On Supporting the Arts

A couple of weeks ago, composer Michael Gordon (not to be confused with ex-Phish bassist Mike Gordon) had a post on the New York Times blog The Score about the importance of the arts (music in particular) in society and the need to support them. Gordon tells the story of playing a festival in Italy with his band and uses that generally as a springboard to argue about the importance of music to bring understanding to the world. His conclusion is very powerful:

After our arrival here in Catania the local cultural emissary took my band out for dinner. As usually happens in Europe our hosts asked us how we could have elected George Bush as president. I have heard the conversation many times. We reminded them that half of the country did not vote for Bush. As members of my band tried to assuage the negative impressions these Europeans had about Americans, I thought that here a different type of cultural diplomacy was going on. There are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of American artists performing around the world — not passing through like tourists but having real, meaningful, positive interactions with the citizens of other nations. In these many small interactions, we communicate a different America.

A good point, although he takes a couple of missteps along the way.

First, he insinuates that the best way to support for the arts is with government funding:

The arts play an extremely important role in European life. I’m not a statistician, so don’t hold me to exact numbers, but a quick search on the Web brought me this information: In the most recent study on government spending on the arts, Finland, which leads the European countries, spent about $91 per capita. (The data is summarized in a January 2000 research note by the National Endowment for the Arts.) Most European countries trail that figure by a bit, but they’re all in the same ballpark. However, the United States, the world’s greatest economic power (isn’t that what our political leaders keep telling us) spent about $6 per capita on the arts.

Why is that so important? Because the arts will be our legacy:

What we remember about a culture after thousands of years is most likely to be their arts, architecture, writing and achievements in thought. Is it worth nurturing, exporting and preserving our culture? Most countries think it is. But in the United States this isn’t a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. It’s a non-issue.

Oddly enough, I remember making that exact same issue with a fellow student in a high school social studies class during a debate about the National Endowment for the Arts. He took the traditional conservative position that public money shouldn't be used to subsidize artists (he went on to join the College Republican at WVU - go figure). I argued the contrary. But in subsequent years, I've changed my position.

Direct subsidization of artists by the government, it seems to me, is both haphazardly random and counter-capitalistic. How can a government agency possibly determine what art deserves funding and what doesn't without moving into some shady First Amendment areas? And why should a few artists lucky enough to curry favor with the government funders be sheltered from the market forces with which we all must deal? Propping up artists who make art that nobody wants to consume is wasteful and just a bit pointless.

What I'd prefer to see the NEA do is shift its mission in two ways. First, its primary goal should be arts education in public and private schools. The market for artistic works will be buoyed by educated consumers who have their appetites whetted in school. Second, if it subsidized any performers directly, it should be artists who serve economically depressed areas that could not support such art on its own. In other words, take the NEA grant away from the Metropolitan Opera and give it to some organization that takes opera on the road into rural areas that otherwise would never see and hear it.

The other misstep Gordon makes is a familiar one:

Those of us who perform and compose semi-popular music — that is, experimental, art, classical and jazz — cannot survive in the free market like rock, urban and country musicians do. Although there is a fan base for these more esoteric types of music that numbers in the millions, it just doesn’t add up to the large CD sales and stadium tours that the popular music stars enjoy.

In other words, "serious" music needs support from the public via the government, regardless of popular appeal, while "pop" musicians and artists are left to suffer the whims of the marketplace and, in the words of Frank Zappa, "got to play for poot in the bistro bars."

That rests on, what I feel, is a fundamental flaw in trying to shuffle "art" music and "pop" music into separate ghettos. I refuse to draw such distinctions. Music is music and its value to any given person can be measured only by how they react to it, not whether it's made for serious purposes or otherwise. Speaking for myself, music that moves me in some way reaches the same place in my brain and (dare I say it) soul, regardless of where it comes from. The bridge from "Afraid of Sunlight," the fiery workout at the end of "Starless," and the guitar solo in "Watermelon in Easter Hay" have jammed themselves in the same crevice of my skull as the delicate second movement of Mozart's clarinet concerto, the broad strokes of Copland's Third Symphony, or the brutal rhythms of The Rites of Spring. I simply see no reason to put Marillion, King Crimson, or Zappa aside as not being "serious" artists. It's worth considering that lots of what we now consider essential parts of the orchestra repertoire was popular entertainment when it was made.

If you look at it that way, the idea that non-pop musicians should be shielded from the market falls away. If an artist can't figure out a way to sell what he or she does well enough to make a living, that's life. I've heard lots of talented musicians who play for 100 people a night and then have to go to shitty day jobs to make ends meet. Most pop musicians don't "survive in the free market." In a perfect world, we'd all be able to pursue our muse without regard to making a living. But this is not that world and as long as it's not, the playing field should be the same for everyone.

But, to get back to Gordon's broader point, he is absolutely correct about the value of music (and the arts in general) in life, in building bridges between people and cultures, and in defining who we are as a civilization. And I certainly have no problem with private citizens and foundations funding what ever kind of artistic programs they want, market forces be damned. So get out there and make your voice heard as a consumer the best way you can - support your local artistic endeavors with your dollars and your time.

Keeping Imus In Perspective

As the media feeding frenzy following Don Imus's stupid, racist, misogynistic comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team continues, an important bit of perspective comes from this column in USA Today by Legal Times writer Tony Mauro. He writes about what he calls "insult laws" that proliferate around the globe to criminally punish speech that allegedly degrades someone or something else. He notes:

In its early days, the United States was not immune from these impulses. The Sedition Act of 1798 made it a crime to utter or publish 'false, scandalous and malicious' comments about the government. Some public officials today probably wish they still had that tool to silence critics.

But thankfully, the principles of free speech and freedom of the press have prevailed. And whatever fate ultimately awaits Don Imus, I think nobody would want him labeled as a criminal for what he said about the women's basketball team from Rutgers University (my alma mater).

Imus's employers are free to deal with him as they see fit, but criminal punishment is off limits. As it should be.

Citing Wikipedia (Redux)

A couple of months ago I posted about the propriety of citing Wikipedia as a definitive source on anything. In the process of arguing that it was OK in some contexts, I said:

But, sometimes, you just need a cite for something tangentially relevant but not super important. I don't think I've ever used Wikipedia in a brief, but I cited Mapquest directions before to show the distance between two addresses that, while commonly known to the parties and trial court before which the issues was first argued, surely weren't know to the judges in Richmond.

Turns out I was wrong. Today I was working on a petition to the US Supreme Court of a case we lost in the Fourth Circuit. The factual scenario that led to the conviction started off with an AMBER Alert. How it works and what it is really isn't critical to the case, but I felt it was important to drop a footnote explaining what an AMBER Alert is, so I cited to the Wikipedia entry. I carried that over to the cert petition as well.

Soccer Smackdown Defined

UEFA Champions League, quarterfinal, 2nd leg at Old Trafford in Manchester:

Manchester United 7 - AS Roma 1

That is a comprehensive ass kicking, particularly considering that Roma won the first leg 2-1 in Rome! For the American football faithful, that's the equivalent to a NFL conference semifinal game ending 49-7.

Album of the Day

Living Proof, by IQ (1992): Back in 1985, while preparing to tour in support of their second album, The Wake, IQ appeared on a British TV show called Live From London. In an hour-long set, they ripped through tunes from the new album and Tales from the Lush Attic (plus the early favorite "It All Stops Here"). To the band's surprise, someone bootlegged the soundtrack from the show and released it on an LP. It became somewhat of a collector's item, so when the band started their own label back in the 1990s, they cleaned up the sound as best they could and released the show as Living Proof. The result is a neat little time capsule of the original IQ, but it suffers from a few things. For one, the sound is just barely better than bootleg quality. For another, Pete Nichols had a truly off night. But, while it wasn't their best performance, it is (to my knowledge) the only artifact of the band from this period. So for IQ fans, like me, it's a nice thing to have around.

As you know, in the DVD era, everything old is new again. The powers that be have been releasing the Live from London concerts on DVD since 2005 (the title link in this post actually goes to a review of the DVD, but its the same set and soundtrack as the album). In addition to IQ, other struggling neo-prog bands of the time make appearances, like Twelfth Night and Pallas. Having Netflixed a couple, the IQ one, filmed at the Camden Palace, comes off better than the Twelfth Night, which was recorded in the much more cramped (but more famous) Marquee Club. In addition, whoever filmed/edited the IQ show correctly figured that fans of a progressive rock band might have some interest what the keyboard player might be doing!

Praise for the Band

Today's Charleston Daily Mail has a nice write up about my high alma mater's concert band. The GW band has been named a State Honor Band every other year for the last 16 years. Why every other year? Because bands can't win the honor in consecutive years. I'm quite proud to say that that 16-year stretch began while I was plugging away in the clarinet section. Not bad, considering my first year in the band included my director being arrested for bank robbery!

Album of the Day

A Live Record, by Camel (1978): I have come to the conclusion that I own enough Camel. Between the three studio albums, later-day DVD in my collection, and this live album, I think I've caught about all the band has to offer. None of it is bad - far from it. There's a lot of nice playing going on, between Barden's liquid synths and Lattimer's Gilmour-ish guitar. But not much of it goes anywhere. For example, the first 10 tracks on disc one of this 2-disc set were completely new to me and, after several listens, I can't tell them apart. They blend together into a pleasing, if unremarkable, whole. I will say this, however - the CD reissue of this set got punched out and expanded to include two full discs of material, which is a good thing.

An Object Lesson In Modern American Politics

I was fascinated last week as the saga of Mitt Romney, the great white hunter, played out in the media. Romney, one of the leading candidates for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, got things kicked off last year when he joined the National Rifle Association. He cleverly paid up for a "lifetime" membership, which allows him to claim that label, even though he's been part of the organization for less than one year. Last week, Romney claimed at a campaign event that he had been a hunter "all his life." That quickly fell apart, however, as the only two hunting trips anybody could remember Romney taking were last year and back when he was 15 years old.* Trying to ramp up his manly credentials, Romney attempted to clarify:

When he corrected his staff's statement during a news conference Thursday in Indianapolis, Romney said: 'I've always been a rodent and rabbit hunter, small varmints, if you will.' He added: 'I began when I was 15 or so and I have hunted those kinds of varmints since then. More than two times.'

But even that didn't really take, as the AP surveyed the four states where Romney has lived and concluded that he never got a hunting permit. The excuse this time, Romney said, is that he rarely hunted in areas where he needed one (which assumes there were some times where he was hunting illegally, right?).

All of this goes to show that, when it comes to ass-kissing politics, Romney doesn't exactly have a deft touch. Which I suppose is to his credit - his ham-handed sucking up to the NRA and hunters everywhere is so transparent that it's unlikely to win him any new supporters. That being said, it's a sad commentary on modern politics. As last week's run of Doonesbury hilariously pointed out, Romney has changed his position on almost every major issue in a play for conservative GOP primary voters. Support for gay rights? Gone. Pro-choice? Like George H.W. Bush before him, conveniently jettisoned for political gain. The list goes on and on.

I'm not sure what's worse - that candidates (and Romney is hardly alone - he's just the best example) do this repeatedly and routinely, but that voters just roll with the punches and go with it. I'm not asking for rigid positions out of which no candidate can be moved - smart people keep their minds open and always consider the possibility they might be wrong. But would it be too much to ask that candidates not fall all over themselves to try and portray themselves as something they clearly aren't just to get a few more votes.

The underlying moral of Romney's NRA pandering seems to be that unless you own guns, join the NRA, and blow away small furry animals you're not qualified to be President. That's no skin off my nose - Romney's already told me I can't be President, anyway.

* The 2006 event doesn't really count. It was one of those "hunting" reserves where people like Dick Cheney pay good money to shoot elderly lawyers. C'mon, that's not real hunting!

Billo Goes Kablammo

This has been all over the internets since last Thursday but, please, if you haven't already, go check out Bill O'Reilly taking on fellow Faux News talking head Geraldo Rivera. At issue was a drunk driving death wherein the driver was an illegal alien. Billo wants to use the incident to engage in polemics against illegals, but Geraldo will have none of it. Billo gets so irate that I thought Geraldo may have been in danger of getting another broken nose! You just can't make this stuff up.

Album of Last Friday

Live Encounter, by The Trey Gunn Band (2001): Trey Gunn is best known as Warr guitarist for King Crimson in their latest recorded formation. He has a fairly lengthy, if not particularly prolific, solo career as well. Live Encounter showcases an augmented version of the Trey Gunn Band from The Joy of Molybdenum (with the addition of a second Warr guitarist) to rip through tunes from that disc and a few others. The music itself is really interesting and features lots of Asian influences (tabla out the wazoo!) in addition to Crimsoid complexity. Excellent stuff, including the two videos on the CD showing the band in action.

Damn, God's a Petty Bastard

At least that's what this sign at the local church says to me:


I know the Lord is full of wrath, but, c'mon, is that the best She can do?

Album of the Day

Live at NEARFest 2002, by Miriodor (2005): My first exposure to Quebec's avant-proggers Miriodor was via a webcast of this performance at NEARFest. I was impressed and promptly went out and got their then-current release, Mekano. Years later, when the band released its next studio album, Parade, they included this live album as a second disc in the packaged. It's a good performance, but unfortunately 11 of its 13 tracks are from Mekano, so it's a bit redundant. Still, it's worth it to have a copy of "Igor, the Motorbike Bear!"

For the Legal History Geeks*

Lately, at work, I've been working my way through the briefs in an upcoming Supreme Court case, Panetti v. Quarterman, which presents an interesting death penalty issue. The defendant, Panetti, is absolutely completely 100% batshit loony insane. Only in Texas could he be convicted and sentenced to death. The issue now is whether he's so insane so as to preclude his execution. To put it briefly, while Panetti knows why the state seeks to execute him (murder), he believes it's all a cover for the state's desire to silence his preaching of the Gospel. If he knows what the state says its motivation is, but disbelieves it, does it matter?

Anyway, one of the amicus briefs is from a collection of legal historians and details the state of the common law on execution of the insane at the time the Bill of Rights was ratified. Part of their argument utilizes information about pre-1789 trials in England. A resource they cite is The Proceedings of the Old Bailey. The Old Bailey is the main criminal court in London. The website is:

A fully searchable online edition of the largest body of texts detailing the lives of non-elite people ever published, containing accounts of over 100,000 criminal trials held at London's central criminal court.

The info dates from 1673 to 1834 and looks to be a real treasure trove of interesting stuff.

* I don't say that to be derogatory - I'm a big legal history geek myself.

Local Legal Conundrum

Someone somewhere once defined "chutzpah" as when a child kills both of his parents and then begs the court for mercy because he's an orphan. In a similar vein, lots of states (including West Virginia) have enacted so-called Slayer Statutes, which prevent a person from inheriting money from someone that they killed. In other words, if you kill dad to get to his inheritance, you'll not get anything at all.

A local murder case has raised an interesting twist on the issue. Richard O'Neal was charged with killing his mother, Bonnie. Richard was found not guilty by reason of insanity at trial. Now the rest of Bonnie's heirs are trying to invoke West Virginia's version of the Slayer Statute to prevent Richard from getting his piece of the pie. The twist, of course, is that while Richard was found not guilty, it was not because he didn't do it. He was insane, and thus not legally liable for the death, but there's no doubt that Bonnie died at his hand. The same issue would arise if Richard had been found not guilty by reason of self defense, I imagine.

On the one hand, Richard did kill his mother. And he has not, in a practical sense, "gotten away with it" - he'll be cooped up in a state nut house for the next 40 years. But on the other, he's legally innocent. If the point of the Slayer Statute is to deter murder-for-inheritance, that rationale doesn't apply to someone who is insane. By definition, he was incapable of doing the mental calculations necessary to be deterred.

Of course, from a practical standpoint, what is Richard going to with his share of his mother's estate if he's locked up for 40 years? Will the state intervene on his behalf in order to recoup some of the costs of his incarceration?

Vuelta del Gigante Hogweed?

The flora of the Southwest apparently are not on board with the Minutemen. According to USA Today:

A giant, aggressive weed growing along the border with Mexico is draining massive quantities of water, overrunning roads and bridges and providing cover for illegal immigrants, drug smugglers and anyone else trying to sneak into the country, the Homeland Security Department says.

Called Carrizo cane, the invasive, non-native plant grows stalks up to 18 feet tall and can get so dense it makes roads impassable.

It's not quite the Giant Hogweed, but surely Cast can whip up a suitable prog epic for the occasion!

Album of the Day

A Little Nonsense, by echolyn (2002): In brief, here is the echolyn story: the band released two full-length CDs and an EP independently, got signed by a Big Label, released on album on Big Label, broke up, released a posthumous compilation album, then reformed in 2000 to begin anew (they continue to this day). When the band signed to Big Label, the two old albums and the EP got locked in Big Label's vaults. After the band regrouped in the new millennium, they made it a point to free the old albums and give them a proper remastering and rerelease. Their second album, the brilliant Suffocating the Bloom . . ., got its own release.

For the rest, the band put together this 3-disc set. Disc 1 is the band's self-titled debut. In a current discussion on the mailing list, the band has been poo-pooing that album, a bit unfairly in the opinion of most fans (myself included). Yes, it's rough. Yes, they sound better, more mature, and more confident now. But the energy and youthful enthusiasm shine through, so it's still a good listen. Disc 2 combines the early EP, . . . and Every Blossom, with four mostly acoustic tracks, and the posthumous compilation disc, When the Sweet Turns Sour, which contains some live cuts, unreleased studio tracks, and a cover of the olde Genesis tune "When the Sour Turns to Sweet." Disc 3 is a real grab bag, holding four reworked "2000" versions of old tunes, three "live in the studio" cuts from the reunion album Cowboy Poems Free, and an old old jam session called "The Edge of Wonder."

It's a neat set, overall. I usually invade it for the debut album, honestly, 'cause the When the Sweet Turns to Sour material has it's own disc that I can pull out when I'm in the mood.

For the Kiddies

Via Appellate Law & Practice, check this out. The Supreme Court of Louisiana has created a coloring book for kids about the courts. That's right, while Daddy's public defender tries vainly to get the court to do some justice, little Connie can color in everything from the State Seal to the Scales of Justice. Oddly lacking from the book seems to be the court itself sitting on the bench. But hey, I hear if you come to court on your birthday, your case is decided for free!

On Mandatory Brain Buckets

Today's edition of USA Today has a couple of articles dealing with mandatory helmet laws for motorcycle riders. First up is this article that details a renewed effort to pass mandatory helmet laws after many decades of moving in the opposite direction. The driving force behind the new push was the crash of Pittsburgh Steeler's quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who wrecked his bike just before the season started last year. He was not riding a helmet at the time and suffered some minor head injuries (nothing that kept him from missing more than a game or two, mind you).

The other article details the lobbying efforts over the years that have produced a rollback of lots of helmet laws that were already on the books. That, to me, is the much more interesting story. I get the argument against mandatory helmet laws - part of the allure of a motorcycle is the sense of freedom it brings, the wind rushing through your hair, etc. It's a popular belief - when I'm visiting the girlfriend in Pennsylvania, I see bikers from neighboring states who take their helmets off at the border to enjoy riding sans brain bucket. In addition, my libertarian streak sees this as unwarranted government intrusion.

But the lobbyists in the article aren't just anti-mandatory helmet laws, they appear to be anti-helmets completely. Witness:

The latest result of helmet-law opposition has been to stall a landmark study that motorcyclists themselves say would save lives.

Motorcyclist groups have long sought an in-depth analysis of why riders are killed. Researchers would rush to the scene of hundreds of motorcycle crashes to determine why they occurred. By finding the main causes, the study would urge safety improvements in anything from training to motorcycle design.

The study was the top priority of a broad motorcycle-safety plan written in 2000 by safety experts, motorcyclists and NHTSA.

When lawmakers in Congress proposed in 2005 that the Department of Transportation conduct and fund the study, the American Motorcyclist Association objected.

'We don't want DOT to do the study,' association lobbyist Edward Moreland said in a recent interview. 'They want to focus on protective equipment' such as helmets. The association wanted 'an independent third party' to run the study, Moreland said.

This would seem, to me, to be akin to blocking a study to show whether water is, in fact, wet. Does anybody serious argue that, in the event of a crash, a head hitting the pavement with a helmet around it is in better shape than a bare skull? If the anti-helmet folks want to maintain the right to not wear helmets, shouldn't they focus on philosophical/political arguments rather than blocking studies into their effectiveness? Surely the motorcycle folks don't want to become the Tobacco Institute of the 21st Century.

For what it's worth, while I agree with the anti-mandatory helmet law folks in principal, their libertarian argument fails in a modern interconnected world. If there was someway to completely limit the excess cost of caring for the brain damaged victims of bike accidents, I'd be all for it. But as long as I and the rest of the insured and tax paying have to help foot the bill, you owe us a little courtesy.

Album of the Day

Legend, by Henry Cow (1973): The title of this album varies from source to source. My CD, on both the disc and spine of the jewel case, use the single word "legend." Others, including some of the Ground and Sky reviewers, call is "Leg End," which fits with the cover art (it's a sock - leg end, get it!). I suppose the unsettled nature of the title is appropriate, given the quirky quality of the music. While, by all reports, this is a more accessible Henry Cow than other albums - indeed, some of it sounds a bit like Canterbury prog on acid - there's still some real weirdness on here. But a good kind of weirdness.

We Never Saw This on Oz

This is one of those stories that gets stranger the farther into you read. The main event, so to speak, is odd but not particularly strange:

A female Thai prisoner has boosted her chances of freedom by winning the world light flyweight boxing title.

Samson Sor Siriporn, a convicted drug dealer, beat Japan's Ayaka Miyano in a bout staged at the mixed Klong Prem jail, known as the 'Bangkok Hilton.'

OK, so I lied - that is particularly strange, in and of itself, tailor-made for Hollywood. Sort of a cross between Rocky, a chicks in prison exploitation flick, and Victory. But what makes the whole thing seem all the more surreal are the details of the match that make it sound like something right out of HBO's infamous prison drama:

The match took place in a makeshift ring in the grounds of the Klong Prem prison, in front of a crowd of about 700 people, including a few prison inmates.

Transvestites released from their cells for the event paraded in high heels around the ring with placards.

Apparently, Siriporn has shown prison officials that she has "talent" and is a "changed woman," thus justifying the commencement of parole proceedings.

Album of the Day

Larks' Tongues in Aspic, by King Crimson (1973): This is one of those albums that somehow doesn't manage to live up to the sum of its parts. For my money, most of the tracks exist in superior versions elsewhere - "Exiles" and a briefer "Easy Money" on USA and the head-rippingly good double-trio versions of "The Talking Drum" and "Larks' Tongues in Aspic, Part Two" from B'BOOM. The first part of the title track drags on a bit and "Book of Saturday" doesn't really have any pop to it. In fact, that's the whole problem - it all sounds a bit to clinical and dry. The fury that invests the live version with extra life is sadly lacking.

What's Next, the Emily Bronte Centerfold?

A couple of weeks ago I talked about what to do when a favorite artist has disagreeable politics. But what if they're just plain ugly? According to this article in yesterday's New York Times, a debate is raging over the physical qualities of 19th-century author Jane Austen. Apparently, there was never a proper portrait made of her, and thus readers and scholars have been left to their own imaginations when picturing her physical features. Now a fairly crude sketch by Austen's sister is leading to some hand wringing that, to put it bluntly, Jane wasn't - as the kids would say it today - teh hawtness.

Who cares? Putting aside the observation that beauty is much more than skin deep, what would it matter? What if Austen was a bitter, vicious, angry woman festooned with boils and (to quote Monty Burns) a mighty hump? Does that change the quality of her work? Does it make it any more or less entertaining, relevant, or interesting? I can't say that it changes my view of Pride and Prejudice from my high school days.

It seems such ado about nothing. And perhaps a sad comment on our very visual, very superficial, 21st Century culture.

Chocolate Christ Sends Donohue Over the Edge

As I mentioned last week, the life-sized milk chocolate Jesus has pissed off Catholic League Bloviator-in-Chief Bill Donohue. As proof of that, read the transcript or see the video of his appearance on CNN with the artist, Cosmo Carvallo, over at Crooks & Liars. In just a few minutes, Donohue manages to threaten Carvallo with beheading and finger breakage, call Carvallo a false Christian, insult New Jersey, and artists in general "losers." You know, when some videotape from bin Laden or some similar person shows up on TV, Bill O'Reilly an his ilk are always demanding that moderate Muslim groups denounce whatever the latest pronouncement is. Where are the same demands that mainstream Catholics tell a hate-monger like Donohue to go fuck himself and stop presuming to speak for them? Isn't O'Reilly a Catholic? He could do the trick.

And, to follow up on jedi jawa's point on the initial post - yes, I'm sure that the dark brown color of the statue is pissing off some people. In addition, Donohue and company seem pissed that the statue is anatomically correct. 'cause, you know, Jesus couldn't have had naughty bits.

Album of the Day

The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, by Genesis (1974): Speaking of classic lineups, this was the last hurrah of the classic five-piece version of Genesis. Peter Gabriel would leave at the end of the tour to pursue his own solo career, while the band would regroup as a four-piece and produce two more excellent albums. There are numerous theories as to what exactly The Lamb is about, none of which have seemed completely logical to me. In fact, while The Lamb is a great album, I'd reserve the "best of the era" label for the previous effort, Selling England by the Pound.

The Multi-Faceted Face of Hooliganism

Next time you hear about rioting sports fans in Europe, don't automatically think soccer hooligans. Apparently women's volleyball can get folks pretty riled up, too:

Greek authorities have cancelled all team sports matches for two weeks after a mass brawl between rival women's volleyball fans left one man dead.

* * *

The pitched battle took place between fans of Olympiakos Piraeus and Panathinaikos near Athens.

Witnesses say about 300 fans fought using clubs, knives and stones.

Who knew?

On a related note, I haven't heard any reports of couch burning or other lunacy in Morgantown in the wake of WVU winning the NIT last night!

The Messiah That Melts In Your Mouth, Not In Your Hands

I suppose, with Big Butter Jesus on the scene, it was only a matter of time before somebody made a giant chocolate version of Christ. I am, in me best Dave Berry voice, absolutely not making this up:

A New York gallery has angered a US Catholic group with its decision to exhibit a milk chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ.

The six-foot (1.8m) sculpture, entitled "My Sweet Lord", depicts Jesus Christ naked on the cross.

The Catholic group in question is the Catholic League, which means more public bloviation from renowned blowhard/jackass Bill Donohue. That alone is reason enough to make me smile.

Copyright Craziness Redux

Over at the Conspiracy, Eugene Volokh has some thoughts on the student copyright suit against a plagiarism database company that I blogged about yesterday. As I suspected, it looks like the kids have an uphill battle in court, although for reasons different than I figured yesterday.

Album of the Day

Keys to Ascension and Keys to Ascension 2, by Yes (1996/1997): Here's a great scam to fleece the fan base - one I fell for whole hog. In 1996, Yes reformed in one of (by my count) their three "classic" lineups (Anderson, Squire, White, Howe, Wakeman) for a series of shows in San Luis Obisbo, California and to record some new material. The reunion was the first one of one of the mid-70s lineups since, well, the mid 70s. A live album memorializing the occasion was appropriate. In addition, there was a full album's worth of new material. What to do? Most folks would say put the live stuff on one 2-disc set, release the new material separately. But no, the Yes guys decided to stretch the material together over two 2-disc sets, each one containing live and studio material.

It's hardly a rip off, but it still grinds my gears a bit. The new material stands on its own merits pretty well. It's hardly Close to the Edge or Relayer, but it's far closer to classic Yes than anything put out during the Rabin years. And, honestly, while the live stuff isn't my favorite performance, I would have bought the separate live set, too (hell, I own the DVD anyway!).

Copyright Craziness

Two interesting copyright blurbs crossed my path today. Both could (potentially) serve as object lessons about the overreach of current law.

First, the company that owns the rights to George Orwell's 1984 (it bought the rights from his estate in 1981) is considering suing the guy who made the pro-Obama ad parody of the classic Apple commercial. Orwell's novel remains in copyright protection (assuming no further extensions - hardly a given) until 2044. "But wait," you're saying, "isn't ad really a knock off of the Apple commercial in the first place?" Yes, but that ad wasn't blessed by the copyright holders either:

After Apple aired its Mac introductory ad during Super Bowl XVII, Rosenblum sent a 'cease and desist' letter to the computer maker, she said in yesterday's statement. 'When the Apple 'Big Brother' television commercial was aired during the 1984 Super Bowl telecast, we immediately objected to this unauthorized commercial use of the novel, and sent a 'cease-and-desist' letter both to Apple and to its ad agency,' Rosenblum said. 'The commercial never aired on television again.'

OK, fine. Apple didn't really have a reason to fight it at the time - they got the bump and PR they needed, no need to risk court action. "But wait," you're saying now, "the pro-Obama ad was political speech and parody on top of that - won't the First Amendment protect him?" Right off the top of my head, I'd say yes, as the copyright holders seem to realize:

'The political ad copies a prior commercial infringement of our copyright,' said Rosenblum in a statement. 'We recognize the legal issues inherent under the First Amendment and the copyright law as to political expression of opinion, but we want the world at large to know that we take our copyright ownership of one of the world's great novels very seriously.'

In other words, "keep your virtual mouth shut, or else."

Next, this article from the Washington Post, comes word that several student are suing a plagiarism detection company:

The lawsuit, filed this week in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, seeks $900,000 in damages from the for-profit service known as Turnitin. The service seeks to root out cheaters by comparing student term papers and essays against a database of more than 22 million student papers as well as online sources and electronic archives of journals. In the process, the student papers are added to the database.

* * *

'All of these kids are essentially straight-A students, and they have no interest in plagiarizing,' said Robert A. Vanderhye, a McLean attorney representing the students pro bono. 'The problem with [Turnitin] is the archiving of the documents. They are violating a right these students have to be in control of their own property.'

This raises at least two issues in my mind. First, who owns the copyright to student works? It doesn't seem clear to me that the students do. Are student works similar to works for hire, in which the copyright resides with the mother company or government works in which the copyright resides with the agency for which it was produced? For example, I do not control the copyrights in the briefs I write, my office does.

Second, assuming some of the material is plagiarized (which, from the story, it doesn't appear to be), what copyright claim could the kids make? If it does have copyright protection, they would violated it themselves by copying it, right?

Both of these cases make me think that the only area of law that's more interesting than criminal law is copyright.

Album of the Day

Just a Game, by Triumph (1979): If Triumph is a poor man's Rush, then this is their Moving Pictures. It was a favorite of mine back when I was a kid, but I only finally picked it up on CD last year. Each of the 8 tracks work very well, in their own way. The rockers ("Movin' On" and "Lay it on the Line") rock, there's a good screaming blues tune ("Young Enough to Cry"), a good laid back blues tune ("Suitcase Blues"), a patented Rik Emmett acoustic piece ("Fantasy Serenade"), and even a couple of near-prog tracks ("Just a Game" and "Hold On"). In fact, I think what appeals to me so much about this album is its variety. That and the cool "rock and roll star" board game in the liner notes (although, I'll note, Gilgamesh did it a few years earlier).

Sympathy for the Devil

Earlier this week, I watched an excellent flick called Downfall. Released in 2004, and nominated for Best Foreign Language Film in 2005, it tells the story of the last days of the Third Reich from within Hitler's bunker. It gained notoriety in Germany for being the first film made there in decades in which an actor portrayed Hitler (as opposed to using newsreel footage, for example). That actor, Austrian Bruno Ganz, delivers an amazing performance, bringing fully to life one of history's great monsters. Really, it's matched only by Ulrich Matthes's uber-creepy portrayal of Hitler henchman Joseph Goebbels.*

It being a movie about Hitler, there's also the question of whether comes off too sympathetically in the end. To be sure, the narrow focus of the film precludes extensive discussion of Hitler's reign. With the exception of a brief scene in 1942 (and bookend documentary interviews with Hitler's secretary), the film takes place entirely between Hitler's birthday on April 20, 1945 and the surrender of German forces to the Soviets on May 2. But the portrayal of Hitler in the film doesn't leave a lot of doubt that he's anything other than a psychotic killer.

While the events of the Holocaust aren't specifically depicted or mentioned, for example, Hitler's musing that history will remember him fondly for dealing with the Jews leaves little doubt of his thoughts. As the military situation collapses around him and the Soviets grind on towards the bunker, Hitler rants and rages about how his generals and soldiers are worthless betrayers and repeatedly brushes off concerns for the plight of ordinary Germans as deserving their fate. I tend to agree with what Roger Ebert said in his review in responding to, among others, this piece in the New Yorker:

Admiration I did not feel. Sympathy I felt in the sense that I would feel it for a rabid dog, while accepting that it must be destroyed. I do not feel the film provides "a sufficient response to what Hitler actually did," because I feel no film can, and no response would be sufficient. All we can learn from a film like this is that millions of people can be led, and millions more killed, by madness leashed to racism and the barbaric instincts of tribalism.

What sympathy is generated for Hitler comes from portraying his complete detachment from reality. The war, clearly, is lost by the time Hitler's birthday comes around. Members of his inner circle are pleading with him to follow them out of Berlin. Artillery shells thunder outside the bunker and the nearby Chancellery building. The distance of the Soviets from the center of Berlin is measured in meters, not kilometers. Still, Hitler futilely consults his maps, moving units around that either have ceased to exist or are barely capable of retreating, much less counterattacking. At one point, he fawns over Albert Speer's scale model version of a reconstructed Berlin, musing that, in essence, the city must be destroyed in order to be rebuilt in greatness (indeed, a chorus of "Best of All Possible Worlds" from Candide wouldn't be out of place).

In the end, I think the filmmakers intend their audiences to be fairly smart about the movie. It's goal is not to provide a comprehensive overview of Hitler's life and times, but a depiction of a specific time and place. I'm reminded of some of the IMDB comments to The Motorcycle Diaries, which criticize the film for not showing the violent authoritarian Guevara would become. They miss the point. A movie isn't responsible for anything beyond it's own metes and bounds. It's not required to be a full-blooded educational tool, if that's not what the filmmakers want it to be.

Judged on its own merits, as historical drama, as a war film, and as a psychological study of several days at the end of an historical era, Downfall is one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.

* Still, every time he came on screen, I heard Timmy from South Park calling after his pet turkey!

Album of the Day

Jazz from Hell, by Frank Zappa (1986): Apropos of my discussion about computers and music, here's Zappa's first in-depth work with the Synclavier. Rather than rehash what I wrote about this album last year, I'll pass on a couple of extra facts. First, the album actually won a Grammy in 1988 for Best Rock Instrumental performance (one wonders what the other nominees were - this stuff is just too weird for the Grammy folks). Second, in spite of being entirely instrumental, the album got a parental advisory sticker from the RIAA, presumably because of a song titled "G-Spot Tornado."

Welcome to the Caaaarrrr of Tomoooorrrrrooooowww!

Last weekend marked the debut of NASCAR's hopelessly misnamed "Car of Tomorrow" in the Nextel Cup. In spite of the name and the hype, the car is decades out of date compared to other modern race cars or, indeed, the average street car. As David Phillips points out over at SpeedTV.com:

Nor did the . . . 'Car of Tomorrow' provide much solace for those hoping NASCAR will reverse field on more than five decades of technophobia. With their carburetors, rudimentary electronics and acres of sheetmetal, the CoT’s closest brush with contemporary (let alone future) automotive trends are its Avenger-, Camry-, Fusion- and Impala-headlight/grill decals.

As Phillips makes clear, the real cars of tomorrow were on display at other locales:

Leading off, alphabetically and chronologically, was an ALMS’ Twelve Hours of Sebring themed on motorsports’ linkages to the automotive industry. Whether it’s the GT2 Porsches that spend part of their gestation on the production line with the 911 Carreras, Targas and Turbos destined for your local doctor, lawyer or hedge fund manager, or the ALMS’ commitment to alternative fuels now (be it “clean” diesel or E10) and in the future (E50 within 18 to 24 months; bio-diesel and perhaps hydrogen fuel later), Sebring celebrated racing as an incubator/proving ground for cutting-edge technology with direct applications to the broader automotive industry.

* * *

If anything, the [IRL] XM Satellite Radio 300 IndyCar race was even 'greener' than the 'Mobil 1 Twelve Hours of Sebring.' From the Honda Hybrid pace car and all 20 Honda-powered Dallaras running on pure ethanol to Jeff Simmons’ sound bite on ABC’s 'World News Tonight' that he prefers 'getting our fuel from the Midwest rather than the Middle East,' the IndyCar season opener was cloaked in green . . .

What's NASCAR got that the ALMS and IRL lack? Fans. And lots of them. Sadly.

Album of the Day

Intersections [1985-2005], by Bruce Hornsby (2006): This 4-disc box set is an absolute treasure trove of goodies for Bruce fans. Disc 1 is ironically called "Top 90 Time" and contains the "hits," such as they are. But, in true Bruce fashion, most of the tracks are live or alternate versions from the original releases (the version of "The Way It Is" is solo piano, for instance). Disc 2 contains a lot of solo piano stuff and collaborations, including the Olympic tune "Barcelona Mona" with Branford Marsalis, both a Grateful Dead cover and the Dead (with Bruce) playing "The Valley Road," a high-octane bluegrass version of the same tune, and a ripping "Darlin' Cory" with Ricky Skaggs. Discs 3 and 4 are all "by request," fan and band favorites. Most cuts are live or solo, but some aren't, so here is where the most duplication of prior releases come in. Still, over all, there just so much good stuff here that's it's almost unseemly to complain.

This Means David Jackson is the Antichrist

Via Pandagon, here is a YouTube video in which a very uptight person explains to a church what makes music "Godly" or sinful. The short answer: if it makes you want to dance, it's not Godly. Or, as Amanda puts it:

The first part of the video, he tries to explain the difference between godly and ungodly melodies, which is a little hard to understand, but it seems that the main signal that a melody is ungodly is it has any kind of soul.

That first part of the video includes a demonstration of Godly versus unGodly melodies on a sax. The "good" melody is bland as white bread on a rainy day. The "bad" melody, on the other hand, sounds like something David Jackson would unleash all over a Van der Graf Generator album.

But the meat of the video is the preacher's extolling the benefits of the march, while demonstrating the Devil's rhythms - boogie woogie, backbeats, and break beats. Exhibit A in the unGodly musical world? "Heart and Soul." Such non-marchy rhythms, he explains:

That’s not gospel music. It might be good for Elvis, it might be good for Jimmy Swaggart, and a whole bunch of other people, but that’s not gospel music.

There's something inherently amusing about a fundy Christian taking pot shot at Lonesome Cowboy Jim, but we'll leave that for another day. What becomes increasingly clear is that, for the preacher, he doesn't prefer march tempos for some aesthetic reason. March tempos are Godly because they propel Christian soldiers, marching unto war. More militant Christian militarism, just what we need!

The whole thing is alternately humorous and pathetic, as this poor guy - who clearly enjoys playing the "bad" stuff (he probably sneaks hits of "A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers" late at night) - tries to convince himself and the congregation of the dangers of enjoying most modern music. Again, from Amanda:

I do sort of agree with Ives that backbeats and upbeats and every kind of toe-tapping, hip-shaking kind of tune does in fact present a real threat to a rigid, fundamentalist worldview. Pleasure and beauty are constant threats, because they give people something to live for, and a sense of self that gives them space to question authority. If anything comforts me in the face of the increasingly agitated fundamentalism in America, it’s that they have no clue how to compete with the pleasures of living available to most of us, pleasures that help assist us in telling them all to fuck off.

Amen. If life in this world is only a preparation for some kind of eternal paradise, than the pleasures and beauties of this world - which might make one hang around in it - must be tools of the devil.

All This Machinery Making Modern Music . . .

Yesterday's New York Times had an interesting article about the march of musical technology. It was about the increasing use, off-Broadway, of computer programs that play back entire sections of scores, replicating all the various instrumental parts. An operator keys in the rhythm, so as to allow the "instruments" to speed up or slow down along with the conductor's whims. This allows the orchestra to sound fuller than its small numbers, but doesn't completely resort to using canned music. Union rules are keeping the tech off Broadway for now, but it's sure to make it in the long run (as sampling synthesizers already have).

I'm not sure what I think about this development. Part of me has never been a fan of "live" music being produced by anything other than live musicians. But modern tech began blurring the lines long ago. Since I've gotten some schooling in the history of musical synthesis and how synths work, I've softened my stance a bit. I used to not be able to stand drum machines, but now that I've played around with one, I recognize them as just another kind of instrument. So, I guess a person who creates tunes using pre-recorded loops can't exactly champion live-performance purity, can he?

Album of Last Friday

Images and Words, by Dream Theater (1992): Last week, I was called out on the WV Blogger board for calling someone of college age a "kid." I defended myself by invoking Crotchety Old Man Syndrome and that, therefore, anyone younger than I am is a "kid," college age versions probably "damn kids." What can I say, thinking about college makes me feel old. This album makes me think of college, as that's when my brother introduced me to Dream Theater. Looking over the disc at work the other day, I realized that was 15 years ago! DAMN KIDS!

Oh yeah, and it's the paradigmatic example of progressive metal, blah blah blah . . .

Album of the Day

Hot, by Squirrel Nut Zippers (1996): Back in college, jedi jawa and I had sort of a bilateral musical preaching going on. I plowed him with Marillion albums, and in return he stocked me with several Squirrel Nut Zippers albums. I might have gotten this one myself, as it was their breakout album (remember "Hell"? Sure you do!), although they quickly plummeted from public consciousness. It wasn't for lack of quality, as their updated variant of early 20th century pop, jazz, and swing is pretty cool. Certainly a step above the similar (yet very different) neo-swing bands that peaked popularly about the same time.

Mass Suicide, a Decade Later

Remember the Heaven's Gate cult? They were the bunch who offed themselves in San Diego in order to catch a ride on a UFO hidden in the tail of the Hale-Bopp comet. That mass suicide, which so captured the public imagination at the time, occurred ten years ago next week. In advance of the anniversary, LA Weekly has an extensive article based on new interviews with Rio, who left the cult just before the suicide because he had another mission to complete. That mission, being undertaken as we speak, is to witness to the world that the Heaven's Gate leader, who called himself DO,* was actually the second coming of Christ. It's a long article, but it's a fascinating look inside a cult from a true believer who managed to avoid his brethren's fate.

* And whose end-of-days ravings are immortalized in Porcupine Tree's "Last Chance to Evacuate Planet Earth Before It Is Recycled," from Lightbulb Sun.

An the Propogandist Is . . .

Well, that mystery is finally solved. The author of the now famous anti-Hillary ad, a reworking of Ridley Scott's famous "1984" ad for Apple, has revealed himself over at Huffington Post. It was not done at the behest of the Obama campaign, tho' the guy admits he's a supporter and had some ties (now severed) to the campaign.

With that resolved, I'll say the same thing I did in the WV Blogger Board thread on this topic - I don't get it. It's moderately clever (tho' it replicates whole chunks of the original ad), but doesn't seem to make a real point. If Hilary is Big Brother, i.e. non-Apple computers, that makes Obama the Mac I guess, right? It's the upstart Macs versus the world. Well, guess what - it's 20-plus years later and Mac is still losing the battle, snarky TV ads notwithstanding. If that's the fate Obama's supporters want for him, he needs a new batch of supporters.

Considering Commas

Earlier this month, the DC Circuit threw out some of the District's gun control laws, embracing a individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment in the process. While much analysis has been made of the decision from legal and historical angles, this column in today's LA Times takes another approach - a grammatical one. Specifically, an English professor from the University of Illinois takes issue with the court's interpretation of the Amendment's commas:

The court dismissed the prefatory clause about militias as not central to the amendment and concluded that the operative clause prevents the government from interfering with an individual's right to tote a gun. Needless to say, the National Rifle Assn. is very happy with this interpretation. But I dissent. Strict constructionists, such as the majority on the appeals court, might do better to interpret the 2nd Amendment based not on what they learned about commas in college but on what the framers actually thought about commas in the 18th century.

I suppose it's only natural, if we're going to wed ourselves to the meaning of the Constitution when it was passed, to take a look at the grammar of the time as well. I would point out, however, to the good professor that one of the grammar texts he cites as being "popular . . . in the framer's day" was, by his own writing, published in 1795. That would be eight years after the writing of the Constitution and seven years after ratification.

A 1795 grammar book has about as much relevance to the original meaning of the Second Amendment's commas as that dang furrin' law that gets the conservatives so upset!

Album of the Day

A History of Madness, by Thinking Plague (2003): When it comes to "weird" music in my collection, Thinking Plague has no peer. While their 1998 breakthrough release In Extremis contained a fairly accessible chunk of RIO/avant prog, a lot of the rest of their catalog is pretty out there (I'd use parts of their first album to drive people from a room). More of this disc is on the weird side, to the point that I don't find much of it very compelling. Case in point, "Least Aether for Saxophone & Le Gouffre," 8+ minutes solo sax followed by soundscapes. Not really my thing. I will say, however, that they produced one of the best Duhbya-era song titles - "Our 'Way of Life' and 'War on Terra'". Of course, it's an instrumental!

Album of the Day

Peter Gabriel (aka, Security), by Peter Gabriel (1982): Apropos of yesterday's post, of course. To be honest, it occurred to me yesterday that I was into the Hs in the A-Z and didn't remember the run of early Gabriel albums. Since they all have the same name (technically, this one got the name Security for the US market, but it's the fourth eponymous elsewhere), they would have come in order all at once. I realized that I'd whiffed on those by not renaming them in my inventory program. So, I caught up today. As I said yesterday, this isn't my favorite of the early Gabriel albums, but it contains a few real gems: "The Rhythm of the Heat," "San Jacinto," and "Shock the Monkey" among them.

My Cases Are Never This Fun

From the Seventh Circuit today comes the kind of case a lawyer can only dream about:

Meet Pull My Finger® Fred. He is a white, middle-aged, overweight man with black hair and a receding hairline, sitting in an armchair wearing a white tank top and blue pants. Fred is a plush doll and when one squeezes Fred’s extended finger on his right hand, he farts. He also makes somewhat crude, somewhat funny statements about the bodily noises he emits, such as ‘Did somebody step on a duck?’ or ‘Silent but deadly.’

Fartman could be Fred’s twin. Fartman, also a plush doll, is a white, middle-aged, overweight man with black hair and a receding hairline, sitting in an armchair wearing a white tank top and blue pants. Fartman (as his name suggests) also farts when one squeezes his extended finger; he too cracks jokes about the bodily function. Two of Fartman’s seven jokes are the same as two of the 10 spoken by Fred.

How did these two flatulent fellas end up in Federal Court?

Needless to say, Tekky Toys, which manufactures Fred, was not happy when Novelty, Inc., began producing Fartman, nor about Novelty’s production of a farting Santa doll sold under the name Pull-My-Finger Santa.

In short, Tekky sued Novelty for violating their copyright in Pull My Finger Fred. Could is possibly be worth it? As the court notes:

Somewhat to our surprise, it turns out that there is a niche market for farting dolls, and it is quite lucrative.

Who knew? Sadly, for Novelty, they lost at trial and were rebuffed by the Seventh Circuit. Alas, their arguments stood less of a chance of success than the proverbial farts in a windstorm.

Innocence Faded

Over at Crime & Federalism, Norm takes a crack at answering a question that lots of non-lawyers have of criminal defense attorneys: Does Innocence Matter? More specifically, does it matter to an attorney if his client tells him he's innocent? Norm argues that it doesn't, because it doesn't really have a bearing on his job of testing the prosecution's case and seeing whether the charges can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. As to trials, Norm writes:

No one is redeemed at trial. Nothing is made right in a criminal case. The murdered victim remains dead; the violated child still shrieks in shame and rage. Criminal law is not about healing. It is all a simple matter of proof.

That's true, and as Norm further points out, no attorney can ever really know if his client is guilty or innocent. It always comes down to trusting the evidence and whether you can trust your client to be honest with you. Since so many criminal defendants are, to put it politely, unreliable narrators, it may be a fool's errand to try and sort it all out given its irrelevance to the judicial process.

A New Level of Creepy

I'd read about "purity balls" before yesterday, but this column from yesterday's USA Today adds a new level of creepy to the practice. As the column explains:

Tuxedo-clad dads promise to 'war for' their daughters' 'purity,' as reported in February's Glamour magazine. Daughters, in turn, vow abstinence until marriage. The fathers slip 'purity rings' on the fingers of their misty-eyed daughters, the elegantly attired couples drift across the floor for a 'first dance,' this one-on-one time with Dad is referred to as a 'date,' and wedding cake is served for dessert. For post-dinner entertainment, a corps of adolescent ballerinas clad in white tulle performs a 'ceremonial dance' to the song [']Always Be Your Baby.[']

That's creepy enough, but now there's a line of apparel to go along with this fabulous new trend:

Another of those 'chastity chic' T-shirts, distributed by California-based Wait Wear, proclaims: 'Notice: No Trespassing on this Property. My Father Is Watching.'

Ewwwww. Forget the prospect of Big Father watching a girl's every move, is anybody else freaked out beyond all belief that they're explicitly claiming a woman's body as "property?" I thought we did away with that convention in the last century! I sometimes roll my eyes when feminists see the big bad patriarchy standing behind every social trend, but I'd say the evidence is pretty clear in this case.

Supreme Court Secrets Exposed!

Well, OK, not really, but yesterday's USA Today had a neat little article about the tradition-bound workings of the Supreme Court and how much slower life is at the Court compared to Capitol Hill. Two bits in the story caught my eye:

By custom, the first thing a lawyer at the lectern to argue a case must say is 'Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the court.' When Chief Justice John Roberts was an advocate, he would write that phrase at the top of his legal pad, in case he suddenly drew a blank.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who worries about mental vapor lock when I go to court. When I argue in front of the Fourth Circuit, I have a three-ring binder with a few pages of notes about important dates, facts, and legal cites for the case. But on the front page, in a big-ass font, I have "may it please the court," "I represent . . .," and the intro for my case. I've not frozen up yet, but I surely will and I'll have something to fall back on when I do.

The other thing, which I take a bit of exception to, is:

'There is nothing like the formality, and even the rigidity, of the process,' says Washington lawyer Laurence E. Gold. 'When you step up there (to the lectern), you know you have the assigned time of 30 minutes and not a second more. There's no spontaneity. You don't want to breach any of the unwritten rules of place, whatever they are.'

The emphasis is mine. I think that's just plain wrong. Appellate arguments, it seems to me, are often more spontaneous than trials, particularly civil trials where each side has been deluged by discovery and all the witnesses have been deposed in triplicate. At an oral argument, there's no telling which particular issue or sub-issue will catch a judge's interest. Sometimes it won't be the most important issue, and the entire oral argument may lead down an entirely different path than the advocate envisioned in prep.

Gabriel Goldmine on YouTube

I'm a sucker for musical "behind the scenes" stories when it comes to albums. Part of it's peeling away the layers of a song and discovering that really cool fifth guitar riff buried in the mix. Part of it's the welcome knowledge that lots of my favorite artists jam aimless for hours in search of material, just like I do (if Marillion produces only 55 minutes worth of album-worthy material from 6 months of constant jamming, what chance do I have?).

Over the weekend, somebody on the Genesis newsgroup posted a link to a YouTube video (in five parts) of an episode of the British TV series The South Bank Show from 1982 about Peter Gabriel's fourth self-titled album (aka Security). The show followed him for about 18 months during the writing, recording, and mixing of the album as Gabriel built several songs from world-music rhythmic bases into full songs. Footage includes Gabriel's band in the studio and on stage. It's really interesting, particularly if you have an interesting in Gabriel's music. But even if not, it's a cool insight into a very creative mind.

At the very end of part 5, Gabriel discusses the mixed critical reaction to the album (I prefer the third one, aka Melt, personally) and is pleased to note the positive reactions to the "black music" press, including this beaut:

. . . Sadly, the honkie poseurs of the rock press don't agree . . .

Links here: parts 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5.

On a sadder note, either A&E or Bravo used to show episodes of The South Bank Show back in the day when they actually showed something other than the reality TV crap everybody else peddles. Ah, those were the days.

Album of the Day

Harbour of Tears, by Camel (1996): In honor of St. Patrick's day, here's an album by English proggers Camel (by this point, basically guitarist Andy Lattimer and whatever side men he hired on). Of course, given recent developments, maybe they're more Irish than we thought. Regardless, this is a concept album about Irish immigrants fleeing to a better life in America. As the back of the CD tells it:

Cobh Harbour is a beautiful deep-water port in County Cork, Ireland. It was the last sight of Ireland for hundreds upon thousands of fractured families who departed her shores for fates unknown.

They call it the Harbour of Tears.

Given my heritage, I can't help but wonder if my ancestors were in Lattimer's mind when he put this album together. It's not my favorite Camel disc, but it's got some really nice classic Lattimer guitar work and is a really good listen.

Album of the Day

Hamburger Concerto, by Focus (1974): Continuing along on the oddly-named album theme, here's one of the top releases from the kings of Dutch prog. Luckily, it's an instrumental disc (mostly - there's some yodelling), so there's no attempt to slap burgerlicious lyrics on these tracks. That doesn't stop them from cleverly subdividing the epic title track, however: a - Starter, b - Rare, c - Medium I, d - Medium II, e - Well Done, f - One for the Road. The music is solid symphonic prog, with lots of great keyboard and guitar interplay, with some extra medieval elements thrown in here and there. Oh, and in tracking down a review of the disc, I found a YouTube video with about 5 minutes of the title track!

Next They'll Call It Soccer!

When Major League Soccer kicked off, it featured a host of different rules that were seen as trying to "Americanize" the world's game - playoffs, a count-down clock, college draft, etc. One of the more loathed changes was the shootout: if the game was tied after 90 minutes, the two teams engaged in something like penalty shots in hockey until a winner was determined. The goal (so to speak) was to eliminate draws, an anathema to American sports fans, and hopeful that it would encourage attacking soccer. Purists weren't happy with the shootout, even though it was an improvement over the traditional penalty kick situation. MLS ditched the shootouts in 2000 and finally consented to draws in 2004 under pressure from FIFA.

Apparently the failure of MLS's experiment hasn't made it across the pond, as the English Football League (the divisions below the top-flight Premier League) are apparently considering using penalty kicks to decide games that are tied at the end of regulation. If these comments are any indication, the fans will revolt at such a change. What's a little unfair, however, is the excessive "the Americans are coming" screeds, which ignore the fact that MLS has done away with its experiments and plays the world's game now. However, those fans are upset with good reason - there's really no need to avoid draws in league play. Knock-out tournament games are another matter, of course, and so far there has been no good solution in those competitions for avoiding the dreaded PK shootout.

Personally, I don't have a problem with tie games, assuming they are the product of two relatively equal teams playing hard to win. What drives me nuts is the idea of one team playing for a draw because it lacks the talent/skill/strategery to win the game. There's no same in two teams battling to a draw. There's not a whole lot of honor in playing not to lose (and it produces some boring soccer, to boot). The only way to avoid those kind of situations, however, is to eliminate draws altogether and let 'em play until one side wins, ala basketball or baseball. Both teams would play harder and more offensively, I think, if one of them had to win it.

Art v. Politics

On the New York Times The Score blog yesterday, composer Michael Gordon asks the musical question, "What If I Like Your Politics but Don’t Like Your Art?" Gordon elaborates:

Or put a simpler way, would you want a fantastic painting hanging on your wall that was made by a Nazi? It may sound like a bizarre question, but anyone with Carl Orff, Richard Strauss or Herbert von Karajan CDs in their collection should give it some thought. The throngs lined up around the block to see Karajan conduct the Berlin Philharmonic, as many New Yorkers did on repeated occasions, should have asked themselves this. And if we care about this question, do we need to examine the politics of other composers, like Wagner, whose views we know, along with perhaps Beethoven and Bach, whose views we know less about?

Non-musical examples abound, as well (Voltaire was an anti-Semite - does that ruin Candide?) Gordon appears to conclude that art and politics are both better off if they remain separate, although he wonders if he's been guilty of doing just that.

I'm not convinced that it's either necessary nor wise for artists to try and wall off their political views from their art, or that it's completely possible. Art generally reflects, in some fashion, the world of the artist who created it. The world, particularly in times like these, is a highly political place. It's probably harder for an artist to block it out than it is to let it in.

Where art mixing with politics falls down is when the political becomes the motivating reason for being artistic at all. If the politics comes first and gets jammed into the art, the art suffers. If, on the other hand, the art grows naturally and absorbs some politics along the way, it's probably OK. Obviously, mileage may vary based on the skill of the artist.

West Virginia, Bloggin' Mama . . .

As you can see from this lengthy list compiled by jedi jawa, there's quite a community of West Virginia bloggers out there. If you're one of them (or even an expat, like senor jawa) and want to mix it up with your fellow Mountain Staters, head on over to the (yet again) newly reconstituted WV Bloggers Board. We don't bite - much.

Album of the Day

H to He Who, Am the Only One, by Van der Graaf Generator (1970): This is, without a doubt the oddest name for an album I own (in English, anyway). It has something to do with the fusion of hydrogen and helium in the Sun. Since I'm a lawyer with a degree his history, that doesn't mean much to me. And it doesn't seem to have much to do with the material on the album, unless the space-bound "Pioneers Over c." were setting their controls for the heart of the Sun (so to speak). Since my initial review over on Ground and Sky I've warmed up to this disc considerably, especially "The Emperor in His War Room" and "Lost."

Peeved, Perturbed, and Pissed in Persia

Although most of the reviews I've read of 300, the adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novel of the same name about the Battle of Thermopylae, it's done big box office in its first week and jedi jawa enjoyed it. However, at least one group is giving the film a big thumbs down (or, as Sneaking Into the Movies gave Dirty Larry, the finger) - Persians, i.e., Iranians.

You see, the movie is about a heroic stand of about 300 (hence the title) Spartan soldiers at a narrow mountain pass against a massive Persian army under the command of the great Persian emperor Xerxes. The Persians won the battle, but at great cost, and it allowed Sparta's allied Greeks to escape, fight another day, and win the war. So, in other words, the Persians are the bad guys. This is not going over too well in Tehran, given the current geo-political situation:

Everywhere else I went, from the dentist to the flower shop, Iranians buzzed with resentment at the film's depictions of Persians, adamant that the movie was secretly funded by the U.S. government to prepare Americans for going to war against Iran. "Otherwise why now, if not to turn their people against us?" demanded an elderly lady buying tuberoses. "Yes, truly it is a grave offense," I said, shaking my own bunch of irises.

Oy. In addition, the film's release coincided with an ancient Persian festival related to Zoroastrianism that taps deeply into national pride. Wonder when the premier in Tehran will be?

Album of Yesterday

Gotterdammerung, by Asgard (1991): Most of the time I try and use this post to pimp some artist that I think (know?) most of you have never heard of. This one is a bit different. Consider it a public service, as this disc has the coveted position of Worst Album I Own. Asgard is an Italian band plowing the same fertile neo-prog field as early Marillion and IQ. Musically, there's nothing terribly offensive going on, it's just very uninspired and "been there, heard that." Had the lyrics been Italian, I would pass the disc off as merely underwhelming. However, the English lyrics, spouted by a vocalist who is obviously straining, are some of the most cliched prog lyrics I've ever heard. To wit:

and under the same sky lived together
men, giants, demigods, fairies, elves, ghosts,
speaking animals, trolls, dragons and magicians

That's from "New Myths," but it sounds like a tired argument about the artsy pretentiousness of prog. It's the lyrics that drag this album down from merely bad to abysmal self parody. At least there's one instrumental track.

Album of the Day

Giant on the Box, by Gentle Giant (2004): This isn't technically an album, but the bonus disc to a DVD compilation containing the sound track of two pieces of concert footage. Both are from during Gentle Giant's tour for The Power and the Glory. The first is a concert filmed for German TV, lasting about 45 minutes. The second is a brief set recorded for TV in San Jose, California. Unfortunately, the material between the two is redundant. However, the concerts themselves are spectacular, a true example of a prog giant (heh!) at its best. The way these five guys switch effortlessly between instruments, deftly handle 4-part harmony, and play some of the most complex tunes of prog's golden age is incredible.

Hitler Youth for the 21st Century

Over the weekend, I saw a really disturbing film. It was not one of these nouveau slasher flicks or the latest Japanese monster movie remake. It was a documentary. A quiet, not at all flashy documentary. It was not a Michael Moore-style muckraking piece. It just involved a camera and a very compelling subject.

The name of the film is Jesus Camp and the subject is a Missouri woman named Becky Fisher. Fisher runs a sort of outreach program and summer camp for young evangelical Christian kids (hence the title). She is driven. She is charismatic. And she is frightening as hell. Fisher is not simply a church leader. She is not simply a teacher, trying to impart the story and tenets of her faith to a new generation. She is a recruiter, assembling an army for God. What is most disturbing is that Fisher is completely up front about what she is doing and why she is doing it. Just when you start thinking that she sounds like a fundamentalist imam in a Saudi madrassa, she says:

It's no wonder, with that kind of intense training and discipling, that those young people are ready to kill themselves for the cause of Islam. I wanna see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam. I wanna see them as radically laying down their lives for the Gospel as they are over in Pakistan and Israel and Palestine and all those different places, you know, because we have... excuse me, but we have the truth!

Granted, her faith is pure and genuine - she is not using religion as a tool to get rich or build her own empire (Ted Haggard shows up and fills that role, making many ironic comments in light of his recent troubles). It also a bit twisted up with some decidedly rose-colored ideas about the world:

He [President Bush] has really brought some real credibility, um, to the Christian faith.

Lines like that make you laugh out loud and even feel a bit sorry for her. But that doesn't keep her from being dangerous. In the end, its the kids, so ready to march off the cliff for a cause they can't possibly understand, for whom you feel sorry.

A note to the IMDB commenters - you cannot judge the quality of a documentary by the repulsiveness of its subject. Many folks given the film a 1 or 2 rating (out of 10) and then praise it in the comments, noting their objection to Fisher and her tactics. If anything, that shows the quality of the film and isn't a reason to downrate it.

A Farewell to Arms (Control)?

Federal courts have such great timing. You're not supposed to drop big news on folks on Friday afternoons - it'll get lost in the weekend news hinterlands and disappear for all time. Nonetheless, the DC Circuit dropped a bit of a bomb last Friday, handing down a 2-1 decision striking down a hunk of the District's gun control regulations. In doing so, the court may have teed up the issue of the meaning of the Second Amendment in a way that the Supreme Court can't avoid.

The Second Amendment, for those who haven't reviewed it lately, says:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

That, sentence, due to its odd construction, has led scholars and courts to split into two groups when it comes to the meaning of the Amendment. On one side are the "collective right" theorists, who argue that the key phrase is "a well regulated militia," which limits the right to possession of arms in connection with some sort of organized fighting force. On the other side are the "individual right" folks, who argue that the "right of the the People . . ." language controls and that the stuff in the beginning is more aspirational than anything else.

While this debate has raged away in academia, the Supreme Court has been largely silent. Prior cases dealing with the Second Amendment are rare and don't address the issue head-on. For years, it was widely assumed, outside of the NRA, that the collective rights interpretation was controlling. A few years ago, the Fifth Circuit handed down a case that adopted the individual right theory, but ultimately upheld the defendant's firearm possession conviction, so it didn't make much of a splash.

This new DC comes to the same conclusion and adopts the individual right theory, basically concluding that citizens have a right to possess firearms in their homes. Unlike the earlier Fifth Circuit decision, the DC case actually strikes down a piece of gun control legislation. That might not only inspire further proceedings by the losing parties, but maybe it might interest the new-look Supreme Court. If the Supremes would take the issue and resolve it with some clarity, it could have a huge impact across the country.

For more discussion about the DC case than you can shake a stick at, see this collection of posts over at Volokh Conspiracy and this post from Jack Balkin. For a surprisingly rare negative opinion, see this piece at History News Network.

Album of Last Friday

Garden Shed, by England (1977): England is a bit of an odd band, chronologically speaking. This, their debut release (only 1978's The Last of the Jubilees followed), came out several years past the peak of prog's commercial growth and just as punk was warming up to kick the ever living shit out of the genre. Garden Shed has a lot about it that the punkers despised - long songs, instrumental noodling, artsy-fartsy lyrics. From a prog standpoint, however, it is also fairly derivative of what came before (Yes and Genesis, in particular). Don't get me wrong - what they do, they do very well (the epic closer "Poisoned Youth" in particular), but there is a bit of "been there, heard that" about them. As it is, the hard-to-find disc from the late 70s has a certain cache to it that the same music wouldn't obtain had it come out 10 or 15 years later.

New Tune

It's been a while, but I finally finished up some new music this afternoon. My latest opus, "Be Resin Go Waxen," is different from the past few things I've thrown up. Rather than using bass/drum/guitar loops as a kind of "surrogate band," this one is much more electronic and less "rawk." Enjoy.

Album of the Day

Foxtrot, by Genesis (1972): One day, I will learn how to play the intro to "Watcher of the Skies" with my trusty M-Tron. I will crank the volume way up. I will rattle the windows. I will piss off my neighbors. And it will be good. :)

Good Thing Anne Didn't Badmouth Attaturk

I haven't blogged about the most recent Anne Coulter flap, mostly because it's been done to death elsewhere (if you really want my thoughts on it, they're sort of in this thread at the WV Bloggers Board). But something else popped up in the news that is an interesting parallel case study.

Coulter, in a cycle that's well known to the right-wing bomb throwers, has now turned herself (again) into the high princess of the First Amendment. It goes something like this: Coulter (or Malkin or Savage or . . .) says something dumb/inflammatory, which prompts some folks to condemn her/call for a boycott/etc., which prompts Coulter to turn around and swipe at those folks as trying to suppress her rights under the First Amendment.

That, of course, is bollocks. The First Amendment applies to government action. Period, full stop, do not pass "Go." It gives Coulter the right to say whatever she wants, but it gives others the right to chastise her for it and doesn't require anybody to give her a forum to say whatever she says. You've got a perfect right to call me a jackass, but I don't have to let you say it on my blog (I probably will, tho'). The marketplace of ideas can be a brutal place, but it's better than the alternative.

Like what the Turks have done to YouTube. Around the same time Coulter was calling John Edwards a faggot, some folks put some video on YouTube that was seriously disrespectful of Mustafa Kemal Attaturk. Ironically, some of it made the claim that Attaturk was gay. Not content to let the attackers be rebutted by loyal Turks (as apparently happened) or simply ignore them, a Turkish court ordered Internet providers in Turkey to block access to YouTube because it fostered insults to "Turkishness."*

What's the lesson in all this? I don't know. I think it's that the robust First Amendment allows blowhards like Coulter to thrive in the marketplace of ideas, but she's a small price to pay for not having to worry about insulting the national heritage.

* One wonders if Monty Python's "Eric the Half a Bee" sketch is banned in Turkey, since is comically proposes that "Kemel Attaturk had an entire menagerie called Abdul!"

What's Your Religious IQ?

An article in today's USA Today calls you dumb. Well, all of us Americans, actually. It's about how woefully ignorant many Americans are about religious matters. Not necessarily what they believe, but the history and development of their own faith, as well as the central tenets of other faiths:

Sixty percent of Americans can't name five of the Ten Commandments, and 50% of high school seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were married.

The author quoted liberally in the article argues that we need more religious education in schools, which I agree with. The problem, of course, is that so many times the faithful can't leave well enough alone and turn education into conversion.

The web version of the article has a nifty little quiz on the side where you can test your religious IQ. I got a 76 (out of 100) - not bad for a heathen.