tag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:/blogs/music-politics-and-beer?p=3Music, Politics and Beer2022-02-17T10:59:32-08:00Sanelunaticproductionsfalsetag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/69002752022-02-17T10:59:32-08:002024-02-12T03:51:31-08:00Johnny Cash's Middle Finger <p>That photo of Johnny Cash giving the middle finger is interesting </p>
<p>It’s a good photo because it is interesting </p>
<p>But I don’t get the sense that the photo enjoys wide circulation for the right reasons </p>
<p>Johnny Cash‘s middle finger is misconstrued as a heroic gesture </p>
<p>The photo is practically celebrated </p>
<p>Imitated </p>
<p>You want to be on that team </p>
<p>With Johnny Cash doing the dirty work </p>
<p>The desperate action of an exploited man </p>
<p>Flexing as such, badass </p>
<p>The middle finger, yours perhaps, we get it </p>
<p>Like an identity politic </p>
<p>Project onto it what have you </p>
<p>The middle finger </p>
<p>An identity politic that is neither principled or productive </p>
<p>The middle finger </p>
<p>The sharpest tool in the road rage tool kit </p>
<p>The devolution of good sportsmanship </p>
<p>A coded endearment towards an acceptance of continued dysfunction </p>
<p>Adults behaving badly through the ages </p>
<p>Just about everyone today likes the image of Johnny Cash giving the middle finger </p>
<p>But almost no one knows what it means </p>
<p>I didn’t know what it meant until I found out </p>
<p>The photo was taken by Jim Marshall during a performance at Folsom Prison </p>
<p>Johnny Cash was asked to take a picture for the Warden </p>
<p>You can buy a variety of merchandise with this image on it </p>
<p>You can find it on sweatshirts and mugs along Music Row in Nashville </p>
<p>It’s possible that Johnny Cash’s middle finger is more recognizable in some circles than the man himself </p>
<p>We romanticize and sensationalize prison, but it’s a business and a shit business at that </p>
<p>Lucrative for stakeholders, don’t get me wrong </p>
<p>But it’s wrong to be a stakeholder in a prison </p>
<p>And everyone likes to be right </p>
<p>A man giving the middle finger would seem to be free </p>
<p>But the United States holds a higher percentage of its population in prison than anywhere else in the civilized world </p>
<p>This free country holding 20% of the world’s prisoners today </p>
<p>The trend has only gotten worse since Johnny Cash‘s middle finger </p>
<p>Johnny Cash wasn’t a phony person </p>
<p>He recognized the situation </p>
<p>I hope his estate makes money off the crass exploitation of his middle finger </p>
<p>But it was an ineffectual protest </p>
<p>A small gesture at that </p>
<p>An interesting image none-the-less</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/67062542021-08-03T20:57:11-07:002022-05-29T05:43:36-07:00Return of Covid: The Delta Variant <p>I’m currently having a moral dilemma over how to respond to the recent uptick of Covid variant in NV County. The numbers are on the rise and I have a few shows on the calendar for this month. Should I play these shows? Should I go see show and/or participate in community events? Where does one draw the line? </p>
<p>The numbers don’t lie, but they don’t tell a clear truth either. The California Dept. of Public Health currently requires masking indoors for non-vaccinated people, but it isn’t being enforced. There is a large enough anti-vax contingent where I live, and we all know they don’t give a shit. Anti-vax people aren’t going to change their minds for anything. </p>
<p>I’m double vaxxed and more/less healthy. Put another way, I’m not concerned for my health. I am concerned for people who are vulnerable health-wise. But this is also where it gets tricky. My concern for the health of others is meaningless if not broadly shared by the wider community. From my experience with C19 – from knowing many people who contracted it, including my family – the impacts vary. It’s a wildcard, but the elderly and the ill-of-health are the most impacted (from my experience and read of the data) – particularly the unvaccinated. </p>
<p>By the numbers, Nevada County was NEVER fully onboard with Covid protocols - not even close. Throughout the first year of Covid, less than half the county even got tested and testing numbers were inflated by people like me who got tested multiple times. What does this tell us…? </p>
<p>Data collection and interpretation/ analysis has been haphazard since the beginning of Covid. To the degree we have an immunization problem, I think we can pin some blame on poor public leadership, political grandstanding, identity politics, sensationalistic media, selfishness, and ignorance amongst people who really just don’t want to know what’s going on. And despite the prevalence of strong opinions since all this started, in truth, it’s actually a very complicated situation. There are a handful of valid concerns about the vaccination too, though most of the skepticism falls flat. </p>
<p>We are still learning about C19 and will continue to do so for years to come IMO. It seems clear that getting vaccinated greatly reduces the risk of getting it, although not entirely. And apparently even vaxxed people can still transmit it, which is at heart of my dilemma. We’re not going to be completely rid of Covid no matter what we do. But, getting the vaccination shot(s) seems to be very effective. If people refuse to get vaccinated, what more can be done? </p>
<p>The venues and orgs that I work with and patronize have all taken serious steps to be a good public citizen. These are hardworking people who have serious skin in the game when it comes to maintaining a business and livelihood. I have much respect for the small businesses trying to do the right thing, but also needing to survive. Small business is not something that I take for granted. </p>
<p>That said, here I am in a grey area. What to do? It seems like those doing the right thing and making sacrifices are the people who are the most punished (outside of anyone actually getting really sick). Meanwhile, the Covid deniers and conspiracy minded people continue on with their miserable lives. </p>
<p>What good does trying to outrun or hide from Covid do at this point, especially if the most vulnerable people are adults who have chosen not to get the vaccine? If we're doing our part to be a good public citizen, including getting the vaccine, what further are we trying to accomplish? Nevada County has been basically open since June (and probably several months ahead of that – fully “open”). Yes, there is a spike in the numbers of late, but they are still relatively small numbers. We know what’s driving it – the unvaccinated – and not much can be done about that. There are no indications of medical resources being overwhelmed anywhere that I know of, which is a trend that has improved in 2021 – a trend that has held nationwide as well. </p>
<p>It’s mortifying to think that playing or going to a show is a net negative to public health... In my case, these aren’t just solo shows in a vacuum either, but commitments to ensembles, rehearsals, venues, etc. It’s easy for a conversation like to this to spin out sideways in many different directions. Where do you draw the line?</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/62619052020-03-25T15:19:25-07:002024-02-09T10:57:31-08:00Non-Essential Activities that Feel Productive While Social Distancing… or just #StirCrazy<p>1. Grow a long mustache. </p>
<p>2. Write your own lyrics to Louie, Louie. </p>
<p>3. Memorize the witty one-liners of the Blue Man Group. </p>
<p>4. Ukulele this / Ukulele that. </p>
<p>5. Dig out that old #2 pencil and check the legibility of your handwriting. </p>
<p>6. Write a manifesto with a #2 pencil. </p>
<p>7. Dance like no one is watching because that it likely the case. </p>
<p>8. Make music with a wine glass. </p>
<p>9. Clean your phone – and don’t stop there – clean the whole house! </p>
<p>10. Compose the perfect Tweet. </p>
<p>11. Keep disagreements with quarantined housemates at a slow burn, stopping just short of resolution. </p>
<p>12. Match Tupperware containers with lids. </p>
<p>13. Hunt for missing sock. </p>
<p>14. Spin all your vinyl backwards and look for messages from Satan. </p>
<p>15. Savor the smell of fresh made coffee… for an extra thirty minutes. </p>
<p>What are you doing to cope with isolation?</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/49308132017-11-13T12:41:47-08:002022-05-26T05:03:44-07:00Conspiracy Theories: Too Much Bullshit (Part 2) <p>Consider the source. An armchair warrior on Facebook isn’t the same as someone who put in their 10,000 hours. Speaking of politics specifically, I don’t think anyone knows how it really works in a nutshell. Politics is a mix of ideology, activism, human nature, precedent, teamwork, systems, etc. The nuance of how this all fits together will give plenty to chew on for strategy and prediction. You can dive in without having to consider the influence of aliens or the Wizard of OZ. But this doesn’t stop many people getting their information from the likes of Infowars and the National Enquirer. </p>
<p>The impetus for most conspiratorial thinkers is not truth, but the desire to participate in groupthink. Logic doesn’t necessarily open the can of truth worms. Conspiratorial thinkers might start off with an intellectual pursuit, but emotivism is at the core of their ideas. The want for understanding gives way to a desire to be right, and such desire requires affirmation. It’s tribal in a way. Often, an agreeable group of conspiratorial thinkers will share the same manner of dress: anarchists with army surplus dark clothes and masks, alien hunters with a cross between Star Trek costuming and renaissance fair garb, or the Hillary-is-Crooked camp with their red “make American great again” hats. </p>
<p>Conspiracy theories do not need to be accurate to gain traction. They just need to be repeated, indiscriminately. We live in an era of doubling down on factually flimsy assertions. It might be that people end up so far out on a limb with bunk info that they don’t see any other way out. All they can do at a point of no intellectual return is double down in hopes to convince the unwitting. </p>
<p>And sometimes the mere bravado of doubling down is psychologically persuasive. This is a tact aligned with certain lowest common denominator approaches to marketing such as cartoonish appeals to sell unhealthy foods or using sex to sell beer and cars. We see it in the use of the power of suggestion such in advertisements for fitness supplements and jewelry. We see it in those subscribing to the dastardly Joseph Goebbels tact of repeating a lie until it becomes the truth. </p>
<p>Of course, believing in a conspiracy doesn't make one a truth Nazi. And I don't mean to say that conspiracy theorists necessarily intend to spread misinformation. But we can’t lose sight of what a qualified opinion is, let alone a fact. There is something amiss when we casually blur the distinction between what it means to know stuff and what it means to just say stuff. And there is something incurious about a want to lord the truth over the ignoramuses of the world. </p>
<p>Ultimately, the weight and complexity of real conspiracies are diluted by tabloid-mannered jibber-jabber. For instance, the rich seem to want to get richer and the poor are getting poorer. It would be ill timed to bring flat-earth theory - or the like - into consideration of the expanding wealth-gap. Bottom line: we are being generous to grant the same level of credibility to conspiratorial thinking as we would to something of, well, actual theory.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/49192372017-11-04T09:35:22-07:002023-09-07T06:46:47-07:00Conspiracy Theories: Too Much Bullshit (Part 1)<p>We live in a grand era for conspiracy theories and most of them are bunk. A rise in conspiratorial thinking is an inevitable by-product of the Information Age. The bar is generally lower for qualified opinion, particularly across the landscape of data mining social networks. Everyone has an opinion to drive the story - any story - and there are plenty of platforms from which to propagate. Meanwhile we might be losing the plot. </p>
<p>It's very difficult to parse through the information milieu of modern life without some sort of formal literacy about how and why we communicate. Confusing opinion with fact is a common tell sign of our ignorance about what-is-really-going-on. And YouTube sourcing doesn't cut it. Wikipedia doesn't cut it. Lacking accomplishment in the field or subject of our commentary makes us less than an expert. Media illiteracy puts forth a worldview that is overly literal and dull, and it spurs the proliferation of hair-brained notions. </p>
<p>Being informed is more a discipline than state of mind. Anyone saying differently is selling something. The truth – in the end – would seem obvious. But experiencing truth is a humbling experience, and curiosity presses forward by nature. It is always slipping through the fingers of those in the know. Truth exists in shades of grey and in nuance, not closets. The dopamine-addled folks who insist that there is so little time for understanding - for comprehension - for empathy - are not helping. </p>
<p><em>Part 2 will be published next Saturday…</em></p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/48755592017-10-03T12:20:33-07:002023-12-10T09:15:58-08:00An Appreciation for Tom Petty (RIP) <p>Tom Petty has been on the periphery of my music life ever since I can remember. It seemed like he was always cranking out solid hit singles with quiet dignity. I’ve listened to most of his music, watched his videos all the way through at least once, and tended to hear what he had to say in general. He appealed to all sorts of people and spanned generations. And it seemed he and I liked a lot of the same music. </p>
<p>But Tom Petty was never a direct influence on me. Personally, I wouldn’t have considered him to be any kind of influence until a couple years ago when I moved to Grass Valley, California. The move led to a decision to retool my hyper nuanced and recklessly delivered Fringe Folk music. My “style” wasn’t likely to fly in small town USA, where minimalist musical adventurism is by no means the norm, at least as far as gigging and the aging enthusiasms of my peers are concerned. The thought was to try reaching people locally beyond a captive audience of indifferent bartenders. </p>
<p>I decided to look for a template to help me say what I had to say in three or four chords (still trying to figure this out). I presume any songwriter knows how difficult this is to do consistently at a high level. I went to the drawing board of usual suspects: Hank Williams and Country music in general (“three chords and the truth” – blah, blah). I got back into the blues and rediscovered a love for the Beatles and the Stones. Eventually a light bulb came on somewhere between ruminations on Neil Young and Jackson Browne: the place to deep dive would be Tom Petty. </p>
<p>I started to devour Petty’s music pulling from the county library, music stores and online. The more I listened the more I marveled. Tom Petty’s songs are almost all limited to three or four chords and, astonishingly, he covered only a handful of subjects in his writing. Yet, the music is so tasteful – it kicks ass you could say – and he almost never misses lyrically. He had an amazing band in the Heartbreakers too – guitar based rock just doesn’t get much better. I am now a huge fan. </p>
<p>My Tom Petty playlist runs about thirty songs deep. I still listen to it regularly – especially at gatherings where people seem to have an appreciation for guitar rock and where ages span generations. Tom Petty was a solid artist. Authentic. I consider all the songs on my TP playlist to be more/ less great. I hold several of his songs in very high regard (Breakdown, American Girl, I Need To Know, Listen to Her Heart, Refugee, Even the Losers, The Waiting, A Woman in Love, A Thing About You, You Got Lucky, Change of Heart, I Won’t Back Down…). </p>
<p>The passing of Tom Petty sends more guitar-rock real estate back into the sea. This is probably what bums me out the most. Tom Petty was one of those people who kept the notion of good rock and roll alive in the perception of the general public. There are not many of these so-called practicing masters left. Selfishly, I don’t like the thought of my appreciation for Pop stars being increasingly limited to dead people. It brings to mind my own mortality. Anyway, Tom Petty’s passing makes me want to play his music. RIP.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/48634062017-09-24T13:31:24-07:002022-03-23T03:10:00-07:00Whether or Not One Stands During National Anthem <p>Fake issues are a problem because they are a distortion of real issues. Whether or not one stands during the national anthem is a fake issue. My political take is that having an opinion on the subject matters - but it doesn't matter that much - especially if you're not willing to have an honest conversation about where this all comes from in the first place. </p>
<p>Concession stands don't close down during the national anthem. They almost never show the anthem on TV because ad revenue is more important. Some people are unable to stand for whatever reason and who is the moral arbitrator of that? People are so quick to judge rather than process things with logical discipline. </p>
<p>I'm not convinced anyone really cares about what others do during the national anthem as long as it doesn’t impede on the liberty of others. I sound like a Libertarian now! And where are the Libertarians when you need them?! Critics of Colin Kaepernick’s protest have turned their attacks personal, resorting to shooting the messenger rather than discussing an actual issue. Such criticisms strike me more as virtue signaling gone wild. </p>
<p>If people do care, I don't see how an opinion on whether or not people stand during the national anthem can work into an outrage. What are we even talking about? Is it the flag? Is it the national anthem? Is it the police? Just when did all this become so entwined and linked by subjective interpretations of patriotism? Since when does symbolism override exercises of liberty? </p>
<p>Heightening the importance of symbols over an individual's right to protest is showing a lack of confidence that the symbols hold real meaning. Relying on iconography is desperate and histrionic so as to drain a symbol of its substance. What does it say when we find it acceptable to sell hotdogs and run car commercials, or use the bathroom, during the national anthem but bellyache when a high profile individual exercises a personal right to protest?</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/47992102017-08-01T13:22:02-07:002024-02-12T03:51:31-08:00Fascism Is Real (Essay #5): The Problem With the Progressive Left<p>This is my final essay on deeper issues within the cultural ramifications on the Donald Trump Presidency. The first four essays focus on the underlying fascism of “make American great again,” and to some degree the people carrying this flag forward. This final essay focuses on aspects of left wing culture that helped to enable the rise of Donald Trump in national politics. </p>
<p>In my estimation, the left’s agenda should all cycle back to one focus: win elections. It sounds trite, but the challenges at hand seem obvious and the situation is dire. No one really has the time for excuses, denials or self-righteous posturing. Progressives need to get real about how certain go-to tendencies like virtue signaling, identity politics and precious hyper-vigilance are a massive turn-off amongst the general population. </p>
<p>The problem is clear enough: We have Donald Trump for POTUS. In addition, we have a right wing Republican House and Senate. It’s a Republican high tide; their dominance extends throughout many state governments. Conversely, the progressive left has very little on the scoreboard of political representation. In response to this criticism, many on the left complain that the system is broken, which many be true, but in a democracy, elections have to be won to effect change. There is so little representation that one could wonder if the progressive left is a real coalition or just a group of reactionaries bonding over narrow self-interests that fade away once election season is over. </p>
<p>The left needs to refocus the mission to include real electoral force. The most important factor towards achieving this goal – above all else – is to build durable coalitions of various interest groups that are capable of holding together despite differences of opinion. To each their own pet issues, but politics and personal ideals do not - and should not - always run parallel. The left needs to get out of the habit of killing its own. </p>
<p>As evidenced by the last election cycle, many self-identifying progressives seem more comfortable with attacking potential allies rather than taking the battle to actual ideological adversaries. It was virtue signaling, identity politics and precious hyper-vigilance exemplified at its worst. These so-called progressives were given plenty of unchecked leeway to compulsively bash the Democratic Party and it’s presidential candidate, often times using unsubstantiated arguments that mirrored pro-Trump sentiments. Indeed, many on the left still seem almost satisfied by the results of this past election. This sort of toxic logic should be exorcised from the movement. </p>
<p>But for all the heated rhetoric, where are the victories for the progressive left? Where are the success stories – the examples that lead people to actually respond in meaningful ways? Where is Joe Citizen discussing progressive matters in conscious deferral to the influence of a movement? Where is this undeniable political base evidenced in everyday civic engagement? And if civic engagement isn’t the endgame, what are we even talking about? </p>
<p>Ideally, everyone should have ideas to effect positive change, and we don’t have to always agree. Recent progressive victories (gains in gender equity and LGTBQ rights) and defeats (an inability to protect reforms in education, the prison system, policing policies and to fight regulation roll backs impacting the environment and Wall Street) need a stronger Election Day identity to effect sympathetic representation. The progressive brand is badly damaged by not turning up consistently at the polls to coalesce behind the candidate that best matches up with the progressive agenda. </p>
<p>The deeper problem for progressives is that despite having many things to say – perhaps too many things to say – they just don’t have much say in things that matter. There are no moral victories really. If progressives really want to understand and change this world for the better, they need a meaningful but succinct set of principals that can be shared with a broad coalition of diverse people. Strength in numbers is vital.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/47553662017-06-23T12:48:44-07:002021-07-14T04:09:03-07:00Fascism is Real (Essay #4): Reject the Premise<p>The more time one spends on trying to understanding the Trump voter at this point, the less time there will be for resisting the toxic cynicism of their reactionary politics. The time for understanding is over. You can't really understand someone who lacks self-awareness, or sincerity, or analytical faculties. All you can do is play down to their level, which will sap your energy. </p>
<p>Understand this: to have voted for a President Trump - for whatever reason - is to win by losing. That's the takeaway. To their mind, the thought of beating the liberal elite - or whoever the boogieman de jour may be - is more satisfying than the thought of loving their country. The focus forward has to be on containing the damage done by a Trump presidency and facing down the politically incoherent electorate that makes up Trump’s base, which appears chiefly organized around the adage of misery craving company. </p>
<p>To better understand the "winning by losing" concept, let’s examine Trump's winning characteristics: born into privilege to evolve into an insecure brat, a scammer, egomaniac, narcissist, misogynistic, racist, obsessive peddler of cheap and tacky products, and so forth. All of this is true and verifiable by a quick review of the public record. And yet no one seems to have a firm handle on inner workings of how Donald Trump specifically makes his money. At any rate, for the Trump base, a disdain for elites apparently does not include a shallow and morally bankrupt rich white man. But by offering such a man their loyalty, they will lose in the end. </p>
<p>Trump’s actual deeds, accomplishments and quantifiable talents are unknown for the most part, more or less lost in a glossy fog generated by expensive public relations companies. All we really have to go on in way of cold hard fact is that miserable personality. If being closed-minded, spiteful and intolerant is what wealth affords, who needs it? Does anyone want to see younger generations emulate Donald Trump's behavior over the years? Are being self-centered and shallow an image of strength that we want to project to the world? </p>
<p>So the Trump voters got their president, but their ambitions remain clouded by fuzzy logic. That's on them. I don't have to do their homework for them. It's their legacy now. The Trump voter has no idea about what is happening or what Donald Trump is going to do as POTUS. And they don't want to know. This is at center of every premise that they put forth, and it leads to a contradiction at every turn. </p>
<p>The Trump base is okay with flip-flopping and hypocrisy as long as it's their guy. They embrace moral relativism as evidenced by an unbalanced reaction to terrorist acts committed by Christians and Muslims; when Dylan Roof kills worshippers at a historic black church, they remain silent, yet these same people slap the label radical Islamic terrorist on the attackers in Manchester and lash out at pop star Ariana Grande’s “hate of America” as bringing on that attack. Their principals are rudderless as evidenced by countless attempts to explain away Trump’s boorish behavior over the years. And all this does is leave you exposed to the con. Trump is playing the room - that's the art of his deal, and it borrows heavily from P.T. Barnum's "sucker born every minute" maxim. Unfortunately, his base is in deep with the guy. Think about it... and you've already won half the battle. The Trump voter has not thought very deeply about it. And they do not intend to. </p>
<p>When I say reject the premise, I am speaking from experience. I've spent quite a bit of time and energy trying to engage in a dialogue with Trump supporters and by enlarge it’s been an empty exchange. When they are not running from intellectualizing the matter, the Trump base will rest on loosely grasped platitudes, talking points and charged emotionalism. Or they bring up Hillary (Killary) or Obama (Obummer) or laugh about baiting liberals (libtards or snowflakes). Often they simply refuse to say anything so as to not have yet one more statement obliterated for its fleeting coherence (the price paid for not being able to think for yourself). These are group thinkers, and we should take warning considering the fascist rhetoric they are drawn to. </p>
<p>In my view, the key to stemming a rising tide of fascist ideology in the United States is to reject each and every premise put forth by the fans of Donald Trump - upon utterance. Don't even let them get started. They already shot their credibility to hell. They would wave a flag and then defer out of service. They wouldn't hesitate to slam a veteran if their corporate overlords gave a directive to do so. They would make America great again by championing inequality. They give lip service to freedom, but they do what they are told at the end of the day. </p>
<p>Donald Trump rewards his base for their loyalty by regarding them with open contempt. Whether it be laughing of his own political slogans as ridiculous, or playing the victim card, or talking in circles, or showing no tangible empathy for those being pushed towards and past the margins of society (for instance, people whose livelihoods are threatened by globalism AKA losers…?), etc. At this point, Trump’s base could act as the poster children for intellectual dishonesty or willful ignorance. </p>
<p>The Trump voter exists in the shadow of their Commander in Chief. By proxy, the Trump voter shows love of country by cheating on taxes, criminalizing the poor and giving handouts to the rich. They want short cuts and scapegoats. They are the proud citizens of the best country on earth and but want to dismantle the government. Trump voters want to “make America great again” and "drain the swamp" by handing government operations over to corporate insiders who for all intents and purposes appear to be sycophants and hacks. This is not a people’s president, but a president poised to apparently grant his base their death wish. </p>
<p>The basic conundrum of the Trump base is that they are perpetuating the problems they purport to want to fix. But these people, however clueless or ruthlessly opportunistic, are now running the federal systems established to methodically protect and serve the free citizens of a free country in a topsy-turvy world - Departments of Education, Commerce, Health & Human Services, Defense, etc. Their overly simplistic approach runs on the mantra of dismantling and/or radically overhauling these departments. It’s a massive undertaking but they are in position to do real damage. </p>
<p>Just reject what they say and get in the habit of doing so in the moment they say it. It’s not your neighbor’s job to do it for you. It’s not the media’s job to do it. Communicating with dog whistles has to end. If Trump isn’t clueless, he is clandestine in his method and likely driven by a self-serving purpose. As for those who say "I don't like Trump, but..." – reject that too. There are no qualifiers. You either accept the racism, narcissism, anti-intellectualism, fascism - the shallowness - or you don't. It’s as simple as that.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/46666192017-04-11T09:38:47-07:002018-05-08T01:51:43-07:00Fascism is Real (Essay #3): We Don't Need a Strongman<p>I haven’t lost hope on having a constructive debate with today’s Republican, but I’ve run out of patience with anyone putting forth simplistic characterizations of the left and liberals. Trump has taken it up a notch with uncivil (“Trump the bitch” and “lock her up”), and cartoonish (“Mexico is sending over its rapists”), perceptions of the "other" so as to betray any real understanding of the people they are deriding. Trump’s supporters are generally grossly misinformed when they speak about the left and liberals. And they will seemingly be the last to realize it. The modern Right, as if by mandate, favors a melodramatic and cheap marginalization of concepts they don't find agreeable. One should look to the Left for a better understanding of what the Left is actually doing wrong. The Right – and Trump voters in particular – are living in an alternative reality that is far removed from the conscious sussing of facts. </p>
<p>If these were kinder political times, I would almost feel sorry for the Right. The Left tends to get in its own way, sure, but at least they move forward with principals resembling liberty and justice for all. In 2017, it is the Left that petitions our government to be more of the people/ by the people. The Left are calling for greater legislative transparency. The Left is more likely to have a vigorous and cerebral discussion about the future of the United States. The Right, by enlarge, has settled for rote exercises of flag waving and reactionary jingoism, actions that are quickly maturing into something resembling an intellectual all-you-can-eat smorgasbord of hot-air paranoia. President Trump insults his constituency on a regular basis; at this point one cannot expect the modern Right to have the courage to admit their embarrassment with such a man. The Right’s blind faith in Trump’s odd mischaracterizations of democracy nullifies any credible sense of decency they’ve built up over the years. Make no mistake: it is the Left that is rising to fight against tyranny in the United States. The Right can apparently only cower to a so-called strongman. </p>
<p>In the tactile world, a strong man would be defined by actions and accomplishments in terms of aspirational leadership qualities - achieving feats of strength, doing the right thing even when unpopular or risky, overcoming significant obstacles, etc. In politics, a strongman means something quite the opposite: someone who intends to rule by force and run an authoritarian regime. The political strongman is someone who generally lacks the attributes and integrity found in real strength, so they project an overly aggrandized image of themselves as overcompensation for deep insecurities. They are cartoonish figures, impulsive and dangerous. The image in their mind – ahem – trumps reality. The end game is to silence critics and ramrod an agenda forward without giving the people a say. </p>
<p>Does this sound like someone we know? Let's examine how the Trump regime matches up to the checklist of a political strongman: hostile to intellectualism – check; disinterest in historical precedent – check; in constant need of flattery – check; decrying the free press as the enemy – check; threatening ominous retribution for critics – check; lack of transparency in governance – check... and on down the list of what would point to the makings of an authoritarian government. Dictators, in particular, have a tendency to set themselves up as a strong man and the ambitions of President Donald Trump do indeed run parallel with that of a dictator. </p>
<p>Fear will define you if you give into it. President Trump is the answer for people who have given into fear, be it fear of immigrants coming to steal jobs, or fear becoming culturally disempowered, or a general fear of the frightful violence occurring all over the world. Or, it could just be fear of snakes and sharks, fear of the principals of evolution, fear of the unknown, fear of having some culpability with climate change, or fear of being exposed as not having actually done the self-work to live up an obnoxious moral disposition (evangelicals in pursuit of the Prosperity Gospel – I’m talking to you). President Trump is all too willing to indulge in fear-based rhetoric to fire up his constituency, on the political premise that he is the only man to alleviate these fears. The world is a mess and Trump is the only person who can fix it. And this is a subject that is not, and has never been, up for debate with Trump the politician. If you buy that premise, then Trump is your man – unequivocal belief is all that is required. </p>
<p>But for the rest of us, President Trump just resembles a nincompoop. By Trump’s own words, there is no room for even partial disagreement with his agency; every challenge is interpreted as undermining of his strongman persona. He is basically at a point where he’s saying his critics are the enemy. This would be comical if the situation weren’t so serious. Free people don’t need a strongman for a leader, and even if we did, President Trump would hardly qualify for the role. As evidenced through the decades, Donald Trump’s accomplishments are rooted in extraordinary privilege. His art of the deal lacks actual accomplishment. I’m not sure anyone really knows exactly why Trump is rich and famous. But here he is: POTUS. And every day brings another example of how unprepared he is to handle the massive responsibilities of this job. As a strongman, President Trump is left with few options other than trying to outrun the big lies by limiting your ability to stand in his way.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/45838272017-02-09T18:02:21-08:002022-05-09T02:32:47-07:00Fascism is Real (Essay #2): The Demonization of Media<p>Fake news leads to fake issues. The Trump administration’s relentless attempts to delegitimize the “mainstream” media add more evidence to a larger picture of onerous and corrupt governance. Unfortunately for Trump, there is such a thing as legitimate media: that which doesn’t base an operating plan on the crass dissipation of propaganda. Trump’s rhetoric is the stuff of the lowest common denominator. Tearing down the main stream works in his favor. Calling the NY Times totally corrupt is an attempt to elevate the relevance of his moronic tweets. Those echoing Trump’s hostility towards the media tend be people who are the least affected by the fear-based narrative being put forth, the working class in the Rust Belt, middle class and executive class white Americans firmly entrenched in their chain store suburban lives. For these people, the reality of a terrorist attack is the equivalent to being besieged by Boogie Men who would like nothing more than to steal their vitals. <br> <br>Trump and his minions have chosen to harness their worldview through a keyhole. President Trump asks the country to view global politics as a black and white paradigm, which is a strange and perverse oversimplification. The world is complex and for all of Trump’s wealthy pedigree and worldly experience, he should know better. But his political agenda on the national scale is thus far limited to a series of restless and paranoid hack moves such as asking people to consider alternative facts and warring with the press. Trump’s take on international affairs is a real “this-is-your-brain-on-drugs” moment. For example, while those firmly connected to reality know that Mexico is not going to pay for that wall, many of Trump’s most ardent supporters passionately argue that Mexico will pay for the wall because Trump said so. Given this lack of actual diplomatic skill, it makes sense that he would want to downplay the legitimate press and all else capable of exposing him for the tool that he is. As Peter Tosh said, “you can fool some people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time…” <br> <br>Donald Trump doesn’t listen to Peter Tosh. He is narcissistic enough, and pampered enough through a lifetime of privilege, to really believe he’s the smartest guy in the room. We must see the legitimate free press as a crucial safeguard of liberty because qualified journalism is the best platform for speaking truth to power. Donald Trump is quite comfortable peddling fictions. He’s the type of liar who never comes correct, but rather doubles down on the tall tales, each one bigger than the one before it, delivered with perpetual and disorientating urgency. The Trump boat is floated on the quiet helplessness of weak mindedness. But President Donald J. Trump seems out of his league on the world stage, as a First World leader anyway. He is unable to articulate even the simplest of actual policy positions. Rather, his tendency towards self-aggrandizement and propensity for gilding the lily more closely resembles the actions of a snake oil salesman or a third world tyrant. Questioning his ability to lead our country is not treasonous, as he would suggest, but rather patriotic as Americans’ true loyalty is always to their country and the Constitution rather than to any one leader, no matter how charismatic. <br> <br>So now the serious media are knocking at Trump’s door looking for answers and his administration has to work overtime in an effort to outrun the lies with their arsenal of gaslighting, questioning YOUR reality, obfuscating information, dispelling disinformation, making shit up, making ominous threats about loyalty and patriotism, and so on. The Trump team is compiling a liar’s playbook for the modern era. The hypocracy and contradictions are endless. Donald Trump was created through media, particularly of the tabloid variety. He never met an opportunity for self-promotion he didn’t like, a practice that went on for decades. The media gave him the platform to raise a political base, starting with his propagation of racist birther sentiments after the election of Barack Obama. Yet many of his closest advisors are media people, coming from the same profession he deems adversarial. And Trump’s compulsive tweeting is an action that suggests not disappointment, but deep and unyielding faith in media even though his sentiments are of the cynical and self-serving variety. <br> <br>In the first essay of this Fascism is Real series, I recommended removing the “deplorables” from your life - those who would lock step along party lines, continue the deceitful narrative of weaker minds and ultimately succumb to fascist tendencies. If there is any justice, they will find the error of their ways soon enough and perhaps even thank you for not contributing to their sickness. The point of this second essay is to defend institutions that promote knowledge and learning: legitimate media, public education, cultural heritage sites, and so forth. These institutions are under attack by the Trump administration, with the endgame being to whip up enough paranoia and public distrust so as to make critical thinking suspect in-and-of-itself. Once the American people and their instrument for checking the government, the media, have been disenfranchised, Trump’s inner circle will complete the take over they have already started by getting rid of the higher principles of our democracy and consolidating power amongst themselves in order to exploit power for personal wealth. <br> <br>But know this: all the rhetoric coming from the Trump camp can be turned on its head. Develop an instinct for pointing out the hypocrisy – if not the outright lies - and respond, but not with reactionary fervor. Stay sane and logical and grounded in facts. We must not capitulate to a developing tyrant that chooses to promote “alternative” facts. <br> <br> </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/45595512017-01-22T09:39:15-08:002022-07-20T04:00:08-07:00Fascism is Real (Essay #1): Call It for What It Is<p>Note that many of the incessant flag-waving patriots are a-okay with fascism. They might not realize it, or they might not be honest w/ themselves. They might be scared, or weary, or just assholes, or a combination thereof. But they are out there and wanting uniformity and name tags and they will probably be very agreeable to far worse in the name of "safety" and "coexistence" and "prosperity" and whatever other devolution towards oppressive sloganeering. </p>
<p>These people, budding and blooming fascists alike, talk a big game about freedom, but it's an empty conceit and self-serving. They are hostile towards intellectualism. They utilize a populist message, but it is patronizing. When it comes to freedom and the exercise of liberty, the strict ideological bent of a fascist only allows for an impatient nod – at best - towards the justice end of the equation. They don’t have an active legacy in the civil rights battle, for instance. Fascists are not arbiters of freedom, or keepers of the moral high ground. Their expertise in the fight is limited to strength in numbers. <br> <br>The problem is that oppressive ideologies are growing in number. The reasons are many and complex, and this is not something a fascist is likely to explore with you. Don’t let ignorance work in their favor. Don’t bog down in the bullshit by trying to engage with a fascist. It’s a waste of time and energy. They will take advantage of your goodwill and exploit your desire to share ideas. They’ve given into a worldview that dims curiosity and prohibits self-reflection. A fascist will turn any attention into a validation of self-importance. Let the fascists pound sand in their sad attempts to whitewash history. <br> <br>Fascism is real. There is a point where a person can become toxic. Seriously, break free from those looking to steal your space and outlaw your liberties. Move on and live your life to the fullest in spite of them. Deep down, a person of such persuasion knows they are lost. The big lie is holding everything together for a fascist, and thus their ideological action becomes that much more desperate, severe and dangerous. The mono-cultural world will eventually run roughshod. Get out from under the grip and get out now. Move forward and beyond, and let the brutes to sort through the wreckage of their own making. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/45492872017-01-13T13:00:45-08:002021-04-23T11:07:11-07:00Music Movie Review: Thoughts on the Oasis Documentary “Supersonic” <p>“Supersonic”, a new documentary about Oasis that was released in late 2016, shows the legendary dysfunction between the Gallagher brothers in their band, Oasis. They were very different as individuals and they didn’t get along – not even a little bit. Band chemistry was poor, and the media couldn’t get enough of the drama. Said dysfunction and their penchant for candor made the brothers Gallagher great interview subjects during their heyday. And I don’t mean to undersell the music either. Oasis was unquestionably one of the biggest bands in the world for a few years. They impacted culture. <br> <br>The film does a good job of telling the story of the band and its impact on pop culture. Oasis had two chiefs, brothers Noel and Liam Gallagher. Noel wrote the songs and, while in my opinion was not a musical genius, is obviously smarter than most of those around him. His brother Liam sang the songs and, in his own words, “just stood over there looking fucking great.” With participation from band members and other core associates, this documentary is a solid chronicling of the band’s rise from humble beginnings to worldwide fame and eventual burnout. If you visited the cul-de-sac of BritPop in the mid to late 1990s, Oasis could not be ignored. They were huge, and they obnoxiously let everyone know it. In the end, the notable thing is not what they did and said but how success found this band despite their frequent episodes of genuine bad behavior and limited musicality. <br> <br>I don’t love or hate the music of Oasis. I’m somewhere above indifference. I appreciate their existence, but they are not a personal influence. If pressed, my opinion would be that Oasis trended towards being heavy handed and derivative - both sonically and lyrically. Basically, better music can be found elsewhere. <br> <br>Personal critique of the music aside, I see Oasis as kind of a rock and roll blessing. On the surface the band didn’t seem very interesting: typical four-on-the-floor rock with a pedestrian look and a borrowed hook. Their broad appeal at times reflected a hooliganism that could overtake anything likable about them. But, there is more to the story, morning glory. <br> <br>“Supersonic” doesn’t shy away from the band’s collective shit personality. But the warts and all approach also opens the lid on the band’s humor, emotion, and hey, they were productive enough to constitute a real rock and roll minute. And thank goodness for that. Rock music began a slow and steady decline in the 1990s. Oasis fought the good fight by saying what they felt, and in the process eliciting laughter and something/ anything in way of passion from its audience. They at least kept things interesting. <br> <br>My takeaway from “Supersonic” is that Noel and Liam Gallagher made damn sure that rock and roll was not going to die on their watch. You didn’t have to like them. They didn’t have to like you. Take it or leave it. But, the tension and antagonism implied in such an agreement between artist and audience saves this particular band from being a pop music cliché. <br> <br>“Supersonic”, the documentary about Oasis, is 122 minutes and a solid watch. <br> <br> SLP Rating: 5/6 beers. That’s four beers for the subject and quality of filmmaking, and an extra beer for the Rock. <br> </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/45003912016-12-07T07:55:08-08:002022-04-12T04:35:43-07:00Big Lies in the Post Fact World <p>It's an unwitting absurdity to hear so-called media professionals try to make sense of a "post-factual world," as if it's a real thing. The post factual world doesn't exist outside of conscious stupidity. Reject it and reject these hacks propagating the notion. The FACT that most people in the United States give equal if not more attention to tabloid sensationalism as they do to political realism is indicative of a decline in the nation’s character. It’s a victory for targeted marketing that comes at the expense of qualified journalism. </p>
<p>Yes, plenty of people buy into fake news. It shouldn’t surprise at this point - it is not a new phenomena. Does it have consequences in the culture? Of course! But we’re losing our way to give into the notion that numbers of subscribers equate with legitimacy. This is setting the table for the big lie – the manipulative lever used by the powers that be to put across a self-serving agenda. It should mortify us to see people turn fake news into a tool for creating a president and forwarding fascist ideology. If you’re a journalist, ask real questions of the post fact world and don't settle for less than an answer to those questions... </p>
<p>And those of us interested in substance need to support these journalists. It’s a very imperfect world, and the real stories are not easy to tell. Diminishing the stature of hacks in the media is one way to start mooring the truth. Personally, I’m angered by professional pundits who sit comfortably in cable-TV land making lots of money and tell us how things are without knowing what people are actually thinking or feeling out on the streets. We can support accuracy in journalism by not engaging in the bullshit, and through investing in enterprises displaying an institutional integrity, by restoring the concept of credibility killers, by lifting up and sharing a noble cause, and by displaying a little grit beyond that. </p>
<p>The reality is, post-fact living won’t bring very much in the way of intellectual nourishment or take you very far down the road towards sustainability. Last I checked, a well-made house still requires skilled engineering. If you wind up in the hospital, you're going to want the attention of a real doctor. Need legal advice? You can go to a lawyer or consult a fortune cookie. We are free to make our choices. But there are good choices and bad choices. And each time we participate in a bad choice, we legitimize the big lie and contribute to the destruction of real journalism.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/44688762016-11-15T19:31:04-08:002021-04-23T11:18:19-07:00Thoughts on the Democratic Process… <p>I appreciate the enthusiasm that people bring to the democratic process. It's been rare where politics on the national stage reflect the thoughts in my head, or the choices I've made with my life. It has happened once or twice, and that's about it. The 2016 presidential election definitely DID NOT jive with anything I was thinking. The pendulum is always going back and forth, left and right, but I didn't foresee the country taking such a hard regressive turn on a mass scale. It's disappointing to say the least. Such a feeling is made worse by the meltdown on the left and the tin ear of disconnect coming from the right. And now it seems like everyone is up in arms. <br> <br>I join those who are basically mourning the decline of democracy. But, I can't say I'm totally surprised by the election or its aftermath. I'm depressed, worried, anxious, angry. Thinking about the dangers and the fight ahead, yeah. I can point to plenty of "reasons" for what happened - convenient media, the inability of a body public to resist the marketing, rampant unchecked bigotry, political narcissism disguised as purity, moral convenience, cultural tribalism, communal disconnect, subterfuge, poor strategy, the left getting in its own way, old fashioned stupidity - on and on. I understood this was all embedded into the process to some extent prior. But the results of the 2016 presidential election feel no less pathetic. <br> <br>What next for democracy and the republic? Knowing people really care about this country gives me some comfort. This is a nation's work, divisions and all. With that said, I have no use for willful and harmful ignorance; that which would allow fear, intimidation and prejudice to leverage a point of view. Fascism is afoot. I think it’s important to cultivate, foster and encourage expression that fucks with anything that approaches absolutism in an ideological sense. Beyond that, it’s time to get stepping ahead of issues that are bogging us down. At some point, the talking stops and the work begins. The mission: build coalitions, get busy, and stay involved. <br> <br>I’m under no delusions. I think things will get worse with Trump, potentially much worse. There will be many instances of bad behavior and worse policy ahead to deal with. But, the process of getting my own little house in order is reinvigorated, and the fight continues. For anyone claiming that they won something by all this – electing an “outsider” who inherited a fortune, built a society page celebrity brand as a glorified realtor, has a limited grasp on the constitution, who exorcises fascist tendencies, spreads racist invective, and exhibits a sociopathic penchant for lying – it rings hollow. They made a wholly uninteresting choice to be on the wrong side of history. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/44219122016-10-16T18:28:30-07:002018-04-06T01:37:26-07:00Silicon Valley Could Use a Good Skeptic<p>For all the talk of saving the world, the techies of Silicon Valley tend to practice a most savage form of capitalism. The law on the SF peninsula is to kill or be killed, industrially speaking. The big players seek monopoly and it's basically by any means necessary - suffocating market share, through aggressive acquisition, leveraging venture capital firms against each other - whatever, however, and so be it. And your employment is at will. <br> <br>For all the talk of transparency, Silicon Valley functions within a walled off corporatism. They might've torn out the cubicles, but the tech industry doesn't move without investor pools being in it to win it. Not that there is anything wrong with this. But don't get it twisted: ambition is the driving virtue. The prize is reaching your payday and then being able to write your own story. <br> <br>"Revolution" is a buzzword in Silicon Valley and it's hype. The hype asks for your best self, and it demands a certain level of myopia to sell it forward day after day. Most of us won't get there; we won’t be celebrated for our best self and asked for our glorified story about a well-lived dream. But don’t despair as we can always search the discount bins of soon to be obsolete smart device accessories for a shoulder to cry on. <br> <br>For all the mythologizing about how Founders sacrifice and strike forth from humble origins, Silicon Valley is a leading contributor to the growing wealth gap. Tech money dominates the Bay Area, and it’s the money that most people love. The notion of lifting the next Founder by the bootstraps is a comfortable first world conceit. Silicon Valley often sets goals that are noble, and exciting, but most of the talk about social engineering and AI is just ultra modern megalomaniacal BS. Where are the skeptics? <br> <br>Let's cure cancer before jobbing out radical new ways to make life more according to our whims. Let's innovate ways that allow the elderly to age with dignity before we lionize another leader in a hoodie and cargo shorts. It's a Halloween costume for Crissakes! Let's out-economize the factory farm and big box store before we pretend the next round of venture capital will transform reality as we know it. <br> <br>The world is changing and quickly. Sure, techie assholes have something to do with it, no doubt. Let me be clear: I'm not down on technology. My iPhone has more computer than what orchestrated the moon landing. I use a handful of smart devices like a pragmatist. My issue is more about the lack of challenge put to venture capitalists that start taking on a God complex after rolling a lucky strike or two. I hate the spawning of imitators that vast wealth inspires. I have contempt for Gatekeepers that can’t resist the marketing. Silicon Valley could use a good skeptic. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/43998512016-10-01T19:33:40-07:002020-12-18T21:11:03-08:00An Appreciation for Woody Guthrie<p>Troubadour is a French word that means a poet who writes verse to music. The word also implies hard traveling. Chances are if you have something to say with a song, moss won’t be growing under your feet. Woodrow Wilson “Woody” Guthrie was quintessentially a troubadour of American music. He sang organic story-songs about everyday events from town to city, for the people and to the powers that be. His influence is legendary, though it might seem quaint in today’s din of self-reverential brand building. <br> <br>Woody Guthrie was born in Okemah, OK, in 1912. In Guthrie’s childhood, Okemah was a small farming town caught up in the changing times. By the early 1930s, severe drought and a failure to use countering farming techniques brought hard times to Okemah and towns like it across the wide North American prairies. It led to an exodus of people – Dust Bowl refugees - leaving the devastation in search of opportunity out West. <br> <br>As one of those people who went west in search of a better life, Woody Gutherie told the story of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression in songs like “I Ain’t Got No Home in This World Anymore.” He wandered, working thankless odd jobs, penniless, family broken, and observing the growing scale of injustice caused by the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. These concerns would remain centered in his work as his reputation for being a truth-teller of colloquial tales grew. It’s not to be sentimentalized: Woody Guthrie articulated the American experience of his era perhaps better than any poet, and certainly better than any musician of his day. <br> <br>Guthrie was at a creative peak from the mid 1930s through the 1940s. You can get a good sense of living history through songs like “Pastures of Plenty,” “The Jolly Banker,” “1913 Massacre,” “Do Re Mi,” “Pretty Boy Floyd,” “Working Hard Blues,” “Grand Coulee Dam,” “The Sinking of the Ruben James” and more. His most famous song, “This Land is Your Land,” has a realistic shot of replacing the current national anthem. His best songs still hold a rare power and urgency; conceivably as necessary today as back when. <br> <br>Woody Guthrie is on the short list of the great 20th Century Songwriters. With all due to respect to Jimmie Rogers, I would argue Guthrie’s range of styles, his presence of character and ultimately his cultural sophistication would make him the originator of the singer-songwriter concept. Of course, “singer-songwriter” became something entirely different – a marketing term - after Bob Dylan and the mass media got involved, but Woody Guthrie is THE original when I think of that term. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/43820262016-09-20T15:42:37-07:002016-09-20T15:42:37-07:00It’s Time for Defenders of the 2nd Amendment to Grow Up<p>The 2nd amendment to the US constitution reads: “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.” I don’t know what this means exactly, but I think any reasonable interpretation has to be communal in spirit, rather than the more self-serving propaganda we get from the National Rifle Association. <br> <br>I support the right to bear arms, but it’s low on my list of concerns. The NRA’s agenda seems misguided in our modern age. There are plenty of guns, and yet the world is no safer. Violence begets violence. Guns are tools of violence. There are too many guns. The access to obtaining a gun is too easy, largely thanks to the NRA. <br> <br>The NRA lacks the courage to have an honest conversation about gun control. They’d rather push the falsehood of the Federal government conspiring to take away guns, or promote racial prejudices and class war, or stoke fears about an inevitable apocalypse. The people buying into all this are not freedom warriors or heroes. They are simply good for the gun business. <br> <br>To experience freedom, one has to want to be free. Freedom doesn’t mean living in fear. The NRA doesn’t resemble a free society to me. They look like a reactionary and frightful group of Debbie Downers; constantly fretting about losing liberties while banking on the anxiety and paranoia of chicken little gun consumers. <br> <br>As for the words of the 2nd Amendment… There is no mention of a right to build an arsenal in anticipation of the apocalypse. The NRA doesn’t seem orientated around the concept of a well-regulated militia either, seeing as they are resistant to any suggestion of REGULATIONS. The definition of “Arms” has evolved mightily since the genesis of the 2nd Amendment too. <br> <br>All the amendments have limits based upon reasonable interpretation. For instance, the 1st Amendment grants the right to free speech, but you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. You can’t incite a riot. The 3rd Amendment restricts the quartering of soldiers in private homes without the homeowner’s consent. Who even thinks about the 3rd amendment? <br> <br>I would argue that the root fears underlying the prominence of the 2nd Amendment should apply equally to the 3rd Amendment. Both amendments were written in the spirit of mitigating governmental overreach. But the context behind these amendments was much different in the late 1700s. <br> <br>The Bill of Rights was created in a less habitable time for democracy. The young US government lacked institutional framework and legislative precedence. There was a standing army left over from the Revolutionary War that no one quite knew what to do with. Times have changed since then and the idea that US government will squat on your land willy-nilly is absurd. This is why no one talks about the 3rd Amendment. <br> <br>The government isn’t looking to take away guns either. The reason why the 3rd Amendment is in the background of consciousness, while the 2nd Amendment is front and center is because the 3rd Amendment doesn’t sell guns (or anything else for that matter). The best arguments for the 2nd amendment condone responsible, qualified gun ownership. The worst - and more prevalent - arguments are self-serving: being armed in defense against other citizens. <br> <br>To cut to the chase: the main reason people have guns is because it gets them off. It has nothing to do with being a hero. So be it. But, in consideration of a weapon’s violence and random potential to harm others, the access to entry should resemble that which would make a good soldier and a good citizen. The process should be transparent. Beyond that, guns are basically a security blanket for adults, psychologically appeasing perhaps, but not sensible. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/43408512016-08-24T19:41:45-07:002021-06-09T10:38:33-07:00Julian Assange Kind of Seems Like a Dick<p>Julian Assange practices a journalism branded on a liar-liar-pants-on-fire conceit. Assange has gained notoriety through his organization Wikileaks by stealing private information and then releasing it as sensational evidence of grand conspiracy. In keeping with journalistic prudence, he keeps his sources anonymous. But, outside of that, Assange strikes me as more of a self-promoter than a journalist. I don’t think he even has real journalist credentials. <br> <br>The high profile of Wikileaks rubs me the wrong way. And I really don’t like that Assange chose to operate like a pirate, but then shifted gears to become a persecuted truth teller when in the grip of the powers that be. Is he an outlaw, an advocate for justice or just a fucked up dude who got a little too deep into the muck? I don’t know... But I think Wikileaks lacks operational consistency, which is a credibility killer in the hero business. At some point one has to decide if activism is to be carried forth with a moral compass. <br> <br>I won’t go so far as to suggest that victims of Wikileaks - primarily corporations and government institutions – are worthy of our sympathies. It’s a jungle out there. I also understand that the pursuit of justice travels through plenty of grey area. But, Wikileaks seems to be ethically challenged on a fundamental level. Private conversations exposed for public interpretation and consumption usually lack proper context. Information lacking in context is ultimately noise and it won’t typically stand up in a court of law. That’s journalism 101. <br> <br>But Wikileaks isn’t tailored for courts of law. It’s designed to stir courts of public opinion. Wikileaks is more of a self-righteous TMZ than an organization dedicated to gathering and contextualizing all the moving pieces. Real journalism is considerate towards philosophy, ethics, and historical precedence. Wikileaks vomits information that is tantalizingly forbidden. Wikileaks might say the “system” is broken, but in reality it thrives off exploiting that broken system for its own gain. <br> <br>Currently, Julian Assange is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He faces arrest and a possible string of international extraditions if he leaves. He sees himself as a political prisoner, which I think is a bit of a leap. While he may not be a bad guy per say, the situation he’s in shouldn’t come as a surprise. For one thing, he hacked classified information, undermining to any nation’s national security. It’s a bummer he can’t enjoy his notoriety more openly I suppose. Then again, did he really think it would play out any other way?</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/42780582016-07-13T20:14:02-07:002021-04-23T11:21:49-07:00Thoughts About Napster and the Documentary “Downloaded” <p>Napster, the extinct file-sharing service company from the early 2000s, had a fast and furious lifecycle; kind of like a supernova that comes out of nowhere, burns bright and then fades fast. The company flamed out so quickly that its influence now seems to be cast to the back pages of history. </p>
<p>The documentary "Downloaded" makes a good case for Napster being one of the more influential tech companies in this young 21st-century. Released in 2012, the film chronicles the company's rise, its extraordinary nadir, and dramatic fall. All the key players within the company are interviewed at length. The film also includes perspective from the relevant tech periphery, in addition to a wide range of opinions from various musicians. It’s worth checking out. </p>
<p>Watching it brought me back to when I moved to San Francisco in late 1999, during what became the first dot-com bubble. SF and the Bay were bustling. People were pouring into the city, and, as a result, people were also leaving the city in droves, in what I would later recognize to be a reoccurring pattern in boom and bust cycles. The city was undergoing a massive cultural shift because the cost of living in limited space was becoming too expensive and too exhausting for many. </p>
<p>Back in 1999, I was attracted to the music and the general industrious nature of artists in the Bay. I was also drawn in by the variety of new media and wanted to be a part of it. Upon arrival, I was shocked by how expensive things were and nearly defeated by the complete lack of available housing. I knew there would be challenges, but I didn't fully realize... </p>
<p>My life got fucked up pretty quickly. I worked a string of crazy jobs to stay afloat. My first apartment in San Francisco was only a slight improvement from living in my car. My personal woes were made to seem much worse by being immersed in a shifting culture that was always chasing the Next Big Thing. The word "sexiness" was thrown around frequently at the time. The big venture-capital money flooding the Bay Area could make anything look sexy. </p>
<p>It was a goofy time and a certain shallowness of character tended to rule the day, as will happen when events become saturated with hoopla and hype. But there was also an air of real revolution about what was happening in the Bay Area. The change brought about by advances in digital technology didn't bleed slowly into the world of general business; they landed like meteorites. The Information Age was upon us, suddenly, after a few decades of casual speculation of what it would look like. </p>
<p>The original Napster (there were two incarnations, the second being inconsequential) was one of the larger meteorites, coming into existence in June 1999 and succumbing to lawsuits in July 2001, and everyone was talking about it back then. During the company’s brief run, it can arguably be considered the face of how the Internet 1.0 influenced and altered perceptions of art, commerce and culture. Napster shook the entertainment industry to its core within months of being in existence. In a broader sense, Napster initiated the common dialogue about “shared economy,” and it pretty much antiquated the notion that nothing was truly free or without cost. <br> <br>Napster made downloading music free and easy. In a nutshell, you could get any song you wanted at the cost-free click of a button. You could also allow your digital music collection to be shared with others. From an intellectual property standpoint, it was grade-A thievery. It was hard to call it anything else: the creators of the product weren’t being compensated. The defense of “sharing” was typically a jumble of moral relativism. Bottom line: the stuff was free so why pay for it? <br> <br>At some point, the surrounding arguments gave way to an understanding that the technology genie was out of the bottle. The train carrying the shared economy had already left the station. Napster didn’t survive the extended conversation - corporate interests representing the status quo shut them down and fast. But, the old-school model of the entertainment business didn’t survive either. We are less than two decades removed from that era and very little of it resembles how business gets done today. <br> <br>Today’s young adults are the first generation of people to grow up with a normalization of horizontal authority, meaning authority given to the many rather than a select few, also known as vertical authority. Vertical authority was the value system holding sway for a couple hundred preceding centuries. Horizontal authority is basically the governing tenant of a sharing economy. And its here to stay with companies like Uber and Airbnb. Future generations will look at the broad strokes of how horizontal authority came into wide practice and wonder why people initially challenged it. <br> <br>Historians in the future might not see anything particularly brilliant within the inner-workings of Napster – the idea behind the company was pedestrian, the technology was assessable in its time, the personalities meh, they were simply the first to implement an inevitable idea – but the company made a significant impact along the timeline of our evolving Modern Age. I remember using Napster. It did what people said it would more/ less. Their service offered a certain convenience that was understandably appealing. Personally, I preferred a trip to the record store – and still do. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/42607762016-07-02T10:10:37-07:002022-01-12T07:38:47-08:00An Appreciation for Sun Ra<p>Sometimes it's not about how good something is in the moment, or what the point of purpose is. Sometimes the impressive thing is the fact that it happened at all. That's my take on the legacy of Sun Ra. He is of a type of singular musician that ultimately furthers the dialogue about creativity and music. <br> <br>Sun Ra lead countless professional combos and toured the world, created his own method of musical notation, recorded and released over a hundred albums of original compositions, was an early and innovative user of electronic instruments and recording technologies, and was well known - if not always appreciated - amongst his contemporaries. His musical influence is legitimate and his influence on the music business is surprisingly far-reaching for someone who insisted he was from Saturn. <br> <br>Sun Ra only received a token notice from the mainstream during his lifetime. He was never on the star path; he didn’t assume a heroic role, or play the antithesis of one, and basically nothing about his presentation was particularly relatable. His commercial potential was essentially zero, but it didn’t slow him down. He stayed pragmatic, from self-publishing albums, to living communally at times with his band, to using homemade instruments (because the music was from Saturn, but also perhaps because real instruments could be too expensive to repair). <br> <br>None of this would matter if the mountain of music he left behind sounded self-absorbed, a little too comfortable, conformist, lame. Quite the opposite: the music is challenging. Sun Ra is a rare original in the annals of commercial music. He insisted he was from outer space and his music sounded like it. It can seem like a novelty, but he was 100% committed. The value of his contribution continues to grow with time. <br> <br>Sun Ra was and still is a curious outlier in the world of Jazz. I’ve intimated that he made “space” music, but by training he was in the jazz idiom, albeit knowingly on the margins. I find his aesthetic to be inscrutable but nonetheless fascinating to consider. What gives a man such self-possession to make music that sounds like no other? To my mind, the gravity starts to take hold upon considering who Sun Ra really was and what he accomplished in his life, thoughts beyond this blog post. <br> <br>If you are new to Sun Ra, you might not know where to begin to appreciate his music. I don’t know of a right answer, but personally, I was hooked by several recordings he made between the late 1950s and late 1960s, such as Cosmic Tones for Mental Therapy (1967), Jazz in Silhouette (1959) and the Heliocentric Worlds of Sun Ra (1965). I haven’t listened to everything – and it’s not known exactly how much stuff was and/ or is still available – but I found these records to be a good place to start. For more background, I recommend the definitive biography Space is the Place by John Szwed. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/42440152016-06-22T20:09:23-07:002021-05-29T11:35:08-07:00Hillary 2016<p>I think the argument that Hillary is an ineffectual political insider and/ or beholden to special interests is tired. You could replace her name with anyone else running for high office and it would carry the same weight depending on your political point-of-view. It's hot air basically. Also, if there is anyone who has proven to get things done within "the system," it's Hillary. So I'm not buying that her negatives stem from operating within the current system (such criticism, by the way, implies that the current system will be replaced with - wait for it - a whole new system!) <br> <br>What I do find interesting is the particular sort of animosity that many dudes have towards Hillary. I'm not talking about civil discourse, informed opining, common venting, etc. - all important/ valid to some degree. I'm talking about the fact plenty of dudes become irrationally hostile and even menacing when pressed to detail their issues with Hillary. I think this is because she is a powerful politician with a long and distinguished career, and also because she is a woman. <br> <br>I can hear the dude chorus now: "my criticism of Hillary has nothing to do with her being a woman...!!" Whatever. It's not all about you. I think it's hard to deny - and frankly, weird to ignore that plenty of dudes resent Hillary because she's female. So many guys are raised with a notion that they're supposed to be in charge, but in reality, it's a false myth and damaging. There is no such universal rule. It's just a crappy tradition basically, and it needs to be exposed for the nonsense that it is in this modern age. As a side note, these wounded guys should to get to know some of my male musician friends who have long ago figured out that sometimes the path to realizing one's best ambitions is to hook up with a smart girl who can also pay all the bills. <br> <br>Anyway, plenty of dudes are grinding their teeth at the prospect of a woman POTUS. It's not by coincidence that Hillary is the first woman with a credible shot at becoming the next commander-in-chief. It's a big moment, and a mad/sad thought for plenty of dudes stuck in the 19th century. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/42344362016-06-16T17:50:31-07:002016-06-16T17:50:31-07:00My Issues with Streaming Music Services<p>Much is made of how the digitization of music has transformed the music industry. There are negatives (the artist gets ripped off, it’s too corporate, the technology is clumsy, etc.), and there are positives (disruption to the old school business model was overdue). Most of us hold an opinion somewhere in the middle; we accept digital music, but it doesn’t thrill. No doubt: a fundamental shift has occurred and yesterday’s ways of making and listening to music are becoming obsolete. Streaming music services are playing a role in the transition. <br> <br>But it doesn’t sound that good… <br> <br>I have a horse in this race because I make music. Digital music doesn’t sound that good when streamed - not yet anyway. At best, the sound is inconsistent - anywhere from sonically thin to overdriven. Top quality requires a certain technological sophistication. I’m not convinced the new gatekeepers have much of an appreciation or respect for the experience of the listener (iTunes, Google Music, Amazon and the like…). And these gatekeepers are lame. Their competitive leveraging tends to leave the customer with compatibility issues. From poor sound quality to planned obsolescence to platforms not playing nice with each other, the listeners are the losers. <br> <br>We are losing the creative context… <br> <br>What makes music – and art – interesting is vaporizing at a heightened rate. It takes considerable resources to transfer classic analogue recordings to a digital format. Aside from the deterioration and loss of less in demand recordings, older music surviving into the new age is not being heard as it was intended, both in regards to sound quality and the album experience. The net effect is cultural: tactile (LPs and CDs) sound recordings are disposable. <br> <br>Creating original music is still expensive… <br> <br>The notion of the recording artist being disposable limits a musician’s opportunity to make a living by traditional means. While not necessarily a bad thing from a creative standpoint, it’s a lame conceit to hail it as an innovative disruptor in the marketplace. Most, if not all streaming services have a shaky matrix to recognize and honor copyright. Put simply, no one outside of the executives and employees at streaming companies make any money from this. And the cost of creating the content hasn’t reduced in the slightest. Musicians are not catching a break with gear, studio time, legal and tax services, etc. The content generators are the last to get paid. <br> <br>The selling point is convenience… <br> <br>I could go on about how a lack of deep listening leads to a normalization of things like auto-tuning, musical vanity exercises and overly literal messaging, but I will leave that to another essay. Streaming services are here to stay. I can appreciate it in certain settings, such as a casual party or when your mind and hands are occupied with other things. But, it would be an overstatement to call digital recordings an improvement on the past, which in a way is interesting in and of itself. There have been few – if any – new introductions of technology that sold itself on actually being worse than the technology that came before it. That’s a price we’re paying for convenience. </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/41909632016-05-21T09:22:06-07:002016-05-21T09:22:06-07:00Marshal Gold Discovery State Historic Park<p>A while back I visited the Marshal Gold Discovery State Historic Park in Coloma, CA. The park marks the initial discovery of gold in California in 1848. The actual spot where it happened is nondescript: a quiet riverbank along a fork of the American River. It happens to be just down the road from where I live. It kind of blows my mind to consider the weight of the historical moment that happened here. </p>
<p>Gold was a gateway event shaping the modern American West. The story goes that James Marshal, a carpenter, was employed by John Sutter to build a sawmill. At some point during the mill's construction, Marshal noticed a few odd bits of metal in a diversion channel coming off the river. It was gold. He couldn't keep it under wraps; within months, waves of dreamers had embarked to the Sierra foothills in search of riches. <br> <br>The infamous Gold Rush was in high gear by 1849. California became a state in 1850 (it was part of Mexico prior). Gold played a pivotal role in the Civil War (it’s no coincidence that my local paper is called the Union). Gold had fueled US Western expansion and the rest, as they say, is history. A tiny historical marker downplays the enormity of what happened almost 200 years ago in this quiet park just off of Highway 49. <br> <br>The Marshal Gold Discovery State Historic Park is a good place to spend a few hours. There are several miles of hiking trails to take it all in. There are historical structures to recreate the Sutter Mill operation. There is a local history display and a souvenir shop. But no razzle-dazzle; it’s not an amusement park. As I was leaving I caught sight of a park ranger, just off shift apparently, drinking a beer in a golf cart and listening to a tune I couldn’t quite place on a radio. Hats off that guy too. <br> </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/40173072016-01-31T08:56:44-08:002016-07-26T06:53:25-07:00Politicking Through an Ugly Election Season: 10 Annoyances <p>The 2016 election season has been ugly so far, and it will probably only get worse in the coming months… My biggest pet peeve could be boiled down to essentially this: people are not serious enough about local elections, and we take national elections way too seriously. However, there are all kinds of behaviors and attitudes making politics a drag. Here is a list of ten things that make me want to punch a wall. </p>
<p>1. Laziness. The confused, disenfranchised, undecided - every election cycle. They don't know who to vote for. They don't know what anyone stands for. The lazy voter says they can’t find a good candidate, but they are too inert to make any progress! </p>
<p>2. Bubble Mentality. A political opinion without the support of a meaningful coalition or legacy is irrelevant. This gets lost on the bubble mentality, which persists with ineffectual self-importance. Anyone with the bubble mental has no party affiliation and can't stand politicians, but holds sage-like wisdom from the sofa. Designation: Couch Grouch. </p>
<p>3. Shaming Non-voters. Some say your opinion doesn't count if you don't vote. Wrong. You are vested if you pay taxes, if you volunteer, if you are a good father, mother, sister, brother, member of the community, etc. You should vote if you can - it's a good habit. But, shaming someone for not voting is disingenuous. </p>
<p>4. "Politicians are all crooked." Yes, no, maybe so. Is it any different than other lines of work? Get over it. Get involved. Get out and vote accordingly. </p>
<p>5. The Loudmouth. One who is always looking for an opportunity to tell you what they think. Or, somebody who thinks his or her opinion is important (news flash: your opinion is not that important). The loud mouth is exponentially worse if tied to other annoyances on this list. </p>
<p>6. Identity Politics. Identity politics are a refuge for the incurious. Opinions are subjective, and not well served in an echo chamber of groupthink. </p>
<p>7. Pathological Ambition: As seen in the politician who runs for public office despite having no clear base of support. They are not civil servants; they want the power of a prestigious office. They often finance their own campaigns (because they have no real base to support them financially). Their positions change to fit the moment. They are resilient to scandal. A candidate with this affliction typically can't be bothered with running for a more local office, using their money to launch themselves straight into state-wide or national campaigns. </p>
<p>8. The Intellectual Vacuum. In other words, those who insist that society is heading in one direction or another with little to no context to support such belief. Commonly seen in wacky political parties on the fringe. </p>
<p>9. The So-called Tyranny of Political Correctness. The notion that one can be oppressed by political correctness is bunk. Ironically, this attitude usually stems from a perspective of anti-tolerance. I don't want to stereotype, but most people tend to be okay with political correctness if it jives with their own beliefs. </p>
<p>10. The Egoist Ideal. This is a hyper vigilant opinion that never factors into winning elections. Even so, the egoist ideal will be up in arms when a nationally elected official doesn't show enough reverence to their point of view. </p>
<p>Don’t let these assholes win…</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/39690762016-01-01T11:50:15-08:002021-06-01T18:50:57-07:00Parallels Between Fringe Songwriters and Old School Weed Dealers<p>I sometimes look for insights from other businesses with parallels to the art market of fringe songwriting. Beyond general characteristics shared by all capital-based businesses – managing margins, staying profitable, building towards some kind of measurable growth – the operational nitty-gritty of fringe songwriting doesn’t have an extensive family tree in the annals of commerce. <br> <br>What is fringe songwriting? I define it as a calling that wakes one up in the middle of the night at the cost of good sense the next day. It’s anything and everything that doesn’t kiss butt up the chain of the art department. It’s not anti-business but… productivity doesn’t really conform to pre-conceived notions of commercial timing, such as considering where to place the “hook,” landing a song with a radio audience, finding placement in hackneyed TV, movies and advertising, or developing for a young-star-in-the-making to sing. Fringe songwriting is a decidedly underground endeavor perhaps unsuitable for the mainstream. <br> <br>Anyway… the businesses of fringe songwriting and dealing weed – pre medical marijuana weed dealing that is – share a few parallels. Fringe songwriting takes flexibility, long, unpredictable, typically uncompensated hours, to foster a network of community. Weed dealers work a roundabout path of getting to know friends-of-friends-of-friends to establish a trust with an eventual clientele. Both enterprises require travel, often at odd hours, and to dark, dingy, sometimes stinky and even dangerous destinations. <br> <br>Both trades require proficiency in finger math, and the contracted agreement between buyer and seller is more copacetic than institutionally proper. A fringe songwriter looking to get paid at the end of the night might have to wait out a long, rambling, protracted story by a promoter. It’s not unlike sitting in some dude’s apartment waiting to exchange green for green, bud for cash. Alternative economies are always in the picture too, including bartering, IOUs and Funny Math. <br> <br>Fringe songwriters and weed dealers might share the same customers: pot smokers. If these industries were to seminar together, I imagine a smooth amalgamation of discussions and debates about what-it-all-means, infused with ideological heaviness and understood by all as right and natural, which is to say it’s not very well understood at all. I would expect to hear plenty of words, yet would be surprised to see anything written down in way of a formal business plan. <br> <br>The entrepreneurial dream of fringe songwriters and weed dealers tends to end up near the same place. While a weed dealer doesn’t typically have high hopes of becoming the next grandiose drug Kingpin, a creative songwriter generally accepts the limited commercial ceiling of farmer’s markets and subway tunnels. Money tends to stay in the cash world. It can get lost in the couch. The IRS doesn’t typically pay notice. <br> <br>A weed dealer faced with state and federal legalization might suddenly stand outside the bounds of relevancy. Ditto for the fringe songwriter facing a public’s embrace of autotuned idolatry. Losing your audience to a normalization of increased regulation and automation can be a rude awakening after 10-20-30 years in business. Certain luxuries of the underground – like wearing bright red action slacks and kicking back in a beanbag chair or drinking in dive bars to foster self-promotion and spending sleepless nights striving for originality – lose charm quickly with money tight, margins more defined and life’s progress on a decidedly sideways bent. As a life plan, it just doesn’t make sense to be an original songwriter or old school weed dealer functioning in the underground market anymore. Sad, but true.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/38049872015-08-05T12:56:01-07:002020-07-12T22:41:52-07:00An Appreciation for the Beach BoysI like the music of the Beach Boys. Brian Wilson's unabashed Pop compositions are more than mere formula songs by enlarge (even the early stuff). The music invokes a simplicity that betrays its technical and emotional complexity. Done well, the songs hold up through a variety of interpretations - from ukulele to the orchestral - without losing their charm. The lyrics are suitably utilitarian and better than a daffy image would suggest. There is a satisfying clarity in the narrative color of the Beach Boy’s best songs. Like their contemporaries and chief rivals, the Beatles, the Beach Boys sang like birds. Any weight within the written word is a bonus.<br><br>The Beach Boys had their own unique sound and it was large. It's unmistakable when emulated. Brian Wilson's songwriting process was personal, poetic and legitimately musical (I am of the camp who consider him to be a savant of sorts), - very original, and as history would have it, influential. Beach Boy-styled vocalizations can still be heard all over the place today – in and outside of popular music. The final element of the Beach Boys: from the beginning, the machine that produced them made a smart move to give their sound a high degree of musicianship. It's kept them relevant. The bed of music beneath the bulk of their best stuff (most of it from the 1960s) hasn't become dated by lesser trends of the era thanks to the taste and ready capabilities of the LA studio hot shots known as the Wrecking Crew.<br><br>The overall story of the Beach Boys is a sad, and somewhat exhausting trope in the annals of music business: drugs, infighting, and mental illness... But, you can't analyze their success without finding out how the music industry makes some of that gnarly sausage. It can be a little unnerving to watch You Tube clips of Brian Wilson post heyday and in throws of mysterious despair. But if you get a chance to watch good musicians and good singers perform Beach Boy hits, I recommend you do so. The experience can be surprisingly fulfilling. If you make music, you might even be tempted to incorporate some of the Beach Boys into your own sound. It has happened to the best of them. It's OK. The Beach Boys were great.Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/37633212015-07-02T08:24:35-07:002021-06-25T06:44:41-07:00Music is ImperfectAutomation can serve music, but it can't correct it. Music has no correctable qualities. The air/ lilt/ light/ space adding color and vibrancy to sound are the gates by which the body and mind gain consciousness of the composition from the general flat line of noise. Historically, the math beat is rooted in the sad arts, hardly creative; a sonic shackle for marching orders.<br> <br>Tonal auto correction seeks to uniform the path between hearing and thought into subservience - a vacuumed bow to the master, and a head slap from the next back-assed disaster. The thinking goes that music has to have enough familiarity - i.e. perfection - so as to not displease the ruling authority. There is no future in such impatient bitch mongering.<br> <br>What is music? The answer doesn’t have to be strict. Music is meant to be imperfect! Keep it to the universal basics: Sonic expression, orderly noise, notable, rhythmic. Perfection seeks to reduce - if not eliminate - the possibilities in the answer. Perfection suits a limited kind of music. It seeks to establish a rule. The thought of bending music towards the ultimate accuracy confuses pride with awareness. It brings to mind a cave man, thick-between-the-ears, barking in the shallows of the arts.<br> <br>Let people be with their music. Competition is fine, but it falls short in defining <em>what</em> and <em>why</em>. It can light the path of <em>how</em> to make music, but who is to say? Those who seek to evaluate the merits of music could and should do so with a spirit for freedom. Musical competitions acting on a norm of perfection are ignoring what we’re all really competing against: time. Too quickly do they abandon appreciation for the fight, struggle and grit required to shape sonic order from disorderly noise.<br> <br>Perfection has no real authority over music, and as a concept, it might best act as a diversion from what is quite often hackneyed and common at the substance level. I reject perfection on the grounds of it being a pretentious conceit. I reject perfection on the grounds of it lacking humor and feeling. To paraphrase Miles Davis: “play it first and tell them what it is later.” Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/36885112015-05-03T14:25:26-07:002021-09-24T10:20:32-07:00Pour Some Sugar On MeDef Leppard, after years of directing ladies to pour sugar on them, are as determined as ever to own the situation. <br>Sadly, dousing your lover in sugar is still well outside of societal norms despite the best efforts of Def Leppard.<br> <br>Critics say the tendency of sugar to get hot, wet and sticky sweet from your head to your feet is pointlessly messy. It will not lead an improved sex life. It is not even interesting. Def Leppard dismisses such talk as envy.<br> <br>Def Leppard points to record sales as justification of how sugar works with the bing-bang. Critics point to a lack of serious study dedicated to understanding the compulsion to tell friends and strangers alike to pour sugar on you.<br> <br>The band and its critics remain at an impasse. According to a spokesperson for Def Leppard, a never ending line of ladies get a kick out of pouring sugar on the band. This is "all we need to know." The band insists they are happy and cannot wait to get doused in sugar again.<br> <br>Critics question the number of ladies in the "never ending line," suggesting a significant percentage of them might be under expectation they are on way to a bathroom or a food truck, or perhaps harboring a mental illness.<br> <br>Def Leppard will play the Yolo County fairgrounds this weekend, headlining a bill that also includes Styx and Ratt. The band's publicist says they will play Pour Some Sugar on Me until they get it right.Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/35576092015-02-25T14:06:30-08:002019-10-24T02:18:48-07:00Boy Bands – Fuck No! <p>Remember NSYNC? Wow, they were really in sync. Streamlined. Uniform. They were painting by numbers and staying within the lines. Step – 2-3-4; but dazzling, no? Just kidding. All boy bands suck. Not just a little bit, but very much so. <br> <br>The appeal of boy bands through the ages baffles me. The songs are horrible, the dancing is often in conflict with musical activity, and the old fashion is generally homage to the worst instincts of the era. <br> <br>I don’t prefer music to be in sync. I find this approach manipulative and tyrannical on the whole. The PC police are overly concerned with censoring content. Fuck them. You ought to be alarmed by the LACK of content in Pop music. Boy bands are little suburban mall brats going Lord of the Flies with their superficialities and boring 1st World problems. <br> <br>Boy bands are not for the free, the brave, the bold or the best. They are for the bitches. The tools. The ramrods. The so-so. The perfectly owned. Boy bands? Look at how they treat each other. That’s how they’d treat you! Fuck no! </p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/34719472015-01-17T08:41:34-08:002015-01-17T08:41:34-08:00Motivational Slogans Pretty Much Suck <br>US culture places a high premium on feeling good. How about feeling how you feel and being true to that? There is something "ugly American" about the proliferation of motivational sloganeering along paths of self-realization. Less talk, more do. At some point, self-actualization just increases narcissism.<br> <br>A positive outlook can be a social grace. It can also carry a backdraft of needy insistence. Inhabitants of the first world do not need to be motivated. We need to commit to the maintenance of our inspiration, to engage in free thinking and action, and stay able to absorb the fallout of our collective tendency to over simplify and thus overcomplicate our lives. A fuel can filled with happy thoughts will burn out fast.<br> <br>There is something about the motivational outlook that is too excusing of our forgetfulness toward the struggle of others. There is something sad about having ritualistic reminders implore us to be good to ourselves. There is something downright depressing about how often motivational sayings occur without the context of motivational doings. Why are we so apathetic?<br> <br>Do motivational sayings increase our fortitude or do they more reinforce a sense of where we are - and where we are not - within societal norms of proper living, regardless of whether or not such norms find sustenance in the truth? I don't know the answer to this, but waiting on the generic pick-me-up doesn't make one more interesting.<br> <br>Motivational sloganeering can often be boiled down to how we buy things and sell things, which is kind of disgusting, particularly when our appraisal of self and others are wrapped up in it. It's important to find healing. It's more important to understand the root cause of pain. Be an example of dignity, integrity, human kindness... Save the happy harmony for the hamster wheel.Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/34548142015-01-06T16:37:12-08:002015-01-06T18:50:37-08:00Music Talk on the Subject of SwagThe conversation used to be music-related when I'd talk with management types about how my music fits into the big picture. Lately, it’s been more about what kind of branded merchandise we can sell down the road - shoes, ties - haha. I'm not surprised this happens. But, what does kind of surprise is how many people accept it without much critical thought. It’s as if the modern musical dream only becomes fully realized when a clothing line is attached to it. Personally, I’d make more money selling shoes and ties working for Macy’s. The guitar I play might offer some fair services, but I make no promises when it comes to your accessorizing needs. <br><br>If you want swag, buy tee shirts and buttons because these items are more than mere fashion. They represent little flags we carry to communalize out loud in our collective inspiration. Shoes, ties, even high-end booze; this stuff is all status-quo bullshit. Buy a Sane Lunatic Productions tee shirt or button and rock on. If you want my shoes, well, I only have a few pairs and the price point must reflect that. Straight-talk: my shoes (all of them well-worn) are not that good of a deal for you. The SLP tee shirt on the other hand, that’s some hot and holy shit right there. Currently SOLD OUT!!<br> <br>Maintaining a brand identity is reasonable business practice, but having a meaningful connection to music is truly special - and valuable - in my world. I do my best to account for this with my music and the future has me feeling optimistic. The 21st Century is allowing more connection to the <em>experience </em>of culture on a local level. See - hear - feel - support and partake as you can. Also, note when it goes a little too far… Listen closely; when the actual music gets lost in the plot, you are much closer to buying shoes at Macy’s than you are to being amidst vital culture.<br> <br>Historically, musicians (actors too) have always been the equivalent of road kill in the pantheon of human societies. Musicians – and more specifically, musical people - are largely anonymous and silent across the pages of history. In many instances they were to be avoided, persecuted even. I don’t see how aspiring to sell shoes with an acoustic guitar honors the suffering behind this sad fact. If history is an accurate measure, it’s only a matter a time before shifting focus away from musical creation to self-important musician-endorsed accessorizing leads to a replacing of musical instruments with donkeys and DJs – wait, what the?! FUCK! Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/30839572014-07-17T20:52:39-07:002021-06-02T20:20:28-07:00American Underground/ Outsider Rock in the 1980s (Part 2): Punk RockWhat is Punk…? I’d say political-action: (MC5, Clash, Black Flag, Gang of Four, etc.), and jamming the status quo: (Sex Pistols, FEAR, Dead Kennedys, etc.). I’d call it a vibrant energy beyond the mainstream capable of linking memorable characters along the margins (Lou Reed, New York Dolls, DEVO). Punk is having the passion to claim your destiny (Stooges, Ramones). “Punk” is a word coined by Lester Bang’s along his search for authenticity in Rock music. <br><br>Today we see Punk everywhere - in music, film, design, fashion, photography… It’s in the gutter, taught in schools, corporatized. Punk is fussed over, celebrated, ridiculed, left for dead. It’s a certain sound, a particular sight, a slight, a movement, freedom, desperately serious and a complete joke. It has placed touchstones along music’s search for meaning. True definition doesn’t inspire; it’s best left open to interpretation. Whatever may be Punk, the general idea has seeded an unquantifiable amount of art.<br> <br>Where does Punk come from? The general sound dates back to garage rock from the Fifties and Sixties. The well goes a little deeper attitudinally into the Rock and Roll golden era, the "Chitlin' Circuit" post WWII. Punk is nothing special: voice, guitars, drums - some (if not all) the music makers entering the fray from an amateurish background. Lester Bangs co-opted the word from prison slang. Energetic, edgy, raw, direct… Punk still attracts new recruits wanting to live or die by some such terms, or maybe just carry a flag that fucks with the Man’s business.<br> <br>Punk remains largely misunderstood (if recognized at all) in Pop culture. So be it. It’s not about nostalgia. It doesn’t click as a tourist-friendly memory mile; it barely holds as marketing term. It’s only now inching towards museum treatment. Punk doesn’t need a Hall of Fame, but the kick-ass of its collective brethren did as much for the business and culture of music as anyone of any time and place. Put simply, any modern Rock music that hasn’t at least paid a visit to Punk’s legacy is all but dead (notwithstanding the general public's taste for zombie). <br> <br>The music business at its heart has always been a shallow, trivial, escapist and sad machine. Punk is one of the few anomalies to that. In its heyday, Punk held the gravity of what could be called a movement. Punk exorcised Rock music, crushed it and then rebuilt it back to a point of purpose. Those in the wake are still improving upon the blueprint to bring musical missions towards greater levels of sustainability. In United States, the Punk idea laid the groundwork for the last great moment for Rock and Roll, the independent underground scene of the 1980s.<br> <br>In the 1970s, Punk made enough noise to attract major label business plans that tried, and usually died, with efforts to turn it into the Next Big Thing. Only a handful of bands made it to any renown. Blondie was an exception. DEVO had promise, but couldn’t rise out of novelty. The Ramones gave it a good shot, but couldn’t tie their craziness into consumer frenzy. The mainstream limits for American Rock seemed clear - and dull - and the truly inspired basically just gave up on trying to please people. The big business economy of scale went to the dollar bin as free-spirited peoples created their own independent operatives. This was the post-Punk moment.<br> <br>Going into the 1980s, the music industry was churning out bland and cynical corporate schlock by en large. The Punk ethic of doing-your-own-thing successfully deconstructed that process, which fanned into regional communities sustained by hardcore music heads living along the margins. Functional networks grew into actual music businesses that existed beyond the influence of major label corporatism. These networks had their own identities, but they shared a can-do spirit. They helped bring each other along from A to B. If one worked hard enough, there were opportunities to get past financial limitations to achieve sonic identity.<br> <br>Success by these measures happened nation-wide. New York had its thing as always. So did LA. Yet, there were notable underground sounds everywhere: San Francisco, Austin, Minneapolis, Washington DC, Seattle, Athens, etc. These regional networks connected and spread an unsaid spirit for adventure that, practically speaking, allowed the means of production to stretch further and operate more efficiently. One could now travel across the country playing unfettered independent Rock music, find food and reliable shelter on the cheap, and have audiences eager for new sounds waiting to hear them.<br> <br>The biggest beneficiary often times was the product itself, which could melt your ears, blow your mind and rattle your bones – maybe all at once. The best of it holds up well today. Musically, this was a passionate era and special for its collective willingness to explore new ideas, not to mention the chronicling of hard-charging-good-(and-bad)-times that could be downright ferocious. Those who bought the product had to have it. The target audience was within one degree of word of mouth; patronizing messaging would not stand. The American underground scene of the 1980s was an unpaved road full of harsh critics, but the payoff was culture – and real cultural experiences – soaked in actual content. Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/30674322014-07-09T22:14:41-07:002014-07-17T20:29:32-07:00Out of Body ExperiencesI’ve had two very real out of body experiences in my lifetime, both set to music. The first one was in high school. I slept in my parent’s basement, had a room there, and I’d keep the radio on and listen to it all night. It wasn’t great music – more like using the sound as company - Pop music (we could only get 2-3 FM radio stations where I lived – if more a choice, probably would have been listening to Classic Rock at the time). I didn’t sleep very well in high school – mainly because I never wanted to go school the next day. I’d stay up so as to not let the day end (usually writing songs all night).<br><br>One morning I was already awake as the radio station started the broadcasting day. The first song was Don Henley’s Boys of Summer; I was sitting on the edge of my bed when I started to float around the basement. It was kind of like the scene from the Big Lebowski when the Dude floats around LA – except I was completely sober. I felt a vivid connection to Boys of Summer, all while floating on the ceiling and staring down at myself sitting on the edge of the bed listening to the song. For an odd moment I was physically outside of my body.<br><br>My second out of body experience came about four years later, near the end of my college life. I was in a Hemmingway hotel (a plaque said Hemmingway stayed there at some point), in Petoskie, Michigan. I was with my sister, brother-in-law, and some of their friends and we were listening to a cheery and talented Irish musician play songs from popular records. We were drinking margaritas – and I was drinking heavily – when the musician played Margaritaville by Jimmy Buffet. Everybody – the entire bar/ restaurant area – laughed and sang along to the classic tune. Everybody was either plowed or on their way. <br><br>I got up a little too suddenly to use the bathroom and stumbled to a hallway just off the bar. The hallway was maybe thirty feet long and surreally decorated in various shades of red – ceiling, floor and carpet – all decorated in red. I had already walked the hallway earlier in the night so there was nothing unusual about it at this point. But, being several Margaritas in and now listening to a live rendition of Margaritaville, it must have flipped the mystery switch. My soul took off and once again I was floating, hovering just beneath the ceiling and watching myself walk to the bathroom listening to a Jimmy Buffet song.<br><br>These two experiences are unique for me. I’ve experienced strange things in a similar vein - hallucination, extreme exhaustion, terror – moments when the world slows down or speeds up in abnormal ways. An out of body experience is different from that. To this day I can recall just how things appeared and even felt being up on the ceiling and looking down on myself. There wasn’t anything revelatory about it – no particular insights, no crystallization of a grand plan. And I don’t think the songs had much to do with it either. I’ve never been too interested in analyzing that part of it, other than to say I can’t hear Boys of Summer or Margaritaville without reflecting on my out of body experiences. Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/28943562014-04-23T23:20:16-07:002014-07-20T20:45:31-07:00Chris Kluwe - Ex NFL Punter Loses Job After Publicly Supporting Gay Marriage I listened to an interesting podcast this morning w/ ex-NFL punter Chris Kluwe, who lost his job (not so coincidentally) after offering public support for marriage equality. Kluwe was ahead of the curve in the NFL in this regard. He had zero problems with teammates and other players around the league after sharing his opinion. Apparently, the majority of players supported his stance. Those who didn't engaged in respectful discourse. Kluwe's actions didn't really phase his collegues. Civil rights for gay people is not that controversial to the modern NFP player. <br><br>Kluwe did have problems with his coaching staff (the Minnesota Vikings). In reaction to the publicity generated by his initial comments, coaches asked him to stay silent about the several state marriage equality propositions up for vote nationally. Coaches took this upon themselves: the MN Vikings ownership, executives, Legal and teammates had no issue with a player making a personal political statement. The coaches for whatever reason (team unity?) tried to stifle Kluwe - a punter (a position deemed non essential in the scale of things), with passive threats, bigoted taunts and other weird mind games. His coaches harassed hime in spite of his better than average stats. <br> <br>Longer story short: Kluwe is now out if the league - can't get a job while still in his prime - deemed "difficult" or not worth the press conference. It’s interesting that professional football coaches – people who have great influence over the livelihood and careers of players - and who publicly would endorse standing up for what is right, fighting for your beliefs and yada yada yada - would turn out to be the bigoted, petty and awful cast of characters in this story. So it goes... Those with power will often abuse it. <br> <br>Chris Kluwe isn’t playing the victim card; he isn't dwelling in the unfairness of it all. He understands that he was just a punter, isn't the guy filling the seats, doesn't have a ton of leverage, etc. He took a meaningful risk and it cost him. The NFL afforded him a nice lifestyle, but he may be better off without it in the long run. I commend him and others who advocate for simple justice when compelled to do so by heart and mind, even when the risk/ reward is not in their favor. History should reflect kindly on such actions. <br> Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/25364462014-02-06T20:59:12-08:002014-07-19T17:29:59-07:00American Underground/ Outsider Rock in the 1980s (Part 1): In HindsightNirvana… (oh, well, whatever), Nevermind.<br><br>Twenty-some years ago, Nirvana released the Nevermind album. It went to the top of the charts and turned the band into global stars. In hindsight, it seems like a watershed moment in music, a point when the American Indy underground of the 1980s reached a pinnacle of celebrated awareness. The interest in Nirvana extended to their influences, and a substantial public grew to respect a certain way of doing things – sonically and attitudinally – which served to more/less kick-start a thousand cottage industries. Nirvana's roots were in a cultural oasis that acted fully-realized and decidedly apart from the dominant corporate schlock of the time. <br><br>Nevermind might have been the last high water point for guitar music too. After Nirvana’s untimely demise, mass audiences for guitar rock shrank as general tastes moved towards Hip Hop, Dance, New Country and saccharine Pop music. Today’s stadium-sized Rock doesn’t pay tribute, or even call to mind a notable legacy of inspired forbearers. Outside of Green Day, most platinum Rock acts look contrived in Nirvana’s wake. Nirvana was the last of the big guitar bands to bring vision to long-standing musical traditions born in garages and basements.<br><br>The album Nevermind is gritty in tone and sonically plush; thematically a frank mishmash of rebel yell and everyman ethos set to killer hooks. It wasn’t a new formula; anyone with an ear to the ground knew it was born out of Punk Rock, an established culture – if liberally defined – long before Nirvana hit the scene. When Kurt Cobain screamed, it was as much a call for cultural and political awareness as it was self-expression. It was exciting, indefinable art, and disruptive of passive consumption. Punk rock bore low hanging fruit with the Nevermind album.<br><br>Nirvana were excellent ambassadors for the Indy underground, routinely praising other bands and lifting them up when possible, even though their operating budget had several more zeros than most of the groups they regarded as peers. Kurt Cobain told a certain truth about weaker artists looking to to cash in on a trend, but he had little interest in being King of the Hill in the music business. When it came to success, Nirvana almost apologized for it, as if a discussion about sales was in the way real talk.<br><br>Nirvana challenged the status quo, and for a minute they ruled the school. The safe and dull corporate shills went running to the hills with urgency to formulate the next mollifying Pop antiseptic. By the time the plastic people recovered, Nirvana had already rocked open a gate of culture, and from it escaped an influential rush of art and industry. Nirvana’s mainstream success was a big moment for independent spirits, perhaps the pivotal hinge-point on way to the modern day life hack. <br><br> Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/23115492013-12-31T14:51:50-08:002013-12-31T14:56:10-08:00Fifteen Love/Hate - Lists for 2013<strong>15 Things I Loved in 2013 that Didn’t Directly Involve Family and Friends</strong><br> <br>Pesto (variety)<br>Bookstores<br>Flat bread pizza<br>Hand crafted, well-made and fresh pilsner beer<br>Live music<br>New Yorker Magazine<br>Interesting and/ or funny tweets<br>Satellite Radio<br>Nights in Nevada County beneath viewable constellations<br>Open flame / slow cook / grill<br>P4 Party Cruiser<br>Bonfire(s)<br>Justified (TV Show)<br>Hardcore History (podcast)<br>Money<br> <br><strong>15 Things I Hated in 2013 </strong><br> <br>Gun violence outside of my house<br>Children getting shot in Oakland<br>National Rifle Association<br>Saccharine shopping music<br>Koch Industries, Inc.<br>MUNI<br>David Ortiz 8<sup>th</sup> inning grand slam in game 2 ALCS<br>Litter thrown out of car windows<br>Garbanzo Beans<br>Corporate phone trees<br>Fishman guitar pickups<br>Technology fated for planned obsolescence<br>Vocoder instrument<br>Pothole on 55<sup>th</sup> St between MLK and Market<br>MoneySanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/22430452013-12-16T21:20:04-08:002022-05-08T04:55:08-07:00Letter to Santa ClausSanta, <br><br>I don’t know if you’re working with the NSA or what, but how bad have I been? You haven’t left me as much as a lump of coal since I don’t know when. I would prefer coal, by the way, to these stacking years of indifference.<br> <br>OK - ignore me all you want. But, my son – crazy as he is at 5 years old – has overcome many bad habits (cussing, breaking shit, etc.). Are you really going to watch him drop another letter in the mailbox, and then leave it up to me to get him something in your name?<br> <br>Santa, it’s safe to say you’re not going to stop by the house again this year. Is it because we’re poor? And here we have all these sappy Christmas movies imparting “lessons” about class in this society… it’s frustrating. Straight up: your act seems like a bogus deal, bra. The houses you miss are noted by all the young girls and boys - the good ones and the band ones. Kids can be mean... <br> <br>If I wanted a bogus deal, I could go buy candles from the candle guy right now (current sale: two candles for the price of one; normally one candle for the price of two).<br> <br>Santa, I understand the magic. It’s a beautiful thought: flying around in a souped-up sleigh, whipping deer and delivering toys to all the tots - working one fucking night a year. Big shot. Christmas is kind of a bummer if I don’t have something with your name on it under the tree on Christmas morning.<br> <br>Let’s cut to the chase: children get sad if they don't get a special delivery from you around the holidays. <br><br>Jonny Mac<br> Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/21134882013-11-25T20:44:12-08:002020-11-09T23:22:14-08:00The Automaton and Popular Music<p>If time is money, evaluating today’s popular entertainments requires a certain currency of distraction. We live in an immediate era, and the logic of herd mentality can seem spun into perpetual disorientation. In a typical pop music video - for example - the object/ star never steadies before us. We only catch a glimpse as suggestive hyper edits whip up chaotic transfers of dream state heat. The effect is a stirring whirring on the Silly Meter with gravity pinging between points of raw befuddlement and head-up-ass profundity. It is as if our modern moment is a heightened refraction on the alchemy of NOW, with more ardent consumers rung up by the numbers. </p>
<p>Automatons have taken hold within this skittish din of art pollution. Coursing through the culture can become a directionless trip amidst a source-less grip of information serving to spike our drink and mess with us. People get worn down after a few go-rounds; they just want to get somewhere and holler at a star. The Automaton Entertainer is there to receive and also, to shake it. Shake it as they hit predictable marks - breaking like a celebrity buzz that is just short a tickle beneath the chin. A gestalt of white noise has given shape to the media landscape, teaming like airs of data funnel farts trying to seduce with promises to weave our own tiny voices into the milieu. <br> <br>Most people just flunk in the static. But, the automaton walks away from an information jam as casually as a billionaire abandoning a car in snarled traffic. The culture is widely crushed; fallen for the object – the star with wildness tamed to a preening that already seems set for the wax, chief personifications of the deadness inside; hot calls for all the nameless cattle. The imaging blitz might seek to turn everyone into a sideshow, but constant readying for the camera is a challenging condition, a real affliction, a course addiction – and only the prime turkey walks out the Idol. One has to ride lightning to abide heavy metal thunder and still resemble the good meat. In the end, it is an emotionless ride for an Automaton, which we should expect of one tied to the gilded flag of salable perfection. <br> <br>Like stealth current in a lazy river, a discombobulating PR attack on the scale of relevancy is the real deal behind a smooth veneer of cultured style. It is an all day messaging intent on clear-cutting the soul distance between the artful mind and body. It’s a cold clamor stymieing time by relentlessly tacking upon your wallet. The Automaton doesn’t notice, and their absorption in the moment has them running downhill towards a quickening obsolescence. Enter the Next Big Thing.... The Automaton Entertainer might impress by being able to butcher and eat the pony it rode in on, but the Hologram Entertainer is threatening to cut the whole heart out of the human act. Rumor has it negotiations are underway with Elvis’s head to top the bill at the next Lollapalooza.</p>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/19808952013-11-03T20:26:39-08:002021-02-11T02:52:02-08:00Ten Recordings for a Deserted IslandI was recently asked to pick ten recordings that I would want to have with me while stranded on a deserted island. Personally, the thought of being stranded – on a deserted island no less - presumably with no rescue in sight - is depressing. A few favorite things wouldn’t do much to ease the worry I’d have over essentially being lost in space. I’d go hungry without food, and insane without company. Overriding concerns would likely stay anxiously tied to survival and mortality, not the best frame of mind for enjoying sound recordings.<br><br>In another sense, I am relieved to NOT be stranded on a deserted island (I have that going for me). It’s in this spirit that I decided to play along with the damned hypothetical. Picking ten favorite records turned out to be a harder challenge than I thought. I was only able to quiet arguments in my head and start making some decisions after establishing a few ground rules. They are: I would be alone on the island; but I wouldn’t have to worry about food, water or shelter, and the stereo would not break down. Also, I couldn’t pick double albums, or box sets.<br><br>The process of picking the records reminded me of how much I enjoy sharing music with others. Since I’ll be alone on the island, I chose the following records, in part, for not being predominantly social recordings. Being alone forever really changes the weight of the ultimate party record, the love song, the urgent call to action, etc. I wouldn’t want to waste a pick on a record that would serve to deepen the despair I’d feel over being stranded. So, this task was made a little easier by not having to pick my all-time favorite recordings, but rather, solid selections that might bring comfort to a solitary circumstance.<br><br>These selections are in no particular order.<br><br><strong><em>Bud Powell – The Amazing Bud Powell (VOL 1)</em></strong><br><em>-If I could only hear one soloist and one instrument on a deserted island, it might be Bud Powell playing piano. Add to it performances by Fats Navarro, Sonny Rollins, Roy Haynes and Max Roach, and my predicament is made immensely better. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Best of Muddy Waters (Chess Records, released 1958)</em></strong><br><em>-An album to sooth my imagination and call to my humanness. I’ve already tested this one out during real life moments of loneliness. It works.</em><br> <br><strong><em>John Fahey – Death Chants, Breakdowns and Military Waltzes (1963 version)</em></strong><br><em>-This is a minimalist acoustic guitar masterpiece that I would probably never tire of. As a bonus, the intense solitude of the island might be an ideal environment for understanding Fahey’s liner notes. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Herbie Hancock – Head Hunters</em></strong><br><em>-Experimental and understated Funk. The subtle interplay between instruments and consistent ease of temperament throughout rewards repeated listening. This is practical music that could be played alongside any activity on the island, from work to play and everything in between. Such flexibility could be why it is one of the most popular jazz albums of all time. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Bob Dylan – Blonde on Blonde</em></strong><br><em>-I choose this as a “sound novel,” a record with real lyrical ambition – evocative, not too literal, and just coherent enough to allow some kind of huge story to settle in and still change over time. It’s also a noisy recording, a high water mark for garage rock perhaps - perhaps something to keep me from losing myself to the desolate elements of the island. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Nat King Cole Trio – Vocal Classics 1942 – 1946</em></strong><br><em>-This would be a record for special occasions on the island; for times when I might wear finer island clothes to enjoy a nice meal and good conversation with myself. The song selection and performance is solid throughout. The quality of such popular music from yesteryear is stunning. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Sarah Vaughan – Self Titled, featuring Clifford Brown </em></strong><br><em>-Sarah Vaughan’s voice is full of humanity, while the band exhibits a little bit of everything under the Bebop sun. This is a great recording, pure and simple on its face and yet expansive over time. If Bob Dylan’s “Blonde on Blonde” plays like a sound novel akin to a grand epic, this would be a more-in-the-now serial novel. I might get tired of the story, but not the voice. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Townes Van Zandt – Live at the Old Quarter, Houston, TX</em></strong><br><em>This is the only live recording (performed in front of an audience) on my list. If I’m stranded, but relatively ok (see ground rules), I would allow myself the conceit of having an imaginary live music venue on the island. Also, I wanted something indicative of Country music, and couldn’t find anything else to rise into the top ten, so Townes ends up as my resident entertainer by default. This is kind of a crazy thought. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Steve Reich – Music for 18 Musicians (original ECM recording)</em></strong><br><em>-It would be nice to be rescued eventually just to see how this music played on my mind over a protracted period of isolation. Music built from loops might actually become regenerative after the umpteenth listen. </em><br> <br><strong><em>Art Blakey and the Jazz Messangers – Moanin’</em></strong><br><em>-This is just a good record to have on hand to keep from hollowing out as a person. </em><br> <br> Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/19365922013-10-27T19:55:06-07:002021-05-08T09:54:06-07:00Lou Reed - RIPLou Reed. RIP. One of the great rockers for sure, and a great writer. To my mind he was someone who gave thought and feeling to important things. He didn’t patronize the listener or suck up to crass business interests. He was an original, a sound artist, something like that. <br><br>Quick story: I’ve bothered to get one autograph in my lifetime past the age of fifteen. It was Lou Reed’s. I was in Manhattan, staying around the corner from where he was debuting the tour for the album “New York,” doing a five-night stand at the St. James Theater. So, I was walking by the side of the theater, but on the other side of the street, with a couple of friends, around midnight. We didn’t go to the show, but noticed a limousine parked outside the stage door. There were maybe one or two people hanging around the limo, and my friends and I deduced it was Lou’s ride. So we walked over to the limo just as a guy comes out of the stage door and says Lou will be out in a few minutes. My friends and I were like, “WOW.” We were only just starting to appreciate Lou Reed’s music at the time, but he was quickly vaulting up into something like VIP status in our estimation. We thought it strange there weren’t more people waiting for him.<br><br>Anyway, Lou comes out – his eyes fried wide open – almost like he was recently electrocuted. He moves past us and into the car, and then rolls down his window to chat, which basically meant trading one or two word responses to handful of questions and comments like… I can’t even remember – stupid stuff, probably. Somebody gave me a pen and I grabbed a napkin off the street for Lou to sign. He grabbed my napkin, and just as he did that, a random passerby on the other side of the street was shouting to someone else named Steve – “Steve – Steve – Steve!” Lou Reed returned the napkin to me with the words “Best of luck, Steve.” Ha-ha.<br> <br>I still have the napkin somewhere. Coincidentally, the next night I was riding in an elevator of the hotel where I stayed. I shared the elevator with a stranger who was in the city with a church group. When this person had free time, he proceeded to tell me, he wandered around taking pictures of celebrities like an amateur paparazzi. He was in the background on the night I met Lou Reed and he recognized me from there. He took a great picture of Lou sitting in the car, and he gave it to me (since he didn’t know Lou Reed from Mr. XYZ, he had no reason to keep the picture for himself). So, not only do I have best wishes to Steve from Lou Reed, I have a picture of Lou sitting in his limo from that night given to me by a random dude – some kind of youth minister no less – that I met in an elevator.<br> <br>That is not all… The night after that, I was walking down that same street across from the stage door of the St. James Theater. I noticed the stage door was cracked a little bit… so I went over and let myself in. Yes, I did. There were a couple roadie-looking guys, maybe sound techs, who saw me, but didn’t care. It was Lou Reed’s encore of the fifth and last night at the St. James… I got to watch him do – if memory serves - White Light/ White Heat, Satellite of Love and Sweet Jane. I remember it being absolutely incredible. <br> Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/17665402013-10-02T02:20:00-07:002021-01-11T07:19:32-08:00Lester Bangs was a Frustrating MessLester Bangs was a writer’s writer for Rock criticism. He was brash and unabashed; as colorful as his subject matter, his passion for culture was infectious. As a bonus, he could string together complete sentences, (not necessarily a pre-requisite for the cutting-edge Rock Writers of his day). Lester Bangs could write and he had enough charisma and cache to keep getting gigs – albeit garbage gigs - after repeated bridge burning. He left a notable legacy as an unflinching misanthrope.<br><br>After a read of selected writings recently, the bold bombast of Lester Bangs still seems potent and important. He was notorious for scorching the cultural landscape of the Golden Gods, and challenging to the mindfulness of the consumer. He brilliantly took down the titans: Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Bowie, Sex Pistols, etc. He wrote like someone born to die, relentlessly punching away at an unfeeling, unthinking marketplace, and a culture that couldn’t and wouldn’t care less. We could use more of this today, though his style is as unemployable as ever.<br><br>Bangs didn’t accept that pop music had to be meaningless. He fought cynicism and keenly mocked creative self-seriousness, but over time, battling the superficial currents of the music business left him with unhealthy measures of both. He was not unlike John Henry up against the machine; eventually he was just worn out by trying too hard. Lester Bangs was an obsessive, and bless him for it. But, his occupational pan handling and tendency to self-medicate – heavily - underscores an inescapable contradiction within the main premise of his work: his job depended on an industry that obviously valued money over good art.<br><br>Lester Bangs was almost perversely expectant on the transformative powers of music. He set impossible standards; ultimately, he fell far short of them himself, (he died young – age thirty-three - in a rather cliché way: OD, looking like a bit of a scum bag). He would manically buy into and simultaneously reject the conceit of the musician as hero. He was a complicated person writing about complicated people, but his chosen medium demanded an oversimplification of the strange business of it all. He fought a good fight, but over time, a predictable downer obfuscated the vitality of his viewpoint. He was somewhat of a fool for elevating his subjects in the first place.<br><br>The downfall of Lester Bangs was fast and furious; sad associations, thinning taste, broke. His last writings have a feel of self-parody, and must have bummed him out greatly. He went out of his way to record some shitty music himself. The talent started to calcify, and he let go/ lost faith, became another first world burnout; a man too smart for his own skill set. It was too early for a man of his vision. He reached rare heights as a critic, especially in the Rock and Roll game, as one able to spit into the eye of conformity and make it seem viable.Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/16712192013-09-20T15:40:00-07:002022-02-22T23:29:49-08:00MTVMTV is awful in this day and age, but at one time I watched quite a bit of it – back in the silent commercial days. I was just a kid. My dad brought a box home one day to attach to the top of the TV. You would punch buttons and get like 8 more channels - pre-cable. I had heard about a 24 music channel called MTV. We hooked the box up and I hunted for MTV… The first video I saw was Romeo Void “Never Say Never…”<br><br>
“I might like you better if we slept together/ But there's somethin' in your eyes that says / Maybe that's never / Never say never…”<br><br>
I’ll never forget that moment. MTV was better than I had imagined. But, my mom - Irish Catholic and annoying - was in the room with me, so I had to act like I wasn’t interested in the video. In truth, it was all I could think about. Funny thing: I never saw the Romeo Void video again on MTV - or anywhere else for that matter (until years later on You Tube). It took me years to track down the name of the band and song.<br><br>
I did see other cool things on MTV in the early days - Eddie Grant, David Bowie, Pat Benatar, the Pretenders, DEVO, Blondie, Duran Duran (Girls on Film and Rio videos in particular– yeah, I thought the boat shit was cool at the time - still like the keys/synths from Nick Rhodes in general), and a handful of other things. That first year or so of watching MTV introduced me to a bunch of music that I didn’t know anything about – being a kid from the sticks who was literally listening to Styx.<br>Sanelunaticproductionstag:sanelunaticproductions.com,2005:Post/15380102013-09-02T15:50:00-07:002021-11-28T20:40:58-08:00Book Review: Commando – The Autobiography of Johnny Ramone Book Review: Commando – The autobiography of Johnny Ramone <br><br>
Commando, released in early 2013, is a good read for anyone interested in the Ramones, Punk Rock and the music business in general. Johnny Ramone, (real name, John Cummings), is succinct and to the point in this telling, the recollections fast and rich. The march through the years is brisk, unsentimental and the reader gets a sense of the real deal. This is the most definitive inside account of the Ramones - by default - seeing as Joey and Dee Dee died prior to the book coming together. Johnny himself was presumably on his deathbed at the time of writing, but illness didn’t dull his edge. Johnny Ramone had a strong point a view and he kept it going until the end. He could be boorish, but there is plenty of intelligence and humor in this memoir to lift the infrequent moments of mono vision. <br><br>
The Ramones are on the short list of Punk’s greatest innovators. The influence of their music, style, attitude and pragmatic approach to the business behind it all is growing with time. They were original; an antithesis to institutionalized sounds and behaviors that water down most attempts at commercial music, and they were stronger because of it. As a band, they always intended to be great, even dreamt of being the greatest of all time. Their aspirations were sincere and raw, and it took real drive to overcome a lack of traditional musical ability and make it as far as they did. In the book, Johnny is candid about his expectations and goals, and his disappointment upon realizing the Ramones would be fated to something less than the rarified air of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.<br><br>
The Ramones recalibrated Rock music for the modern age. They kept songs tight and on point, eliminated the Blues and guitar solos; toured a no-nonsense stage show relentlessly, and they wore a uniform of leather and long hair throughout their career. They were geeks underneath it all, but cool as can be. Johnny Ramone was the architect behind the band’s operation; he was the Task Master, the aesthetic guide (or despot, depending on who you ask), and the main money manager. To hear him tell it, they kicked more ass than just about anyone despite certain limitations posed by his band mates: Dee Dee’s self-destructiveness and inability to take an order, Joey’s insecure “front man” prima donna prerogatives, and a series of drummers who were grating complainers, if not outright drunks. Tommy Ramone, the band’s original drummer, is the only person connected with the band to consistently receive high compliment from Johnny. <br><br>
It was Tommy’s idea to start the band, and it was Tommy who would be the first to leave, after their third album, in a desperate attempt to reclaim his sanity. The Ramones were truly strange – and I don’t mean in a gimmicky way. The showbiz shtick stayed on the surface. Just below, the Ramones were four singular individuals who were often at odds with each other. Johnny was as unapologetically right wing as they come, (and if today’s right-wingers had good taste in music, this book would provide evidence that their ideology had a notable cultural legacy – at long last). Dee Dee Ramone, the band’s principal songwriter, was a sensitive soul with a hard drug problem, as well as a determined non-conformist. Joey, for his part, ran regular interference with band logistics and productivity stemming from his severe OCD and debilitating self-esteem issues. Marky Ramone, the second and longest tenured drummer, could be a melancholy alcoholic. You get the idea… <br><br>
The Ramones took on piety in all forms with unrelenting humor. Deconstructing self-righteousness was about the extent of their musical statement, preferring instead to just rock and have a good time. But, the band’s inner mood was often sullen and sour. The band’s internal dialogue – both publicly and privately – was terse. To quote Johnny, Dee Dee was the “craziest guy you’re ever going to meet.” Johnny lacked sympathy for Joey’s OCD; instead dismissing him as unorganized and bothersome. Dee Dee would purposely write lyrics and act in ways that mocked Johnny’s conservatism and controlling nature. Johnny, in turn, would force everyone to listen to Rush Limbaugh in the touring van (they toured together in a single van through the course of their career - comrades). Joey would accuse Johnny of managing missteps, and characterize him as being a fascist. Johnny married Joey’s girlfriend. As so it went, on and on. The band was certainly beset with mental illness from the get-go, and all that heaviness went unsaid and largely unresolved within the Ramones. <br><br>
They were dysfunctional, but it fell away somehow when they were on stage. The Ramones were remarkably tight as a performing outfit. Anyone who ever saw them live – whether they be punks, rockers, or metal-heads – will attest to the non-stop fierceness of their set. Always on time, (and only postponing a hand full of shows across a twenty-five year career), the Ramones were tougher than platitudes and rock star pretensions. They didn't pander to the audience, which I appreciate and admire the more I think about it. They charged into an uphill battle against a dull and slow-turning industry and managed to bring hilarity to the game. They held on to their integrity too, which may be their greatest legacy. To those who don’t understand Punk music – where it came from, how it has evolved (or not), over the years, and why it is still relevant today – the Ramones might appear one dimensional and cartoon-like. In truth, their path to greatness was anything but. <br><br>
Commando is a rare telling from the inside of one of the best rock bands of any era. You don’t have to be a Ramones fan to appreciate, but it helps to know the scene from which they came. Johnny doesn’t mince words in his assessment of any and everything, and to his credit, he keeps things on point. He is unfair at times. One has to keep in mind the equally strong personalities of Dee Dee and Joey, who probably roll in their graves with this book. But, since they have all passed on, this is as good as it gets. Johnny’s shell cracks a bit when forced to come to terms with the death of his band mates. He offers touching reflections on Dee Dee and Joey, and it’s a little bit of emotional truth that goes a long way. Taken as a whole, Johnny Ramone’s Commando doesn’t take the posterity format too seriously. It seems like he had fun putting the book together, and I enjoyed reading it. <br><br><br>Sanelunaticproductions