s. cagney

Documentary FIlmmaking=Frustration 101

2006-01-30T20:39:00.000-08:00

Errol Morris and Michael Moore I salute you. Not only for being brilliant visionaries in the craft and art of filmmaking. But being thus in the most torturously tedious form of this art and craft.

Never again will I seek to do a documentary. Unless, I can afford to employ a crew. Filmmaking, in general, is not a simple task to undertake; but, I have been specifically educated as to the particular set backs and obstacles that await the eager, fledgling directors who are attempting to capture the art, the beauty, and the pain of reality.

Reality is a bitch.

The single most inportant, indiscriminate, hit-you-right-upside-the-fucking-skull difference between narrative film and documentary film: In both their is a narrative, but in narrative you are in complete authorial control of the narrative. In documentary the narrative has you by the short hairs and will relentlessly drag you about the editing suite.

The true talent of a documentary filmmaker is his or her ability to take the reality that they are given, compromise their original vision, and then take what they have and use their own foresight and intuition to create a product that exudes a newly discovered vision.

Discovery is the biggest part of the whole thing. When you hear discovery you think positive, I am sure. Columbus discovered the America, yippee, hooray. But, the Native Americans they also discovered Columbus and that discovery would cause them centuries of being bent over and given the old in-out. This is not meant to be metaphoric for me the Indian Filmmaker and my Portuguese Sailor of a film. No, I simply mean to point out that not all discoveries are like chocolate filled easter eggs.

For example the discovery that despite countless attempts to get a camera and one other camera operator into death row I was denied was not a Columbus-type-of-discovery. That was a not so happy discovery considering it meant that the subject of my documentary would never make even a cameo. But, hopefully, there will be something novel and intriguing about the story of man on death row told through his family's eyes.

Don't get me wrong. I love filmmaking and I love my movie. But it has been hard, I just hope that what I produce will be a positive discovery for anyone who happens upon it.

If not, back to the drawing board....

Go see Terrence Malick's The New World, don't listen to the reviews, and if you don't like it don't listen to yourself. It is beautiful.

This Holiday

2006-01-16T08:26:00.000-08:00

A tribute

And these are my top 5 movies of 2005.

Jack Abramoff Offs Lobbying???

2006-01-10T14:13:00.000-08:00

Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay have become the Monica Lewinski and Bill Clinton of 2005. It seems that this dynamic duo has recently found themselves up to their necks in bad press. I just wonder if Tom Delay will ever suffer any legal repercussions or is Abramoff going to have to get caught sucking him off.

I hope I am wrong. I hope that the demise of Newt Gengrich sets the perfect example for the imminent downfall of the House majority leader. I hope that DeLay will find himself in a career-ending contreversey. But, I am not so sure. With the President spying on any and every American who so much as breaks wind in his general direction he could very well succeed in burying the DeLay case in a sea of vanished dissenters.

But, I have a question that I hope someone could answer for me. Diane Ream, on NPR, was weezing. Then, in the middle of a few of her weezes she managed to have a piece that dealt with the possibility that the government put an end to lobbying.

The way some of the guests on the show described it sounded as if it was a similar tactic as campaign finance reform. They would prevent corruption by more striclty regulating the legislative process of which lobbying plays a primary role.

I'm not so sure I am comfortable with this. Although Campaign Finance Reform is a stroke of brilliance, and although I agree with many of the proponents of this theory I am afraid that there is something wrong with not allowing people to try to influence Congress toward their policies. Can that even be done?

I'm not sure. Perhaps, a rigorous examination of the involvement of lobbyists and special interest groups in the legislative process would be the most appropriate course of action. The establishment of a watch dog organization to ensure that special interest groups are not doing more than merely expressing their interests.

Boots

2006-01-05T13:24:00.000-08:00

Boots are intriguing.

When one slips on a pair of boots the also slip on an invisible sense of indestructiblity. In your boots you can brave the deepest and groggiest of mud puddles without fear of soiling your socks. You can trudge through the thickest, meanest, ass-whippinest, briar patch in the woods and not get one scratch on your ankle.

Yep, boots are quite the friend for a rugged man.

But, now, in these, our fashionable times, a man need not be rugged to bestow a pair of boots upon his feet. What does this mean?

Something that was once a symbol of working class woe and blue collar drudgery is now a part of the popular culture image market.

Now, you must understand I am not criticizing. I, myself, wear boots and I do not hop horse turds in a pasture. I am just pondering (and am asking for you collaborative ponderance) if there is some significant social theory to be drawn from this phenomenon of proletariat image being adopted by bourgeois fashion.

In my mind, the boot is analagous to the long hair of Hippies being their freak flag symbol. The boot is not so much a freak flag but, at one time, it could be seen as the working class' banner of detriment. They would spend the rest of their days in those boots, at that job, drinking that same Bud Light six-pack after work. They would never leave the monotony that those boots subjected them too...they would never leave Casablanca.

The boots of today, however, they see the flashing lights of fashion exhibits and the hazy smoky air of the most expensive clubs. Oh, what a life these boots have seen.....

Kong and Brokeback

2005-12-22T11:35:00.000-08:00

During my delightful trip to Michigan I, among other joyous things such as Euchre (A Yankee version of Rook) took in a few movies. One of the films was the highlty touted heavy-weight film by Ang Lee, Brokeback Mountain. Then, just yesterday, back in the familiar tobacco scented city of Winston I saw Peter Jackson's no-surprise "epic," King Kong. I will only talk about Kong because I have more to say about it, and for Brokeback Iwill likely only regurgitate the well-deserved accolades you have already heard. But, you should go see it. It is a beautiful film and a beautiful love story, it makes no effort to politicize homosexuality, its not a movie about politics.

Right now, before I even commence, I would like to state that I enjoyed King Kong. Although what follows seems critical I did thoroughly enjoy myself (even though I had to get up to piss twice in the movie)>>>>>which brings me to the one thing that sticks in my crawl about Peter Jackson. Peter, give me a break, do you really have that much to say? Lord of the Rings I hated because it was so unnecessarily long that by the last third of the movie I already had cut and pasted two death threat letters, stamped and addressed it to that son of a bitch Jackson.

I say unnecessary because he has so many shots of people journeying, I mean when the cinema history books refer to Peter jackson the auteur they will have a section on how the staple of his films are his journey fetish. We get the point!!! These people are traveling a long distance, but the point of editing is to manipulate time and space so the audience doesn't feel like they themselves are traveling this great distance.

Paired with the infamous journey-shot is the Jackson's incessant need to include 5 billion action-reaction shots. He will have a shot of some action or some scene and he will directly precede it with a shot of the charatcer who is doing the looking in a prolonged and whimsical gaze. Enough of the fucking gazing, Pete!!! If I see Frodo gaze longingly one more time I am going to develop a severe and violent prejudice for little people.

Okay, okay so I am not even talking about Kong, sorry. I mentioned these aspects of LOR because the aspects are all still very prevalent in King Kong. I liked King Kong more though. Why? Not real sure, it would seem that my detest for Peter Jackson would not allow me to enjoy the movie. I think it is two things: First, King Kong is a truly captivating love story. It does hint at a somewhat politically incorrect subtext (more on that later) and could be unsavory for that reason, but it is a truly tragic movie. It is a love story about in which the two main parties can not communicate (very conducive to the Peter Jackson motif of the gaze) and this love on the part of Kong is ultimately doomed, he is destined to be lonely--I've always been a sucker for tragedy, ever since my Dear Mommy use to read me to sleep at night with Othello.

The second part of my adoration of the film is Naomi Watts. Watts shocks (punny?) me every time. She is amazingly beautiful and she is amazingly talented. It was hard for me to go to the bathroom once, not to mention twice, for fearing I would miss her on screen. She really does make the movie.

Now, on to the debate over King Kong. Since the 1930s version of Kong film historians have debated the politically incorrect undertones of the film. The stereotypical fragile, blonde, white woman who is possessed and adored by the savage, black, African ape. The historic white paranoia around black male white female relations does peak its head occasionally in this narrative, and the question must be asked should the choise to redo this film have been made. Certainly, the filmmakers were conscious of the racial implications of the film they moved the setting from Africa to an island in the South Pacific. Therefore, the natives were no longer Africans, thus the problem was solved? No. Africanness has never been the issue, blackness is what has led to discrimination and prejudice. And, I think perhaps, the Kong narrative does further the categorization or segregation of race. BUT

BUT. Even with this the film, in the end, does ask the question who is it that is really savage. It attempts to take on the Joseph Conrad issue of the savagery in man kind as a whole, but that is just in the end....what about in the beginning when we see hords of black people chanting, and killing, and foaming at the mouth...............I don't know I am sturggling with this one myself....

Merry Holidays and Stuff

2005-12-08T11:43:00.000-08:00

Hunter S. Thompson reminded me today ( please note that I am not engaging in communication with those in the after-life; I am sure they have dealt with ass holes like me enough for one lifetime....no, I am reading Hey Rube the latest publication of Thompson's articles and letters) that the Holiday seasons accompany a rise in suicides and homicides. The conservative in me welcomes this trend; it influences of the thinning of the population so the elite can rise to their rightful place as masters of the universe, similar to He-Man. He-Man is the strongest so god damn it he deserves his prosperity.

But, the bleeding-heart liberal in me wishes to address the matter from an alternative perspective. When you, my wonderful audience member (the one or two of you), are enjoying your holiday cheer let's hark the woes of our fellow man who feel life to be a forlorn hope. Remember, that is all I ask. Remember that while you have that turkey leg in your mouth some unfortunate soles have a 357 barrel in their mouth.

On another note, I have illegally obtained The Strokes new album. I have had to argue vehemently with some, but I do think it illustrates a new and courageous attempt at a novel sound for the New York City rock and rollers. My biggest qualm with the band is that I have had to begrudgingly neglect the fact that they are a bunch of rich boys who had their daddies get them to the point of rock and roll stardom.

But politics be damned, I am going to set aside class ( I can't believe I just said that) and make a statement that I think The Strokes have a good sound; they are more popular in England than they are here, which always bodes well for any rock and roll group. And, they live a rock and roll lifestyle which I think is very important, especially in this times where youth, my peers, seems to increasingly champion conformity.

A new survey finds that only one half of all high schoolers think newspapers should be able to print without out government consent. Also, one in five said that it should be taboo for Americans to express unpopular opinions. Britney Speares, the spokeswoman of American youth, said that we should support President Bush's decisions, that we should have faith in our leaders ability to lead.

The fact that dissention is seen as unfathomable by today's youth is evidence that youth, today, lacks the drugs, sex, and rock and roll that inevitable accompany progress. I mean, if there is ever a time to disagree, if there is ever a time to dissent, if there is ever a time to rock and roll, god damn it the time is now, when we are young. So take off your polos and sweater vests and start thinking differently, start being a ludicrous idealist, and please, just go to a rock and roll show.....strawberry fields forever

Yule Tide Cheer for the Atheist

2005-12-05T12:05:00.000-08:00

In the past week I have heard several speeches given at Christmas themed events. I have had the privilege of hearing the Wake Forest Chaplain speak. His message, both times, has piqued my interest, and both times his simplistic eloquence has enticed me along from word to word.

But, of particular interest to me is one staple that accompanied both speeches. At the lighting of the Quad and at Lovefeast he made an effort to include a variety of religious denominations and those who claim no denomination at all. He asserted that it is not just the Christian who can experience the joy of this season.

This season is not so joyful for all, I will be the first to recognize that. It is a time when we are forced to visit extended family who we must pretend, for at least an hour, to be interested in what they tell us they have been doing since last year when we humored them for an hour. And this extended family, it is almost certain, is just as crazy as you remembered them, many of them having fried their brains long ago in the sixties, and some, rare and special ones, who are still frying their brains now, along with their newly addicted children. But, my cynicism will stop now....

The Chaplain is exactly right; and it is rare that I agree with a Chaplain. Perhaps, it was his initial statements about the poor and destitute that captivated by liberal sentiments, but I agree that Christmas has a way of creating a social aura that is not present the other eleven months of the year...unless teorrorists attack.

In conceding this, however, I also recognize that not everyone who is affected by the holiday spirit is Christian or even religious. These people do not appreciate the "true" reason of Christmas; but, as the Chaplain claimed, this does not matter. It is precisley this blurring of religious boundaries that makes the season what it is.

The reason I am writing this is not to kiss Christmas's ass, however. We all know that we are going to be force fed enough Christmas to strangle a horse. No, the reason I am writing this is to pose a question; there is something that I can't quite put my finger on about this paradoxical nature of a religious holiday that is not exclusively religious.

Myself, I am one of those people who, as the Chaplain puts it, claims no faith in particular. But, I can not pretend to feel no welling of sentiment when the winter season arrives. But, why is this, why is it that a holiday founded on principles which not only do I not believe in, but which I also feel are responsible for intoxicating the masses, why is is that in this time of they year I am influenced by the spirit?

I think maybe it is the sprirt of giving and goodwill that persuades me. I do not denounce religion: when religion can teach people to take care of one another and not judge based on differences it is successful. When religion can give destitute people hope it is successful. But, when religion is treated as more than a metaphor, when it is treated as truth, people become divided and people fight each other rather than their common enemies.

Christmas, I think, recognizes religion as metaphor for humanity. I know I was won over the first time I saw Merry Christmas Charlie Brown (I don't know if that's the title). In it Charlie Brown champions a down and out, in the dumps, ragged, little Christmas tree. Despite jeering and dispute from those around him he stands by that which is thought of as inappropriate and unqualified, and eventually he influences all his friends to see the beauty in what they had once seen to be uncivilized.

Christmas not only breaks down the constricitng nature of organized religions, but it also breaks down the idea of social truths. It embraces meatphor and symbolism with no pretense of asserting that they are definitively the way things are. Charlie Brown proved that there was no such naturally occurring phenomenon of that which is inappropriate or appropriate, no such thing as that which is pure or un-pure, no such thing as that which is right or wrong. Humans are symbol-creating and a symbol-using animals. Christmas recognizes the power of symbols but it does not attempt to prescribe truth to symbols which are socially constructed; instead, it appreciates religious narrative as a story with a moral...and a good moral at that.

EXAM TIME RUSH MORE LATER

2005-11-28T17:34:00.000-08:00

The Amerikan Individual

2005-11-04T09:13:00.000-08:00

In today's USA Today the cover story is about Johnny Cash and the new bio-pic Walk the Line. In the article the journalist, Brian Mansfield, states, "Cash tapped into so many streams of the American myth--self-made man, gold-hearted rebel, champion of the underdog...."

Perhaps Mansfield uses the term myth for a reason when referring to the American ideal of being a "self-made man." Individualism is a misguided justification. The explanation that anybody in America is a self-made man is simply a way for the Haves to justify there being Have Nots.

The bourgeois conservative can look down on the blue collar, country boy and say, "Look, buddy, Johnny Cash made something of himself, so can you." This fails to realize though, in my opinion, that no person is a product of their own. A person is a product of a collection of things. Various people, places, events, and situations go in to molding a person.

I do not wish to diminish the blood, sweat, and tears of many people who struggle through everyday of their life. In fact, I am arguing for the benefit of these people.

The assertion that someone makes something of themselves, that they be indivisualist, implies that if someone does not make it is due to a fault of their own. They must not be hardworking, they must be lazy. Wrong.

We do not have poverty because there is an entire class of lazy, weak individuals. Capitalism demands that there be a sudden percentage of unemployment for it to work, people born into poverty find themselves in a vicious, unescapable cylce of poverty. Cultural situations and just pure bad luck create unsuccessful people.

Yes, there are people who overcome being born into poverty, people who overcome racial and geographic discrimination, people who overcome substance addiciton. I dare to say, however, they do not do it on their own.

Why, Cash himself has attributed much of his success to other people. One such example is his life-long companionship with his wife, June Carter. He thanks his friends and collaboraters. He, also acknowledged that much of his success late in his career is because of producer Rick Rubin.

I hypothesize that the reason for this focus on the individual is because of an American phobia of socialist philosophies. Socialism does mean less money-making than capitlism, thus it is a very un-American ideal. But, it is not being a socialist to simply recognize that people are not isolated individuals, that instead, we are all interconnected in societal web.

In "Long Haired Country Boy" Chalrie Daniel's says "Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin' if I can't get it on my own." To those weak, lazy individuals who are not as strong as the individual Charlie Daniels, who have to get by from welfare check to welfare check, I say that you don't have to do it on your own, it is not your fault.

Johnny Cash said that he wore black because by wearing the sorrows of the working man on his shoulders it would lighten their load, at least a little bit. These do not sound like the words of a self-made man, but they sound like the words of a man who understands that it should not be un-American to work and fight for the sake of your fellow man.

"Liberal" Arts Education

2005-10-28T09:14:00.000-07:00

I recently heard, on the radio, a debate over whether or not teachers should be up front with their political stance and/or their religious beliefs or if they should withhold these personal attributes.

When I heard of fellow student's account of a professor admitting to her that she (the professor) does not believe in God I felt called, as I often do, to make my own comment, as I often do, on the topic. First, I will address the politics on campus, then deal with religion.

Now, I understand that it must be quite disheartening for conservative students when the majority of professors are liberally aligned. But, it must only be expected that after a certain degree of education, say, past high school, that an individual would be enlightened as to the most intellelctual way--the left way. I apologize for that ad hominem slight of tongue, but we have to keep the millions amused.

To the discontented conservative student I say there are professors out there for you. I had a friend in the business school whose professor announced to the entire class that "If there are any communists out there I will find you and kill you." This guiding light of inspiration and knowledge is the ideal safe-haven for my right-winged brethren.

On a serious note, why should a professor be obligated to keep secret their own beliefs. In my mind, education succeeds when the professor does not take the role of orator and instructor with no humanity and dimension, but instead, the professor interacts with students as a sort of student. Ideas and intellectual advancement are inherently intertwined with life philosophy and values such as is indicated in political philosophy and religion.

Thus, the religious predilection of a professor is part of understanding the professor, of understanding how their ideas and perspectives on class discussions are slanted. Messages are continuously being sent through classroom instruction, shouldn't students have all the information necessary in order to best decipher the messages they are being given and the intent with which they are being given. Nothing you are told, no messages, no teachings are "the truth" nothing is "God's way" nothing is the "natural way." All messages are influenced by the message sender.

One may argue that professors should avoid divulging their religion because they have a very influential position and can easily persuade students. But, are attempts not being made everyday to persuade us? We are constantly being told what to believe, what to think, what to wear, what to eat, who to like, and who to be scared of. Yes, a professor can be influential, but if I can subject myself to the messages of media and the government everyday and decode what is useful and what is not, I have confidence that I can deal with the influence of professors message. Being influenced is not necessarily a bad thing. Being influenced out of your comfort zone of belief can either result in intellectual or philosophical progress or it can result in a reaffirmation of your previously held beliefs, thus strengthening your faith in them.

In short, use your knowledge of professors beleifs to your benefit. If you know what they like, then give it to them, get that good grade, and then move on. And, perhaps, perhaps, you may even learn something along the way from someone new and interesting, someone who is not there to pet you and tell you they believe what you belive, but instead challenge you to think about other perspectives in life. You don't have to agree and you don't have to like it, but don't say that they don't have the right to do it.

Bocce Ball and Killing Yourself

2005-10-18T13:39:00.000-07:00

Today, as I was getting into my car in the parking lot behind the freshmen dorms I saw a group of guys playing bocce ball. Big mistake, because now these three anonymous gentleman are going to receive a bombardment of degradation on my nationally infamous blog.

Bocce ball is for people who are so old that their diapers are out of style. Now, for those of you who know me well you may contend, "Cagney, the All Knowing and All Wise, you have, yourself, participated in the fast pace action of Bocce sportsdom." This is true, I have, but the reason you do (and the only excusable reason for Bocce Ball) is when you're at family gatherings or family vacations and dad and mom or grandma and grandpa are there and it is done as family interaction. It makes sense then. Grandma and grandpa aren't in their Flip-Cup prime anymore; beer pong won't work because your mom and dad don't mess around with beer, they just spent 18 years raising you, they need the hard stuff to numb the pain you have inevitably caused since their life ended 21 years ago when you came into their world.

Especially freshmen? You should be working your little bodies as hard as they can go to make friends (that is pay your fraternity brothers to realize you are just as much of an ass hole as they are) and get in clubs and get good grades and get get get get get.; such is the American way. There is no time for Bocce ball in college. Have faith young freshmen there will be plenty of time for Bocce ball when you become unintelligible and unconscious and are sent away by your children to live in a nursing home......

Quickly, I want to address a political question that has long been debated but I heard today on NPR--that is doctor assisted suicide. Americans have adhered to the Declaration of Independence's creed of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I would argue that if you have the right to life then what follows is the implication that you have the right to the lack thereof. If you have the right to liberty then you have the right to the freedom of your own life and death. And, most importantly, if you have the right to the pursuit of happiness and you would be happier to end "this mortal coil," then by-Thomas Jefferson you have the right to want to die.

I do understand that chaos would insue if we let every nutjob who wanted to kill themselves go to the family doctor for a routine suicide. But, would it be that hard to set up a code of standards and reviews to allow people who are terminally ill as classified by trained physicians to acquire the premission to have their suffering ended......I mean you do it for your god damn dog it seems like you would have the courtesy to do it for your fellow man.

Me Movie Snob; You Apolitical Drone

2005-10-09T23:15:00.000-07:00

I can recount countless times that I have been called names. I have been referred to as all varying grades of humanity. But, one recurring name that has been used to label me is "movie snob."

The decision has been made for me to utilize this opportunity to defend myself.

Let us, momentarily, compare the world of movies to the world of food. Because an individual chooses to eat grilled grouper and mixed vegetables over a bed of rice pilaf rather than a Big Mac with fries and a Coke we do not call them food snobs. The movie world is not so different. Big Mac Movies come out every weekend and they set box office records every month. With this surplus of movies, should I be condemned for opting to seek out movies with something different, something meaningful, something thought provoking? Well, all I know is that we do not condemn all these yuppies on their Atkins diets and we do not denounce health food nuts; instead, we praise them for being motivated.

I think of myself as a motivated consumer of movies.

Some people say to me, "What is wrong with just being entertained? I don't want to have to think all of the time." To those people I say thinking is not a burden, it is your way of breaking the bonds of your class, breaking the bonds of your ability, breaking the bonds of reality. Thinking is dreaming; dreamers have more fun; and, most importantly, dreamers affect change.

The reason people have come to consider thinking as burdensome, in my humble opinion, is because the ruling class has always encouraged apolitical masses. Since the outset of modern civilization our societies have had a hierarchal structure. It only makes sense that rulers would find the most effective measures of making the masses over which they rule more docile subjects. One such example: religion. Christianity tells us that "Thou shall not steal," but common sense tells the Peasant Isleepinthestreet that when he is starving and King Lookatallmyshit is up to his neck in chicken legs that he should take some of this surplus so he deosn't die. Therefore, the ruling class created police. They give them the motto "To Protect and Serve," but you never see them protecting one man in the ghetto from the other man in the ghetto, no they are there to protect Dr. Lookatallmyshit's stuff.

This may seem like a digression, but it is not, have faith...........That was a test!!! Never have faith, have thought. Don't believe that someone will handle the journey of life for you, handle it yourself and enjoy it along the way.

Okay, so seriously, the reason I made the whole peasant and police digression was because the reason people think they do not like challenging movies or thought provoking movies, the reason they think they simply wish to be entertained is because they have been conditioned to think that if they are apolitical they are comfortable. Maybe not though, maybe challenging convention can be thrilling, maybe being drawn outside your comfort zone can be sexy.......maybe not, this is only my opinion...............Where does a 400lbs gorilla sleep??????????????????????? Anywhere he wants.

2005-10-06T19:49:00.000-07:00

"I am a stranger to what is coming....."

the most truthful quote I have found

Minor Pleasures

2005-10-04T21:37:00.000-07:00

I remember last semester I experienced certain discomforts most every night. It may seem like hyperbole, but believe you me, every night last semester I woke up with one or the other or both of my arms asleep.
This is no laughing matter. When your arms lose circulation EVERY night it can by no means be healthy for the life of one's arms. Pretty soon, it seems, your arms would get fed up with your fat ass lying awkwardly and prevernting the normal flow of blood into there wanting veins.
Therefore, it is a minor pleasure of mine that I have not had to put my arms through such a predicament at all this semester.
This post has been in response to one, glass-half-full, always on the sunny side, optimistic, piece of shit who accused me of being a bleak motherfucker.
He then told me to hug someone and then write my blog.
Well I did exactly that.....Directly preceding the writing of this post I hugged Mrs. Aita while she lie bare ass naked on a bed of roses. So romantic, so beautiful.

"Don't play Neil Young"

2005-09-30T09:34:00.000-07:00

You may not have heard Roman Candle, you may not have heard Why Modern Radio is A OK with Me. You have, however, experienced that which the song articulates.
For me, this is a song that is most tragic and evokes a nostalgic yearning for a a past I never knew, a past when "a pop song used to be a powerful thing." In todays pop culture I fear that we have been conditioned for immediate pay off. Songs are good because they have a catchy beat that we can move to; songs are good because they tell us stories we have heard before that reside somewhere in our comfort zone; songs are good, simply, because they make us feel good not feel.
There are certainly bands and musicians who are writing songs and playing music that demands their audiences to be interactive audiences, but the point is that our pop culture does not embrace them; they, instead lie somewhere outside of the metaphorical town of pop culture, strung out on heroine, for anyone who makes songs that challenge convention surely must be using narcotics.
Yes, today's rock and roll is trapped in an era of squeaky, clean images. Faces that make us feel good, and show us how beautiful life really can be line themselves in a vomitous mass all over the walls of pop culture. Unfortunate. Rock and roll used to be a medium for the everyman poet. Rock and roll was not for pretty people, rock and roll was for real people, with real ideas.
This what Modern Radio should recall. It is the story of a man who has been in prison, and in this societal trough he has realized the humanity that is possible in music. Yes, there once was humanity in music.
But, as the song ironically points out, perhaps it is better that modern radio doesn't play music like Neil Young, Johnny Cash, or Radiohead. In a culture boiling over with a torrent of media, messages, and shit it is, I suppose, better that modern radio is as it is. Let the businesses and corporations occupy the public stage, let the pretty faces be the performers. For, we all know where the poets reside--off stage, in the shadows, away from the spotlight. It is only from the darkness that one can see all that light illuminates.

You can hear the song here.

2005-09-25T22:41:00.000-07:00

The sky hangs heavy over Central Prison, the air inside, even thicker. The atmosphere seems to press the air right out of the lungs. The air depresses such that no pulse of life can be felt. There's no uprising on death row, the men dawn a complacency that comes with the sealing of fate, there is nothing left to do but keep waiting. Some of the men turn to writing, some turn to reading, some turn to painting, but all of them turn inside. All they know of the outside is indifference, inside is the only place they discover consideration. The minutes unwind, the clock moves with no afterthought, no apprehension. With each move towards the gallows these men are one step closer to knowing. Will there be hell beyond that noose, will there be heaven, will they see their lovers, will they see their friends, will they see you ane me?

2005-09-25T20:04:00.000-07:00

ANOTHER OGB ARTICLE.............sorry I am getting lazy like Jake Delhomme and his pathetic Kittens....purr cats purr

2005-09-16T13:36:00.000-07:00

OGB Article

Cowboys and Medieval Farmers

2005-09-15T08:36:00.000-07:00

I have often thought I would like to be and could be a good cowboy. Good in the sense that I could easily spend a life of solitary rambling over the countryside and/or work my own ranch or farm. But, I realized one important qualification to my cowboy abilities. Horses are working animals and so pulling plows, though it is hard work, should not seem unnaturally cruel to our equine brethren. And, even pulling a wagon, is somewhat justifiable, but the thought that I can't get around is when a horse drawn wagon is traveling downhill. It seems the weight of the wagon would be constantly pushing the horse or horses downhill. Just imagine how terrifiying of an experience it is for Hardy High Ho Silver who has been pulling and tugging this wagon full of goods and also my fat, pearl-handled-revolver-toating ass, all over the wild wild west and suddenly it thinks it is going to rest because a downhill section of road is coming up only to be surprised and indeed startled to find that the momentum of the wagon threatens overrunning the horse and snuffing out his life then and there. Wagons going downhill are scary; therefore, I would be a one horse cowboy. Riding my faithful steed not hitching him to a wagon.
In Medieval Europe people were either shit-eating poor, farmers, or royalty. Okay this is surely an oversimplification, but it suffices for my story. Well, the majority of the population was in the agriculture profession. And, many of that population grew grain, with which they would travel to the nearest mill to have it ground. Prostitutes being the oldest profession, and wisest, (obviously considering that it is the longest form of employment, the need for whores is as constant as death and taxes) decided to take advantage of this market. So prostitues would whore around the mills, turning them into pseudo brothels. The government, concerned for the moral fabric of their communitites, debated closing the mills because of the public debauchery occurring there. When it was realized the sever economic impact closing mills would have on Europe, however, the idea was discarded and the whoring, and adultery, and just good old fashion sex, was allowed to continue. And, ever since we have put religion and morality in their rightful place: subordinate to making the holy dollar.

Come Back Woody Guthrie

2005-09-14T14:14:00.000-07:00

After reading my first post my dad e-mailed me with the following: "Watch the threats (Charles Whitman). 'Big Brother' is watching." He told me that I could end up on the evening news being escorted out of my Barclay Terrace home and interrogated by the feds.
Now, see here, Coppers, just where do yous guys come off tryin to say what it is I can and what it is I can't say, you low down, dirty rats? During the period in Hollywood where government censorship was in full force a film was produced entitled The Public Enemy. It starred the handsomely named James Cagney in a role that truly exemplified his versatility by having him play a gangster hood. (For those of you less than literate in film history a tinge of sarcasm should be noted). But, at the beginning and the end of this film there were blatant messages calling for us the public to seek out the criminal element, recognize them as the enemy, and combat them. The government ideology behind this is evident because it fails to recognize that the government themselves were responsible for this rise in criminal activity through prohibition and the widening of the gap between the rich and poor that took place in the decadent, roaring twenties. And, rather than suggest government reform to combat crime, it calls for us to strike down the criminal with an unmerciful blow, and send them back to poverty-stricken, labor class where God says they should be.
Government criticism is not part of pop culture as it has been in the past. Pop culture, today, seems to be going to college for four years while you are trained to become little money-makers, and if you are good and you make the grade you will be set out into the real world to use your money-making training and make, make, make. Suddenly, education has become a commodity. We invest money in education with the expectation of great monetary return, no concern for intellectual expansion which is why the university was originally created. Instead we have become disciples of a capitalist religion; we don't question our government and in return it keeps our pockets lined.
The title of this post, come back Woody Guthrie, is a line from a Steve Earle song, which explains that we are in dire need of radicals today. Woody Guthrie was hugely popular around the turn of the century and his songs championing the put upon laborer had huge audiences, in fact they became anthems for the labor movement. Today, media that offers criticism to an imperfect nation is cast to the outskirts of our culture along with the counter-culture poets who are offering it. I would be willing to bet that no one has heard of the Steve Earle song I refer too, thus proving my point exactly. Our country was founded by radicals, revolutionaries, and people who looked for the societal wrongs being committed so they could solve the problems and give a progressive charatcer to our blossoming country. All the great humanitarian advancements were not instigated by people who were optimistic about the direction our world was heading in, but instead they had the courage to ask. "What is wrong here ." Will someone please bring Woody Guthrie back, it is time that the reactionary is returned to the limelight where he belongs here in the land of the free and the home of the brave....

First Football Sunday

2005-09-12T22:00:00.000-07:00

Sundays during football season are both a blessing and a curse. It is a curse, first of all, not specifically during football season, but just Sundays in general, because I have to feel guilty about not indulging in the sanctification of going to church that most people at Wake Forest so rewardingly experience every week. Secondly, it is curse because Sunday is when we college students spend hours on end doing the work we should have been doing the past two nights instead of drinking ourselves unconscious.
But, Sundays are a day for the weekend warriors of the National Football League to engage in the long celebrated act of running into each other and projecting their testosterone in an ejaculatory fashion all over my televison screen--and, for this we love them.
Recently Sports Illustrated proclaimed that my pride and joy Carolina Panthers would "go all the way this year." Well I hope the Panthers make the Super Bowl, and perhaps, I will, finally, "go all the way" this year.
Even though I consider football as a blessing on Sundays there is one important catch in order for it to indeed be a blessing. My team must win and god damn it if they don't there will be hell to pay. I will more than likely be unable to do any of that aforementioned plethora of homework; I will probably not want to talk to you; and, I may even get so intoxicated I end up pissing all over my room which I hallucinate to be Jake Delhomme's interception-throwing, gumbo-cooking, bojangles-pushing, poor excuse for a quarterback face.
The loss to the Saints this weekend is particularly disconcerting. If I hear, once more, some half-brain sports commentator allude to the Saints victory as a symbolic victory I will pull a Charles Whitman and climb to the top of Wait Chapel and begin shooting people in a diabolical fashion.
You are a sports commentator, and no matter which one you are, you are probably not a good one. You do stats, you don't do metaphors. Leave the metaphors to Shakespeare and your mother, who surely is speaking metaphorically when she says she loves you. If the New Orleans Saints were truly winning one for the millions of people stranded without homes, then they would forfeit some of their multi-million dollar paychecks to the cause of getting people back on their feet. But, why should we expect football players to do what our government won't. God Bless America and let's play ball!