GENERATION TERRORISTS

In the Western world like to imagine that we live in a very free and open society. We’ve finely airbrushed our colonial roots, mopped up our Imperial footprints and embraced the MOR tailoring of Benetton. But I sometimes feel it’s an oppressive kind of freedom the UK enjoys.

We’ve increasingly come to fear extremism in all it’s forms and for some of us, our government’s attempts to protect us from it. But I think the UK is guilty of its’ home-grown brand of terrorism, that is the tyranny of so-called good taste and over-censorship.

The debate of what is and is not acceptable to say, write or show in the media has recently exploded onto our screens and bled onto our fingers in print. See Sachsgate, Thatcher’s daughter and the controversial Dutch MP, Geert Wilders, recently denied entry into the UK.

But being very liberal can go also go very wrong. When people seek things out to be offended by they encourage a culture of complaint. Lots of these issues, like racism, relate to complicated ways of life that some of us cannot fully understand and we end up harming others’ causes in the process.

Take the recent controversy over Thatcher and the Golliwogs comment. I don’t think I can righteously claim that a Golliwog is offensive to me, personally, because Golliwogs are a cruel cartoon of black people, and I’m white. That’s not to say I don’t care, it is wrong because it is offensive to others, our generations (should) know this. But I think it would be hypocritical and condescending to argue that Golliwogs actually offend white people, when they were a form of propaganda that empowered white supremacy.

Take the Spike Lee joint, Bamboozled, a racial satire about a satirical Black and White Minstrel TV show gone wrong. It shows how both black and white people can very quickly learn to enjoy a racist skit show without stopping to think what it means. This is how racism starts, if you accept racist media portrayals and graffiti on the walls it all blends into the background of our social furniture. Then, like swearing, racism will seem ok.

As a media event, Bamboozled is a grey area (no pun) chiefly because you have to show racism to fight racism. But Lee’s aim was to draw a line in the sand about our modern perception of race issues and the golliwog history. By comparison, Carol Thatcher’s “joke” in a time when Golliwogs have long since been put to bed, emerged as nothing but a slur, her only defence being Conservative ignorance.

I think we’re better to speak openly about almost any issue, from immigration to sex with pensioners’ granddaughters, because you can’t prevent offence and comedy is a great way to do this (if it’s funny: discuss) But I think there is no room for blatant racism, either in the BBC or on the streets. However, if you white-wash-censor every example of controversial material that might offend someone, somewhere, from the Amazon to the Igloos, then I don’t think we can say that we are a free and open-minded society and so we the terrorists have already won.

Hallelujah for Buckley and the Burke!

HOW many candles does it take to produce the light of a star? Judging by Alexandra Burke's Hallelujah video, ten thousand (approx.) for Jeff Buckley, he was the star and the light and his enduring influence and appeal continue to burn bright.

I'm not happy with Alexandra Burke's cover of Leonard Cohen's song, Hallelujah. The recent chart battle for Xmas no.1 between the X-factor version and Jeff Buckley's has already been well covered but I feel I have to say something on the subject.

The people will always want to have their cake and, no doubt, to eat it. That's fair enough, everyone likes different things. But I can't stand to let Alexandra Burke's version get to the top of the charts, here are my reasons.

Many people have credited Alexandra Burke's version with turning people onto the Jeff Buckley's cover, which is great but if you hear Jeff Buckley's version and immediately prefer it to Alexandra Burke's then surely that means that his is the superior cover.

Not many people know this, except for Michael Pane, but Jeff's version is actually a cover of a cover. Jeff himself stated that he preferred John Cale's (ex-Velvet Underground) cover of Cohen's original, with the alternative set of lyrics. But when he set out to record his version he was beset by the usual problems of his freewheelin' style as Jeff was prone to playing a song differently each time from his Sin-E days playing solo in New York cafes. He played Hallelujah in different keys and with different guitar passages, so his versions are much more than just "stripped down" as many people refer to them.

Buckley's overflowing invention, his inability to be complacent with his music is very noble sounding, but it was no doubt a bitch to record properly. In the end Buckley's producer at the Grace sessions, Andy Wallace, put together several takes of Hallelujah, creating a unique hybrid of performances.

Alexandra Burke's Hallelujah, by comparison, is more an achievement of volume and style without substance. Where Buckley reached for beauty, Burke drowns us in shallow bombast. Loudness and candles does not equal a powerful cover of an emotive song. I'm not a huge fan but at least some of Mark Ronson's version album had some interesting covers on it, different takes on the same pop songs, but Alexandra Burke plays it so straight as to be square.

My point is simple: Jeff made Hallelujah his own, Leona Lewis just sang it back to us.

After Jeff Buckley's death in 1997, Bono in his infinite self-righteousness, described him as "a pure drop in an ocean of noise". This could be interpreted in many ways, such as a comment upon Jeff's full and clean sound against the tidal slur of grunge or the insincerity of the Mock-ney chirp in Britpop. I've always seen it as a comment on Jeff's place in the musical world, especially around the time Grace was released.

When Grace came out people were stunned at Jeff Buckley's voice and musical style, particularly as a different reincarnation of his father, Tim Buckley. Jeff sounded Happy/Sad but also was his own musical man, not entirely riding the coattails of his father's shadow. The important thing about Jeff's cover of Hallelujah is that it proved him to be something else as an artist, full of potential for changing music. And that's why he's so sorely missed today because everyone is reminded how poorer the world of music, and our conception of talent, is without him. In the age of the cover, the remake, the sequel, the re-issue and the manufactured plastic star, we need some of that purity again.

Urbex. Baby, I'm so slow...

I just found this amazing site. Bunch of guys explore breaking down buildings, just for kicks. Some really beautiful, haunting photography.

Click the Rabbit hOle to find it...

It's a forum site so look for the "report" links

Ignorance and Bliss are the Kiss of a Pig

It's nothing new that Barack Obama's latest statement has landed him in hot water:

"You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

The evidence against him has been bandied around at great length already. The initial criticism being that Barack Obama had offended and thus further alienated a number of female voters some of whom are already believed to have been won over by the Republican party's surprising appointment of a woman vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. This is confusing in itself; should offense be taken that Obama might have compared Palin to a pig and not the self-flattering "pitbull in lipstick" she had made herself out to be?

Probably not. And if he did mean it, I think he actually dealt her something of a compliment. It is common knowledge that pigs are one of the most intelligent mammals, though not the most noble of creatures; as they are also well known for bathing in mud & faeces. As well as eating swill without finding a pearl (that's Dolphins, right?)

Socrates himself made the comparison between the temperament of the pig and human beings as being heavily weighted in the pig's favour. Onboard a sinking ship a human will panic and cry, whereas a pig will often go with the rocking flow of the boat, content in their ignorance. Humans easily become mired in their own complex emotional frameworks, such as being paranoically offended over minor turns of phrase, and lose sight of consideration for others and the simpler (cheaper) pleasures in life. The nature of the pig is a similar attitudinal state to that of the Pyrrhonian sceptics, who promoted freedom from high-minded thought and other, other-worldly considerations, such a philosophy and politics.

Perhaps then Obama has made a veiled nod toward an ancient philosophical problem he sees as a dominating feature in modern politics. He has drawn out for us a crucial paradox that whilst humans are often content to see themselves as highly articulate and ridden with deep thought and selflessness, especially when compared to our animal brethren, so many of us are often loathed to forget our deep seated alleigances (to be sure, some of us never forget) so stuck in our ways, so eager to reach the trough, and much like the stubborn donkey, we plough a blind-minded furrow we believe righteous, whatever the cost to other people. Which, ironically, makes us seem just as ignorant as the free 'n' easy piggies over whom we claim mental superiority, lipstick or no.