all people) Sean Hannity that:

'I believe in censoring anyone who is my enemy. He also added, 'I believe in censorship when it benefits me.'

This in reference to a spat with another pair of NYC shock jocks whom he perceived as a threat and had the station (they and Howard were on the same station) place a gag order on them prohibiting them from talking about Howard or his show. Seems that Howard didn't learn the most important lesson about free speech - it's only really free if other people have the right, too.

Album of the Day

Red Queen to Gryphon Three, by Gryphon (1974): How can you not like a band that has a member solely dedicated to playing bassoon and krumhorn? Gryphon's four-track instrumental concept album (think chess) is a great medieval-tinged symphonic prog work. Jaunty bassoon runs abound. Maybe krumhorn runs do, too, but, honestly, I don't know what one sounds like!

Constitutional Nose Thumbing

Last month I chastised a state lawmaker for voting in favor of a law of questionable constitutionality under the theory of "let the courts settle it." I still think that voting in such a way is an abandonment of the legislator's oath to uphold the Constitution. So what of South Dakota's recent anti-abortion law, that runs headlong into Roe v. Wade? Are the mouthbreathers in the Black Hills on any better footing? Michael Dorf over at FindLaw says yes. He makes a fairly convincing case that the only way for anyone to legitimately challenge Roe (or any other constitutional status quo) is to act in a way that forces the courts to deal with the issue. I'm not completely convinced, but it's an interesting theory.