What's he on about now?

In case the articles, essays and opinions throughtout this site just weren't enough for you, here's my online diary (a.k.a. 'blog'). It's as close as you'll come to the inside of my head, so don't say I didn't warn you
(and remember, you can always e-mail me if you love or loathe anything you're about to read)...


   Thursday, April 28, 2005

   GOING DOWN TO RENO

I mentioned a couple of weeks ago that the new Bruce Springsteen album "Devils & Dust" would be released only in the dubious new DualDisc format. Imagine my surprise when the record turned up this Tuesday in a spendid two-disc set -- one CD and one surround-sound DVD -- for a lower price. You'd almost think the record industry is listening to consumers.

But enough about that -- how's the new album? Fantastic, I'm pleased to say. Springsteen's albums are like collections of short stories, Raymond Carver with a guitar, and the new batch is terrific. The title track is haunting, "Long Time Coming" blends regret and hope, and "Black Cowboys" is a tiny wonder. Overall, it's a sparse set of country tunes about sin and redemption that suggests Johnny Cash in spots.

One song, "Reno," surprises with its sexually-frank lyrics -- it's a more 'X-rated' Bruce than we're used to. This is obviously the case for Dateline NBC's Matt Lauer who interviewed Springsteen this week:

Lauer: “When's the last time you had a label on the back of the CD that said, ‘This song contains some adult images’?”

Springsteen: “I don't know if I ever heard that one before.”

Lauer: “The song they’re referring to is about a man's time with a prostitute...want to go back to that whole 'writing these in hotel rooms after the Tom Jode [sic] tour.' I'm imagining this is fiction right?”

Springsteen: “Yes, absolutely.”

Lauer: “What's that song about?”

Springsteen: “Actually, it's a love song.”

Lauer: “It's a graphic love song.”

Springsteen: “It just comes at it from a different point of view.”

Lauer: “But why did it have to be so graphic. I mean, sexual intercourse images. You know, could you not have told the story without those things?”

Springsteen: “No.”

Lauer: “No? Just leave it off the album?”

Springsteen: “No, I don't think so. And the label is to say if you're going to hand it over to your 10-year-old kid. It sort of lets the parent know along the way this story comes up. It was just part of the story. It made the story real.”

While it's a bit sad to see a TV host interrogate The Boss over his artistic choices, it's terrific seeing Bruce stick to his guns. "Reno" is a sad, lonely song written by an adult to be heard by adults. And note MSNBC's misspelling of 'Tom Joad' on the site -- if they don't know who Springsteen's hero is, there's no need for Bruce to cater to them.

Labels: Bruce Springsteen

My e-mail spam gets weirder every day:

Hi there! My name is Elena, a 32 years old woman living here in beautiful Russia. I am 5'6" tall with blonde hair and blue eyes. Here I am looking for my Prince Charming who will be open-hearted, kind and caring not only for me, but also for my cute daughter who is only 7, but smarter than lots of adults. She is attending the school with English bias. We have a lot of friends, but would like to meet a man who will be a loving husband and father! If you are serious about our future relationship, do write me today at nicewoman@Phreaker.net. I do not want to make this letter too long.... I hope to hear from you soon.
We'll give you a chance ;) Bye-bye!
Elena

Sorry, Elena -- unless you're looking for gomoseksual, I suggest a slightly more targeted approach. Elton John was never that serious about Nikita, you know.

I thought I'd have to bleat on about the new Pope a lot longer but -- look! -- the press are doing their job! Okay, it's the British press but it's a start.

This Guardian article says all I'll ever need to about Pope Ratzinger.

I'm a lousy networker. I enjoy meeting new people but the second I suspect there might be something to gain by talking to them, I find myself shutting down in fear of being an opportunist. I back away whenever there's the feeling that I (or the other person) am 'after something' (much like picking people up in bars -- it's really only worked for me when the attraction is blindingly mutual).

This is obviously a problem I need to work on. The majority of meetings in this city have some business or sexual subtext to them, it seems, and few of them occur on a perfectly level playing field. Get over it, I say to myself.

With that in mind, I went to the fourth birthday party for Rabble.ca, a left-wing Canadian "newsmagazine for the rest of us." I'd hoped to meet like-minded newsy people but, as it's been a while, I forgot how cliquey like-minded newsy people can be. Everyone in the room seemed smart and friendly but were joined in impenetrable groups of three or four. I've had an easier time meeting people in gay bars, I thought, and cursed myself for not begging a friend to come with me.

That said, I had a great time with the performers Rabble lined up, especially spoken-word artist Motion (I was surprised at how much I enjoyed her coffee-house rhythms). Even better was award-winning poet Dionne Brand reading this terrific excerpt from her new book, "What We All Long For" -- a celebration of Toronto. That's right, I just used "celebration" and "Toronto" in the same sentence (you'll just have to deal).

Later in the evening, I went up and said hello and told her of the conversation I'd had earlier that day with a pair of co-workers who were complaining about the city. They're finding the people chilly and inaccessible. I told them how Robertson Davies once quipped that Toronto is like "a rich fat girl" who doesn't know how to be pretty. They laughed and I said that I planned to stay here and care for her "until she loves me back." The one girl looked at me as if I had three noses and said, "Well good luck with that."

Ms. Brand laughed and told me to keep at it. I thought of Victor Laszlo in "Casablanca": "Welcome back to the fight, this time I know our side will win."

Labels: Canada, introspective, Trawna

No sooner was the 'see-it-to-believe-it' video "America: We Stand As One" released, Internet tricksters gave it the "Team America remix" (fuck yeah)!

The Internet is a beautiful thing.

Quote of the day:

A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt......If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake.

-- Thomas Jefferson, from a letter he sent in 1798 after the passage of the Sedition Act

It's been a difficult few months but I'm finally seeing signs of hope. Though the expected-but-now-proven weaselling of our Liberal government puts the same-sex marriage vote in jeopardy, they've still been successful in keeping the Tories at bay.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration now has the lowest approval ratings since WWII! The American public are finally beginning to see through their "do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do" moralizing and they don't like the view. That smug "I-told-you-so" feeling doesn't do much for me (I wish it did) but I'm happy to see these guys sweat a little for the first time.

Labels: George W Bush

As the Who almost said, "Meet the new Pope. Same as the old Pope." The choice of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (previously 'the Inquisition', but that name doesn't go over so well anymore) -- was no surprise to anyone uselessly hoping for a more fair and inclusive Catholic Church.

The surprise would be me defending Ratzinger's Nazi past. While the phrase "the new Pope is a former Hitler Youth" makes me happier than anyone, it's not precisely true. Like many Germans his age, he was forcibly conscripted into the Hitler Youth in 1941 and deserted the army a couple years later rather than be made a soldier.

Sigh -- too bad. I loved saying "the new Pope is a former Hitler Youth." Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, said in his memoirs that, after WWII, "We were determined to make up for the lost years, to serve Christ in His Church for a new and better future, a better Germany, a better world."

This is apparently being achieved by referring to the use of condoms to prevent AIDS as "a kind of behavior which would result in at least the facilitation of evil," and the condemnation of homosexuality as an "intrinsic moral evil."

Ratzinger's eye for evil was less sharp in 2002, with his incredibly-belated response to the scandal of paedophile priests consisting merely of Vatican-sanctioned secret trials and quiet dismissals. As always, the church's privacy is more important than the lives of the individuals within it.

I am forced to admit though that Ratzinger's ascension to Popehood is comforting -- both to conservatives who'll continue to see the church limit human freedoms and to progressives, who won't have to rethink their anti-church stance and negotiate with a moderate Pope. No, it's culture-war business as usual, except that when the lazier activists call the Pope a Nazi, they'll almost be right for once.

I picked up a copy of the new Garbage album "Bleed Like Me" this weekend. Once the premier techno-rock band of the nineties, their previous album was a disappointment -- both artistically and commercially -- and the band came close to breaking up.

But here's a new album -- and while it doesn't reach the heights of "Version 2.0", it's a solid return to form. And Shirley Manson looks and sounds hotter than ever -- a growling vixen worth switching teams for! An interviewer asked, "Could Rock 'n' Roll exist without sex?" and Shirley said, "Oh yes, but you get a better bang for your buck when you get both."

Cheers, once again, for Dan Savage:

"What's maddening about this pope's signature gay bashing is this: When the pope — the dead one, the next one, the one after that — says something stupid about homosexuality, straight folks take it to heart. The church's efforts have helped defeat gay rights bills, led to the omission of gays and lesbians from hate-crime statutes, and helped to pass anti-gay-marriage amendments.

But when a pope says something stupid about heterosexuality, straight Americans go deaf. And this pope had plenty to say about heterosexual sex — no contraceptives, no premarital sex, no blowjobs, no jerkin' off, no divorce, no remarriage, no artificial insemination, no blowjobs, no three-ways, no swinging, no blowjobs, no anal. Did I mention no blowjobs?

John Paul II had more "no's" for straight people than he did for gays. But when he tried to meddle in the private lives of straights, the same people who deferred to his delicate sensibilities where my rights were concerned suddenly blew the old asshole off. Gay blowjobs are expendable, it seems; straight ones are sacred."

My dreams of being a writer in Manhattan are dashed, thanks to a typical job posting on Craigslist:

New Hot Online Magazine seeks Hot Writers!

We are searching for both FEMALE and MALE hot writing talent. We are looking to fill our short story section. We will need 8 short stories to begin. Also looking for content providers. We need fresh, young, hot ideas. Anything controversial, anything hot, anything sexy , anything shocking is welcome for review. Please! Nothing corny, Nothing bland, Nothing ugly.

Who are we?
An online magazine dedicated to entertaining beautiful, sexy, trendy people. What are we into? Anything Sexy, Anything "IN", Anything Single!

So what do you do?
Send us a picture of yourself along with a bio.

Pay is negotiable.

I used to write for 'Fresh' magazine -- it was hot, young, sexy, trendy and kept staining my coffee table with baby oil. It lasted four issues. Perhaps beautiful, sexy, trendy people are entertained just by being beautiful, sexy and trendy. After all, it works for me! And now on to something corny, bland and ugly!

No, not more Pope-bashing but, on a lighter-yet-vaguely-related note, my aforementioned plug for the new TV version of "Battlestar Galactica" (stay with me here). Like many children-of-the-70's, I eagerly tuned in to the weekly "Star Wars" rip-off from Glen A. Larson, creator of 'classics' like "The Six Million Dollar Man" and "Knight Rider." I adored the show's fancy special effects yet found my TV affections constantly reverting to the bargain-basement rubber monsters of "Doctor Who." What had gone wrong?

A night fifteen years later answered the question. Mildly drunk and wildly nostalgic, a group of us in university rented a batch of 70's videos, including "Mission Galactica: The Cylon Attack," a two-parter stitched together and featuring Lloyd Bridges as a rogue spaceship captain. It was, we realized, absolutely and irreedemedly stupid. What was shiny chrome to children was tin to adults. One brutal-yet-entirely-accurate summation of Larson's career refers to the show's "idiotic" plots and argues that:

Today, there exists no better indicator of the rampant stupidity, vacuity, and incompetence in contemporary Hollywood than the news that there are now competing factions fighting for the rights to relaunch Battlestar Galactica. The mind boggles; it’s like fighting for the rights to make a sequel to Howard the Duck.

That relaunch eventually arrived and I ignored it. One bitten and all. But after an initial miniseries, more episodes were commissioned and the loudly-enthusiastic praise from critics and viewers alike finally convinced me to rent the DVD. The new BG is...well...bloody fantastic. It's not only the best sci-fi series in years but it's among the best dramas.

For one thing, the show features a provocatively-creepy notion for an American television show: the bad guys -- unrelenting, genocidal robot "Cylons" -- believe in God. 'Our' God. One of them explains that, while humans still remain "one step away from beating each other with clubs," the Cylons have evolved into perfect synthetic duplicates of their human creators and God has now chosen to give them the souls mankind have abandoned. They will extermine humanity because God has decreed it.

This theologically-disturbing notion comes from writer/producer Ron Moore, a "Star Trek: The Next Generation" veteran responsible for some of that show's best episodes and the co-creation of its superior follow-up, "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine." "Battlestar Galactica" takes many of DS9's cultural and political themes and digs in deeper. Moore made a thoughtful blog posting this past weekend that does a bang-up job in explaining the show's appeal:

I do see the show as an opportunity to raise questions in the minds of the audience and ask them to think, which is something of a rariety in these days when politics seems to be about stoking emotionalism and finding simple-minded slogans to stand-in for actual answers to complex problems. ("Culture of Life!" "Right to Die!" "Ban Smoking!" "The Ownership Society!")

Galactica is both mirror and prism through which to view our world. It attempts to mirror the complexities of our lives and our society in turbulent times, while at the same time reflecting and bending that view in order to allow us to extrapolate on notions present in contemporary society but which have not yet come to pass, i.e. a true artificial intelligence becoming self-aware and the existential questions it raises. Our goal is to examine contemporary culture and society, to challenge (and sometimes provoke) our audience, but not to provide easy answers to complex problems.

This is what science fiction was meant to do; what television ought to do. BG asks all the big questions of "The West Wing" but does it with sex appeal and spaceships. What's not to love?

Labels: religion, TV

Reading various obits for the Pope over the weekend, I can't help but feel that my comments on Friday were a bit...intemperate. I won't remove them, however, because my opposition to the Pope's beliefs are sound and logical. In fact, what I'm finding odd about this weekend's reactions to the Pope's death is the very-large gap between the public's love for the man and distaste for his opinions. To me, the two are very linked. Is a man not the sum of his experiences and attitudes? For the general public, there's a real disconnect going on, noticeable in this CNN poll:

A majority of U.S. Catholics surveyed want the next pope to have a theological outlook similar to that of Pope John Paul II, but they would also like to see changes on issues such as birth control, stem cell research and allowing priests to marry...

I'm sorry to break to them but any new Pope who relaxed on those issues would have a decidedly different theological outlook than John Paul II. US Catholics are going to have to admit that, no matter how much they respect the man, he did not represent their interests. But in the meantime, many people who completely agree with me nevertheless managed some praise for the man, like 'Joe in DC' who said:

John Paul is the embodiment of best and worst of the Catholic Church. When they do social justice and peace, they are at their best. Helping to bring down communism, opposing wars, opposing the death penalty, I would say are good things...It's easy to forget how he basically stood up to the Soviet Union and the Polish communist regime. That's what got him shot in May of 1981.

See? Joe's a better man than I -- mentioning the Pope's fine qualities before going on with a solid critique of John Paul's legacy. I should've done that, so -- in that spirit -- I will say that the one thing I did admire and respect about Pope John Paul II was his ability to apologize.

Unlike virtually every previous Pope, John Paul II tried to reach out to other faiths and to the many, many groups the Church has wronged over the centuries. He apologized to Jews for ignoring the Holocaust, Muslims for starting the Crusades, scientists for executing Galileo, and so on. This mission culminated in 1999 with the remarkable document, "Memory and Reconciliation: The Church and the Mistakes of the Past". This lengthy summation of nearly one hundred official apologies prompted one columnist to ask, "Is the Pope Overdoing the Apologies?"

Oh, hardly. The trouble is, that while the Pope was busily apologizing for misdeeds from decades or centuries ago, he was ignorant or unapologetic for current abuses (and I think you know where I'm heading with this). The Catholic world was shocked in the 1990's by the discovery that Boston Cardinal Bernard Law had not only been aware of rampant child sexual abuse by clergy members but even covered up for one of the worst offenders. According to a US state department report:

The grand jury inquiry lead by Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly found the archdiocese's own records reveal that they received complaints from 789 alleged victims, involving more than 250 clergy and other workers. But he said, the number of victims, spanning a period from 1940 to today, probably exceeded 1000.

One thousand children. And that's only in one diocese. How did the Pope respond to Cardinal Law's horrific lack of moral accountability? By giving him a better job -- a promotion to a top church in Rome. And there was no comment, no apology, only a renewed attack on honest, out gay men and the campaign for same-sex marriage, neither of which has anything to do with child molestation.

Thanks to my teenage years, I know first-hand what a closeted, dishonest, repressed, celibate life can do to a person's psyche and, trust me, it ain't pretty. The Catholic Church is sadly rife with these kind of people and, if the Pope won't deal with it, apologize for it, or even discuss it, then I won't be shutting up about it anytime soon. And, yes, it makes it difficult to say nice things about him now that's he gone.

In summary, my problem with the Church in general (and therefore John Paul II as its leader) is the huge gulf between what they profess and what they accomplish. This may be unfair -- how many of us truly live up to the standards we set for ourselves, after all? -- but, in the case of an organization that wields so much power over so many people, we must hold them accountable. Pope John Paul II's admirable "Memory and Reconciliation" document ends with this paragraph:

Recognition of the Truth is a source of reconciliation and peace because, as the Holy Father also states, “Love of the truth, sought with humility, is one of the great values capable of reuniting the men of today through the various cultures.” Because of her responsibility to Truth, the Church “cannot cross the threshold of the new millennium without encouraging her children to purify themselves, through repentance, of past errors and instances of infidelity, inconsistency and slowness to act. Acknowledging the weaknesses of the past is an act of honesty and courage…” It opens a new tomorrow for everyone.

And there it is -- the Pope has finally said something I can completely agree with. May he rest in peace in the heaven he championed.

I wish I could share in the worldwide swell of emotion for the imminent passing of Pope John Paul II but...no. He's been on the wrong side of issues too close to my heart for too long. The Pope's rabid opposition to birth control while millions of children go starving is morally indefensible in my book and, when he announced last month that gay marriage is "part of a new ideology of evil," well he went and made it personal.

I like comedienne Judy Tenuta, who once said [though I'm paraphrasing the first bit from memory], "The Pope says that women can't be priests, the Pope says that gays are evil, the Pope says that birth control is wrong, the Pope says that he's infallible, and I say...fuck off, Pope!"

Harsh? Maybe. But, unlike far too many people, I didn't suddenly sing the praises of Nixon when he was dying, either. John Paul will go to heaven and happily sit at the right hand of the Lord or something but the rest of us will have to muddle along with the next fascist ideologue the church replaces him with.