Blog Entries [10 - 19]

Monday, August 19, 2024

Speaking of Which

I started this in a timely manner, but had various distractions during the week, and skipped Saturday altogether as I decided to cook dinner for some guests. So I only made it about half way through my usual rounds on Sunday before I ran out. Picked it up Monday morning, and should get something out in the evening, hopefully not real late. That will push Music Week back another day, which will probably bring my slow week back over the 30 mark.

As I'm wrapping up, the Democratic National Convention has started. Nothing on it below. That's definitely one for next week. There is also a report of a ceasefire deal, which would be nice timing for the Convention, but may not yet be real: Netanyahu agrees to mediators' cease-fire proposal, Blinken says. More on that (if there is anything more) next week. I didn't quite get to everything I usually hit, but I figure I have quite enough for now. I may add some things on Tuesday while I work on Music Week. I've already held back two Jonathan Chait pieces, which may turn out to be especially irritating.

I added a fair amount of material on Tuesday, while working on the much more manageable Music Week. Hard to say when one of these things is done, except by opening its successor, which will happen shortly after posting Music Week.

This is just an aside, but as long as I've been doing this, my first stop for news has been Vox. However, a few months ago, they redesigned their website to make it much harder to find new articles -- the chronological roll has been replaced by clusters of pieces that are dominated by what I suppose they consider "human interest" stories. Today's (rarely with author names, never with dates/times):

Of those stories, I only clicked on the last, and that only because I had no idea who Blake Lively was. (Actor, It Ends With Us, "the second biggest movie in America," something else I had no inkling of. At the end of which was a pitch for money, informing me that I had read 80 articles in the last month.) Further down the page, more articles I skipped:

I can't say that I have zero interest in these pieces, but they don't look very promising for my purposes. (To be fair, I often click on their culture and tech pieces, without writing anything about them.) The bottom of the home page still has a listing of "more news," which is chronological and labeled and I'm still finding quite a lot down there. So I may not be complaining about their irrelevance so much as I'm disturbed by their apparent belief that the other stuff is what really matters. In addition to the pieces I've actually cited below, the roll includes a bunch of articles that are interesting but don't immediately fit in what I'm doing below (this is a judgment call being made late Sunday, as I'm rushing to wrap up, so don't want to open up any more cans of worms than I have to). So I thought I might just mention them here:

Back in what we might call my "middle years" (roughly 30-50, or 1980-2000) I focused much less on politics, and more on general social, cultural, scientific, and business issues like these. They remain interesting subjects, but seem to be getting pushed aside in favor of more conventionally political matters.

Top story threads:

Israel:

  • Mondoweiss:

  • Ghada Ageel: [08-15] Gaza's other death toll: "Israel has caused countless preventable deaths which are yet to be reflected in the official Gaza death toll."

  • Yousef Aljamal: The daily battles to survive the Gaza genocide: "Tents out of aid parachutes, waiting days for a tin of beans, re-digging graves to bury martyrs: here's what Palestinians have to overcome."

  • Haaretz: Don't buy the lie that Israeli settler violence is the exception. It's the rule.

  • Reem A Hamadaqa: [08-14] What it's like living in a tent in Gaza: "Gaza's landscape is dominated by tents that have become homes to the hundreds of thousands of displaced Palestinians. But building a tent and living in one with your entire family isn't easy."

  • Tareq S Hajjaj:

    • [08-11] The Fajr massacre: Every 70 kg bag of human remains is considered a martyr: "The bodies of Palestinians killed in the latest Israeli massacre in Gaza were destroyed so far beyond recognition that doctors have only been able to give grieving families an anonymous bag of human remains to bury." I don't like the word "martyr," but one does need some term to honor those who died, not as willing sacrifices to a great cause, but as victims of victims of atrocities committed by people who have no honor and decency.

    • [08-15] Fighting the Israeli army in Gaza: Inside the battle for Shuja'iyya: "In a testimony obtained by Mondoweiss, a resident of Shuja'iyya recounts his motivations for wanting to join Hamas's al-Qassam Brigades to fight against the Israeli army."

  • Samah Jabr: [08-15] Sadism as a tool of war in Gaza.

  • Rifat Kassis: [08-18] Why the Israeli 'peace camp' disappeared: "It is primarily in the hands of Israelis to reject their settler colonial occupation, their apartheid laws, and their current government and nationalist parties. The alternative means the loss of their humanity."

  • Joseph Massad: [08-12] Why raping Palestinians is legitimate Israeli military practice: "Sadism has long characterized Zionist colonists' treatment of Palestinians, rooted in orientalist views that Arab only 'understand force' -- including sexual violence." This led me to a couple older pieces:

  • Qassam Muaddi:

  • Jonathan Ofir: [08-12] Israeli media's coverage of the rape of Palestinian detainees shows support for sexual violence in service of genocide: "Israeli media coverage of the rape of Palestinian detainees demonstrates the widespread acceptance within Israeli society of sexual violence as a weapon of genocide."

  • Noa Pinto: The taps have run dry in Jerusalem's largest Palestinian neighborhood: "Long neglected by the Jerusalem Municipality, Kufr 'Aqab residents now receive only a few hours of water a week."

  • Richard Silverstein: [08-14] As Israel wages genocide, its economy is buckling. US aid is vital to Israel not just to keep resupplying them with bombs but to keep the economy operating given how expensive their war is. (The same thing can also be said for Ukraine. In both cases, the US should have enough leverage to shut down the wars, if only the powers in Washington decide to do so.)

    Four hundred thousand Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers have served extended tours of duty in Gaza, the West Bank, and northern Israel. They have left families and jobs and, in many cases, lost their businesses. In addition, almost 250,000 Israelis have become refugees due to fighting with Hezbollah. This has had a massive impact on the Israeli economy. Economic growth and GDP have plummeted.

    Forty-six thousand businesses have failed since October 7. That number will increase to sixty thousand by the end of 2024. This has a ripple effect throughout the economy. Bankruptcies hit the bottom line of the lenders who extended credit to the failed businesses. Vendors and suppliers also take a hit, while the lives of many small business owners have been reduced to shambles. They have sunk into debt and often are forced to rely on handouts from friends, family, and charities:

    Many of those [IDF] fighters are close to a breaking point. Exhausted and in some cases demoralized, they are struggling to balance family and work with military service, while the economic toll from their absences mounts.

    The Israeli Population Authority reported that in the past year, 575,000 more Israelis left the country than returned to it. The immigration rate has halved since October 7.

    Activity in the construction sector, reliant on over two hundred thousand Palestinian workers who are now barred from entering Israel, has declined by 25 percent. This has led to the collapse of building contractors and developers.

    The Palestinian economy has been decimated and driven residents into penury. The desperation they face will lead inevitably to bitter resentment and future violence. Tourism, once a powerhouse of the economy, has dried up. The agriculture sector (20 percent decline) is based mainly in the north and the south, regions hard-hit by hostilities. Trade has plummeted drastically at Israel's southern port, Eilat, due to Houthi interruption of maritime traffic in the Red Sea. . . .

    The Bank of Israel announced that the 2024 growth rate would be -2 percent, unprecedented in an Israeli economy used to sustained growth. Fitch has just downgraded the country's credit rating, describing the economic outlook as "negative." The Bank of Israel has raised the interest rate to 4.5 percent. . . .

    Israel's buckling economy will increase social unrest. Massive increases in funding for the ultra-Orthodox and settlements will sow sectarian division between secular (40 percent of the population) and religious Israelis. Wars in Gaza and Lebanon will destabilize the region and increase the likelihood of future wars, which will require massive increases in military spending. The current economic strain will increase hostility, already at a fever pitch, toward Netanyahu and his government and lead to their likely downfall in 2026 elections.

  • Aaron Sobczak: [08-14] Israelis using Gaza civilians as human shields: "IDF soldiers give gruesome first hand accounts to Haaretz newspaper."

  • Jonah Valdez: Video of sexual abuse at Israeli prison is just latest evidence Sde Teiman is a torture site.

  • Kelley Beaucar Vlahos: [08-12] Nearly 2% of Gazans killed in last 10 months: "Harris laments bombing of shelters yet her administration just released $3.5B in more weapons to Israel."

America's Israel (and Israel's America):

Israel vs. world opinion:

  • Abdullah Al-Arian: [08-14] Why Arab regimes' betrayal of Palestine may come back to haunt them. Maybe, but the phrase "learned helplessness" -- which I've seen in various contexts of late -- comes to mind. They tried declaring their solidarity with Palestinians, and even went to war against Israel -- most notably in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973, plus numerous skirmishes, with Iraq's Scud missile attacks in 1990 a "last hurrah" -- to no avail. They tried negotiating peace, which Israel only allowed on terms injurious to Palestinians. The Palestinians themselves passed through both phases, multiple times, getting screwed both ways. The "Abraham Accords" promised normalcy through commerce but just made Israel more arrogant, leaving Hamas so desperate they resorted to what was effectively a suicide bombing. No doubt most people in the Arab (and other Muslim) countries feel more solidarity than their leaders, which could make it a potent issue when and if the outs -- which is nearly everybody -- rise up against the ins, for whom this is but one of many discrediting issues.

    Israel doesn't care. What's the worst case scenario for them? Say, Saudi Arabia is overthrown by a novel Islamo-Fascist party -- the term has never been more than an idle slander before, but if you start from the Nazi notion of a Third Reich (this one would seek to revive the Abassid and Ottoman Empires, which can provide plenty of Islamic trappings to pave the way to war) -- which then moves on to form alliances with Egypt, Iran, and/or Turkey (each susceptible in their own ways to such thinking), Israel could simply respond by obliterating them all with nuclear weapons -- and could depend on the US as backup. Some Israelis may even relish the challenge, as cover for finishing off the Palestinians, and extending their settlements onto the East Bank.

    Needless to say, no actual Arab political leader is thinking even remotely along these lines. Even ISIS isn't ambitious enough to challenge Israel. The only way this situation can be resolved -- the only way Palestinians can finally catch a break -- is if/when Israel decides to change course. To paraphrase Golda Meir, "Peace will come when the Israelis will love their children more than they hate Palestinians." That's not happening soon, and there's not a damn thing Arabs, including Palestinians, can do about it. (Well, the BDS work is good; the UN, the ICJ; the protests in the US and Europe directed at curtailing support Israel still depends on for its warmaking. Threats and acts of violence against Israelis and/or their supporters abroad are more likely to do harm than good.) Related here:

  • Alain Alameddine/Nira Iny: [08-17] Germany was never denazified. That's why it's siding with Israel today. "The Allies failed to denazify Europe by failing to dismantle the political foundations their own nations shared with the Nazi regime. Europeans need not repeat that mistake." I don't buy this argument on any level. There was an explicit denazification program in the late 1940s. It was narrow and shallow, and abandoned shortly, as it turned out that the most anti-communist Germans the West needed after partition had Nazi backgrounds, and by then simple disavowal seemed like a satisfactory compromise.

    The real change of heart occurred in the 1960s, when a new generation came of age, and was eager to break with the past. That's when acknowledgment of the Holocaust started to appear in German literature, e.g., the plays of Rolf Hochhuth and Peter Weiss. That also happened after Israel tried Eichmann, and started lobbying Germany for reparations -- not just money, but recognition that Israel alone represented the survivors of the Holocaust. That was a good deal for Israel. What Germans got out of it is less tangible, but they could afford some charity to feel and look better, and having no Jewish population of their own, they could easily equate Jews with Israelis.

    That Israel would eventually manifest symptoms of Nazism was unforeseen, and may still be bewildering. As far as I can tell, no western state that supports Israel does so because they're in favor of the genocide. Most go to great lengths to deny that Israel is doing any such thing, and to insist that Israel is only defending itself, as is assumed to be their right. Where Germany is exceptional is in how dogmatically they equate antisemitism, which they are well trained to eschew, with any criticism of Israel. But that has more to do with the fact that they were once ruled by Nazis than that they still feel the urges that once drove them to genocide.

  • Omer Bartov: [08-14] As a former IDF soldier and historian of genocide, I was deeply disturbed by my recent visit to Israel: "This summer, one of my lectures was protested by far-right students. Their rhetoric brought to mind some of the darkest moments of 20th-century history -- and overlapped with mainstream Israeli views to a shocking degree." Following is a long quote, but virtually all of it is needed to get a sense of how ordinary Israelis are considering events. This is preceded by a long section on Bartov's own experiences in the IDF and in studying Nazi Germany and how soldiers are trained to commit war crimes. That has much bearing on how IDF soldiers are fighting this war, but their popular support (or at least forbearance) is something different. Although Israel prides itself on being a democracy -- at least for some of the people, some of the time -- there has long been a divide between the political/military class, who are trained to lead and fight, and the elect citizenry, who are terrorized and ingrained with propaganda, so they will follow and fight (as ordered).

    Today, across vast swaths of the Israeli public, including those who oppose the government, two sentiments reign supreme.

    The first is a combination of rage and fear, a desire to re-establish security at any cost and a complete distrust of political solutions, negotiations and reconciliation. The military theorist Carl von Clausewitz noted that war was the extension of politics by other means, and warned that without a defined political objective it would lead to limitless destruction. The sentiment that now prevails in Israel similarly threatens to make war into its own end. In this view, politics is an obstacle to achieving goals rather than a means to limit destruction. This is a view that can only ultimately lead to self-annihilation.

    The second reigning sentiment -- or rather lack of sentiment -- is the flipside of the first. It is the utter inability of Israeli society today to feel any empathy for the population of Gaza. The majority, it seems, do not even want to know what is happening in Gaza, and this desire is reflected in TV coverage. Israeli television news these days usually begins with reports on the funerals of soldiers, invariably described as heroes, fallen in the fighting in Gaza, followed by estimates of how many Hamas fighters were "liquidated." References to Palestinian civilian deaths are rare and normally presented as part of enemy propaganda or as a cause for unwelcome international pressure. In the face of so much death, this deafening silence now seems like its own form of vengefulness.

    Of course, the Israeli public long ago became inured to the brutal occupation that has characterised the country for 57 out of the 76 years of its existence. But the scale of what is being perpetrated in Gaza right now by the IDF is as unprecedented as the complete indifference of most Israelis to what is being done in their name. In 1982, hundreds of thousands of Israelis protested against the massacre of the Palestinian population in the refugee camps Sabra and Shatila in western Beirut by Maronite Christian militias, facilitated by the IDF. Today, this kind of response is inconceivable. The way people's eyes glaze over whenever one mentions the suffering of Palestinian civilians, and the deaths of thousands of children and women and elderly people, is deeply unsettling.

    In theory, the political/military class serves at the sufferance of the voters, but for all intents and purposes, the voters only exist to ratify their leaders, who have been carefully selected through decades of conflict and combat. As Americans, we should know what that feels like, although we feel it less intensely: our businesses are booming, our wars are more distant and less intrusive, our homeland more secure, our history unclouded by Holocaust paranoia. Still, our information is manipulated, our options are selected and limited, and our attention diverted, so how responsible are we for our leaders, let alone for what they do once elected?

    By the way, I also ran across this article Bartov wrote early on: [2023-11-10] What I believe as a historian of genocide. His article starts: "Israeli military operations have created an untenable humanitarian crisis, which will only worsen over time." He then asks whether those military operations constitute genocide, and tries his best to answer "not yet."

  • Marco Carnelos: [08-19] European leaders are stoking the flames of a Middle East inferno: "Their wilful blindness to Israel's atrocities in Gaza, and their refusal to hold Netanyahu to account, could sharply escalate the conflict." The author has been following European leaders, to little avail:

  • Juan Cole: [08-16] Saudi Crown Prince fears assassination if he recognizes Israel without getting a Palestinian state. Draws on:

  • Hamid Dabashi: [08-18] Thanks to Gaza, European philosophy has been exposed as ethically bankrupt: "From Heidegger's Nazism to Habermas's Zionism, the suffering of the 'Other' is of little consequence." Just noted, not something I'm interested in digging into at the moment, but I will note that back in the 1970s, my interest in the Frankfurt School hit a brick wall when I attempted to read one of his major works (probably Knowledge and Human Interests) and failed to retain anything useful from it (not even rejection). While I know a bit more, and care a bit less, about Heidegger, that's a pretty narrow slice of European philosophy to attempt to generalize from. As for Habermas's cheerleading for Israel against Hamas, I noted that his principle statement -- a joint letter -- was from relatively early in the genocide (Nov. 13), so I wondered if he had since thought better. A quick search didn't reveal anything, but I will note this:

  • Chip Gibbons/Nathan Fuller: [08-16] More than 100 journalists come together with their fellow journalists in Palestine and against US complicity in their killing.

  • Miles Howe: [08-17] Revocation of the JNF's charitable status indicates massive shift in how Canada views the Israeli occupation: "The revocation of the Jewish National Fund's and Ne'eman Foundation's charitable status suggests a massive shift is underway in how Canada views the illicit funding of West Bank settlements following the ICJ's opinion on the Israeli occupation."

  • Sarah Jones: [08-19] Gaza is the defining moral issue of our time: Agreed that "what's happening in Gaza today is a moral outrage and an ongoing genocide, and our reaction to it will shape who we are as a nation." I'd add that that's been the case since around Oct. 10, around the time when Israel repulsed the last Hamas fighters and re-sealed the breached walls around Gaza. A unilateral Israeli ceasefire at that point would have ended the war, leaving Gaza badly damaged, but few would have faulted Israel for that. Continuing the bombing for a week or two more before a ceasefire would have made the point that Israelis are vindictive bastards, which should have been unnecessary, but given how much worse it could be, we would have sighed in relief. There's no excuse for what they've done ever since then, and even if they can't see that, there's no reason for the US, Europe, and everyone else to make excuses, let alone aid and abet, their genocide.

    On the other hand, one thing I had to come to grips with after Oct. 7 was that moral judgments are a luxury that presume a degree of free choice. I don't have time to go back through those issues -- you can check my old columns from Oct. 2023 on, which hold up pretty well (though may have been a bit too generous toward Israel). One thing I do want to emphasize here is that I think moral judgments are unnecessary and sometimes dangerous luxuries in politics. For most of us, moral judgments give us essential perspective on the world. But politicians have to operate in a different world, one where being "right" signifies very little, and what you can do is often quite constrained. I can comfortably say that Netanyahu is immoral for wanting to prosecute his war, and that Biden is immoral for not restraining him, but I understand that what Harris can actually do is very limited, and may not be helped by saying the right things (as Jones wants her to do -- that is the point of the article). I think that we should judge Biden harshly for what he has said, done, and not done, but I'm not yet prepared to say the same about Harris. Moreover, while I would like for her to take what I consider proper positions, I understand that as VP under Biden, and as the Democratic nominee for president, she is operating under constraints where saying the right things may not contribute to the right actions, and may even complicate them.

  • Ahmed Khan: [08-16] I left Biden's campaign over Gaza. Here's how Harris can earn my trust again.

  • Joseph Massad: [03-20] In the West, Israel never initiates violence, it only 'retaliates': "In the western narrative, it is the Palestinians who initiated violence by daring to resist racist and colonial Zionist violence, which is why their resistance can never be called 'retaliation.'" He notes that their choice of language is not new or peculiar to Israel: "The New York Times referred to the white Rhodesians' killing of 1,600 Africans in Zambian refugee camps in 1978 as 'retaliatory raids.'"

  • Craig Mokhiber: [08-12] The ICJ finds that BDS is not merely a right, but an obligation: "The ICJ's authoritative ruling on the Israeli occupation makes clear that boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against Israeli occupation, colonization, and apartheid are not only a moral imperative but also a legal obligation."

  • Jeff Wright: [08-11] In significant reversal, Church of England head says Israeli occupation must end following ICJ opinion: "'The [recent] Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice,' Archbishop Justin Welby writes, 'makes definitively clear that Israel's presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is unlawful and needs to end as rapidly as possible.'"

Election notes:

Trump:

  • Charles M Blow: [08-14] Another 'nasty' woman strikes fear in Trump: "But when Trump talks about women who in any way challenge his power, his rhetoric drips with sexism. In recent days, he has referred to Harris as 'incompetent,' 'nasty' and 'not smart.'"

  • Jamelle Bouie:

    • [08-13] What the Republican Party might look like if Trump loses.

    • [08-16] Trump has opened the pathway to reform: Not really, unless he thinks Trump is going to lose so badly that Democrats will be able to implement his major reforms -- he starts with "end the electoral college and move to a national popular vote," removing all the vote suppression and gerrymanders that have allowed Republicans to claim elections, and ending the filibuster, which allows a minority party to frustrate change. Oh yes, also "reform of the entire federal judiciary." Only when denied such cheats will Republicans be forced to become good citizens, and compete for real majority rule -- in which case, would they still be conservatives? And in any case, why credit Trump with "opening the pathway to reform" when all he did was to reduce the old elitism and crony corruption ad absurdum?

      Bouie is usually a pretty smart guy, so I really don't get what he's driving at here. He writes, "The United States will always have a conservative party," but why? Do we really need a party that is dedicated to plutocracy? To keeping most people poor, in debt, and powerless? To promoting racism and violence? To a police state that protects fraud and rackets? There will always be a place for what's called "conservative" personal values, but why should such values be incompatible with conscientious and respectful government, fair business, law and order, a sense of public interest, a generous safety net, and broad-based equality? Republicans have to cheat, because what they want is fundamentally unacceptable to a majority of the people. Democrats don't have to cheat. They just have to get out and run to honestly represent the people in their districts.

      If half of the Republicans in the Senate were to lose next time out, the Senate would not be suddenly flooded with socialists like Bernie Sanders and liberals like Elizabeth Warren. They'd wind up with a lot more people like John Tester and Joe Manchin, who would be nearly as conservative on personal principles as the Republicans they replaced, but at least believe in honest, functional government, like Democrats do, and may be a bit more tolerant of diversity, because they'll see more people as allies and less as threats to their delicately perched minoritarian rule.

      And if Democrats did succeed in representing everyone (without or even with the 1%), which is clearly the goal, what the hell do we need Republicans for anyway? They can go the way of the Know Nothings and the Mugwumps, for all I care.

      Oh, one more thing: anyone who wants to talk about reforming democratic institutions without starting at money should be hooted out of the room. The number one threat to democracy is money. And we know this because we've already seen it at work. And even though the Democratic Party still gives lip service to democracy, they've been afflicted as badly as the Republicans. The only difference is that the Republicans brag about the power of money in their party, while Democrats just whisper about it -- a hypocrisy that paradoxically makes them look even more corrupt, and makes ordinary people all the more upset at them.

  • Philip Bump:

  • Jonathan Chait:

  • Kevin T Dugan: [08-12] Traders are having a hard time staying bullish on Trump media.

  • Tom Engelhardt: [08-15] Why voting for Donald Trump is a suicidal act. His main thing has always been the folly of empire, but lately he keeps circling back to climate change, with increasingly dire consequences.

  • Michelle Goldberg: [08-16] Trump is no longer even pretending to champion the working class.

  • Margaret Hartmann:

  • Ellen Ioanes: [08-12] What we know about Trump's claim that Iran hacked his campaign.

  • Jeet Heer: [08-16] Donald Trump is already planting the seeds of the next insurrection: "Insecure and contemplating defeat, the former president returns to a familiar script." This, of course, speaks to his character and nature. No doubt he will whine and lie, threaten and cajole. He may animate some of his usual surrogates, assuming they're not yet in jail. But he's not going to have anywhere near the credibility and resources he had as sitting president. He might organize a rally, but they're not getting anywhere close to the Capitol. He might try the fake elector slate again, but with indictments still hanging over their heads in Arizona and Georgia, it's less likely to happen. And the immunity the Supreme Court seems to have granted him in 2020 won't be applicable this time. At some point, even his hand-picked Justices are going to throw him under the bus. And the military is not going to rise up like some Praetorian Guard declaring him Caesar. Of course, if the election hangs by a thread, it's going to be loudly contested through the courts, where he plausibly has chances slightly above 50-50. But if he loses by a clear margin (like 3%, with 30+ electoral votes) there's nothing much he can do about it. The question then will be whether he wants to martyr himself, or settle and plea bargain. No matter his distasteful he considers the latter, I doubt he has the constitution for the former.

  • Ed Kilgore: [08-15] Trump xenophobia reaches its apex in racist campaign post: "A post from Trump's campaign embraces the 'great replacement theory,' with Kamala Harris as the evil engineer of American carnage."

  • Whizy Kim: [08-13] Why Musk and Trump are on the same side: "The richest man in the world and the former president's glitchy, cringeworthy interview, explained."

  • Leon Krauze: [08-12] What deporting 15 million people would look like. Even here, Trump's mass deportation fantasy still looks like idle talk. When I hear things like this, I try to imagine what it would actually require. As near as I can figure, this is how it would have to work (in order to work, which is supposedly the goal, but not the most likely result):

    1. Due process would have to be short-circuited (to some extent it already is, but we're talking much more extremely). Normally, the courts would object, but Trump judges may not.
    2. You'd need a national identity system, so you can efficiently sort out people, to determine whether they stay or go. To enforce compliance, you may have to arrest massive numbers of people, just to get them into the system. Enforcement is likely to involve a lot of profiling.
    3. You'd need a massive expansion of enforcement and detention resources. How massive depends on effectively the first two points are implemented, but even if they're very efficient, you'll still need a lot.
    4. You'll need to greatly expand monitoring and surveillance, especially of businesses.
    5. You might consider expanding your network by offering bounties, which would provide incentives for all sorts of abuse, and probably produce some uncomfortable blowback.
    6. After all, the more you criminalize what many people accept as normal behavior, the less respect people have for law and justice, so you're likely to see a much broader increase in crime.
    7. One should also note that a government that is willing to do all these things to punish immigrants isn't likely to treat its own citizens much better. Immigrants aren't the only people Republicans despise and disrespect.

    While there are people who would applaud such a proposal, their numbers are small, and their influence is limited. Republicans talk a big game, but they're not very good at actually doing things -- nor, really, about thinking practically. The Iran nuclear deal is a fair example: the only way to insure compliance to negotiate a deal that would allow for inspections, but would also give Iran some incentive to comply, with little risk to their own security. No other way was possible, but Republicans (following Netanyahu's lead, as usual) preferred threats and projection of force. You know what happened after Trump ended the deal.

    Republicans would rather yell about something than deal with it. That's why Trump killed a border security bill that Republicans had threatened to shut down the government to demand, one that Biden was willing (and perhaps even eager) to accede to. He wants to run on the issue, and he wants to build monuments to his vanity like his border wall, and he has no qualms about inflicting cruelty on the immigrants, but he isn't serious about fixing the problem. His threats may be less transparently phony than Romney's solution of "self-deportion," but they're still just threats -- accented, true enough, with performative cruelty, because the Republican base eats that up. But does the base want identity cards and bounty hunters? And are the donors willing to sacrifice all that cheap labor? The notion that deposed union workers from the coal mines and factories are going to going to flock to Texas and California to pick lettuce and strawberries, or to west Kansas to slaughter beef, is fantasy. You're talking about deporting 5% of the people who live and work in the country. You think Washington's lobbyists are going to pay for that?

  • Chris Lehmann:

    • [08-13] The true source of Trump's delusions: the gospel of positive thinking: "Trump's obsession with crowd sizes is part of his lifelong quest to prevent reality from blocking his fath to success." Sure, there's something to this, but the seed planted by Norman Vincent Peale was relatively benign for most people, but with Trump was planted in the soil of class privilege and monstrous ego. Also, note that Trump knew Peale personally (much as he knew Roy Cohn), which helped to make his revelation seem like personal destiny. (The Bushes had a similar relationship to Billy Graham, who most of us only knew via TV.)

    • [08-14] The press has the Trump campaign e-mails. Why haven't we seen them? "The media went berserk over Hillary Clinton's leaked e-mails in 2016. But when Trump campaign messages leaked this year, standards changed."

  • Ruth Marcus: [08-14] Trump's no Nixon. He doesn't deserve a pardon. My first reaction was Nixon didn't deserve a pardon either, and then when I started weighing them against one another, I still believe that Nixon was much worse. Granted, his margin was largely on things (war crimes) he never would have been prosecuted for in the first place. The actual (or for Nixon potential) prosecutions are comparable in that they were not just crimes against democracy but against the Democratic Party, made even worse by the cover ups. And there, at least, Trump far exceeded Nixon, who at least had the decency to retreat into political irrelevancy -- and thereby proving that even the worst criminals can be rendered harmless by removing them from the conditions that made their crimes possible. That may be a useful guideline for dealing with Trump: take away his political ambitions, his soap boxes, nearly all of his money, and it may not matter whether he spends his remaining days in prison. On the other hand, if he doesn't, he will always be an example of the American justice system's favoritism. That he has gotten away with so much for so long means that those who fear for the integrity of the system have already lost.

  • Meridith McGraw/Adam Wren/Natalie Allison/Adam Cancryn: [06-22] Trump keeps flip-flopping his policy positions after meeting with rich people.

  • Edith Olmsted: [08-19] Trump's rare attempt to stay on message ends in disaster: "Donald Trump gave a low-energy speech that elicited few cheers from the audience."

  • Charles P Pierce:

  • Jessica Piper: [08-20] GOP megadonor drops another $50M into pro-Trump super PAC: "Timothy Mellon has now given $115 million this cycle to the group." Mellon has also given $25 million to a super PAC for Robert F Kennedy Jr., who now seems likely to drop out.

  • Nia Prater: [08-12] What we know about the Trump-campaign hack.

  • Brian Schwartz: [08-16] GOP megadonor Miriam Adelson plans to do whatever it takes to help Trump win with $100 million PAC: "The Adelsons donated nearly $90 million to a pro-Trump PAC in 2020. Miriam Adelson could be Trump's biggest financial booster by Election Day."

  • Dylan Scott: [08-14] Trump's campaign against public health is back on: "The former president says he'll block funding for US schools that require vaccines."

  • Matt Stieb: [08-12] Trump-Musk meeting begins with X meltdown.

  • Rodney Tiffen: [08-11] How Rupert Murdoch helped create a monster -- the era of Trumpism -- and then lost control of it.

  • Michael Tomasky: [08-16] Donald Trump has no idea what has hit him, and it's a joy to watch: "He's had yet another horrible week. The old tricks aren't working. Kamala Harris does not fear him. And it's showing in the numbers."

  • Li Zhou: [08-09] Trump's ever-shifting position on abortion, explained (as best as possible).

  • No More Mr Nice Blog: [] The other W word:

    I am all in on the One Weird Trick Democrats have found -- calling Republicans "weird." It works because the GOP ticket is, let's face it, a couple of fucking weirdos, but it goes way beyond them to encompass the party as a whole: their weird conspiracy theories, their weird obsession with children's genitalia, their weird and creepy compulsion to control women.

    But I'm wondering if there might also be gold in another, more Trump-specific line of attack. Because the thing is, Trump is just really, really whiny.

    Trump complains a lot. Like, all the fucking time. He complains morning, noon, and into the wee hours of the night. He complains about being held accountable for his numerous crimes, and he complains about anyone mentioning his convictions. He complains about the polls. He complains about the fact that things change in a campaign, then he turns around and complains about his own campaign's inability to force him to adjust to change. He complains about the microphone, his teleprompters, sound system, and imaginary supporters being denied entry at his rallies. And yesterday he complained about "audio issues" on the X call that, he claims, were responsible for his lisp. There's a case to be made that Trump is the whiniest whiner in the whole whiny history of whinerdom.

Vance:

And other Republicans:

Harris:

  • Perry Bacon Jr.: [08-13] It's not just vibes. Harris is polling really well. "Her better-than-expected numbers are creating optimism, but Trump can still win."

  • Robert L Borosage: [08-13] It's not about Harris "moving to the center": Responding to a spate of recent articles urging Harris to "move to the center" or reprimanding her for not doing so conspicuously enough. I wrote enough about Jonathan Chait last week, but Borosage adds this:

    New York magazine's Jonathan Chait, the relentless Javert on the hunt for any progressive stirring, argues that to make up for Walz, Harris needs to adopt positions "that will upset progressive activists" and "understand that the likelihood a given action or statement will create complaints on the left is a reason to do something, rather than a reason not to."

    Chait doesn't deign to reveal how Harris should rile her base. Instead, he invokes Trump as a model, arguing that the Donald's "softening" of the abortion plank at the Republican convention "was a smart move to reduce the party's exposure to unpopular positions" and didn't cause a fracturing of the party, despite grousing from anti-abortion zealots.

    Really? It takes a fervid imagination to believe that Trump's cynical repositioning on abortion makes a whit of difference to voters concerned about the reversal of Roe v. Wade. The only thing Trump gained was the admiration of pundits like Chait who consider such political posturing to be sophisticated.

    But when Trump waffles, his people know he's dissembling and don't care: they trust him to stay true, at least to their core emotional bonds. But who trusts a Democrat? They say one thing, do another, always looking for compromises to reconcile everyone and satisfy no one. The perception that HRC was crooked destroyed her. On the other hand, you could understanding that Trump was far more crooked, and take that as a badge of character. What Harris and Walz need to do is to show some character and commitment, and the worst way to do that is to reassure donors and pundits they're no threat.

    The real challenge for Harris is not how she insults the left but how she makes herself into a credible champion of the economic concerns of working people. . . . Harris can't and shouldn't compete with those moved by Christian nationalism or racial division, but she can and should seek to cut away at his support by making a more compelling argument on what produced the economic distress and growing despair among working people, the obscene inequality that eviscerated the middle class -- and what can be done about it. . . .

    Her stump speech highlights her commitment to "an economy that works for working people" with a practical agenda -- paid family and medical leave, affordable childcare, taking on Big Pharma to lower drug prices, making healthcare more affordable. Walz reinforces that message because he's actually passed such measures in Minnesota. And much of this agenda was passed by the Democratic House in Biden's first two years, only to be blocked in the Senate by Republican opposition. As to "moving to the center," these are all incredibly popular programs, supported by the vast majority of Americans. . . .

    For this to bite, Harris must become more populist, not less. She must be clear that she will raise taxes on the rich to pay for affordable childcare, that she will take on Big Pharma to lower drug prices, break up corporate monopolies to lower prices, take on Big Oil and invest in renewable energy, addressing the accelerating climate catastrophe and capturing what already are the growth industries of the next decades. Again, the contrast with Donald Trump's promising oil executives that he'll do their bidding if they'll ante up $1 billion for his campaign is telling.

    As best I recall, all Democrats move left as elections approach, then move back center after they win, as they face entrenched lobby powers. I have little doubt that Harris will follow this usual arc. But the answers to most pressing problems are to the left. If they want to be taken seriously, they need to look in that direction. Otherwise, if they follow centrist scolds like Chait, they're as much as admitting they're hopeless. Borosage also cites:

  • Gabriel Debenedetti: [08-16] Kamala is a (border) cop: "How the Harris campaign plans to deal with the most common Republican line of attack."

  • EJ Dionne Jr.: [08-11] Harris is beating Trump by transcending him: "The vice president and her running mate are achieving a radical shift in messaging."

  • Kevin T Duan: [08-17] Kamala Harris wants to build 3 million houses. Is that enough?

  • Abdallah Fayyad: [08-13] Trump and Harris agree on "no tax on tips." They're both wrong. "The policy looks less like a pro-worker tax credit and more like a big business tax cut." I accept that this was "Trump's idea" -- sure, he got it from Republican policy wonks, as did Ted Cruz, who has introduced legislation to that effect (see links below) -- but it's more interesting that Harris "stole the idea," rather than making any attempt to refute it. On its own, it isn't a very good policy idea, but by the time it turns into legislation, it will be a small part of something much worse (if Trump does it) or maybe not so bad (if Harris does it). It does make it much more possible to happen, because now it's a "bipartisan" idea, and who can object to that? Democrats like to present themselves as open to bipartisan ideas, even if they wind up rejecting most of what Republicans offer as such. (Actually, the only things Republicans offer as "bipartisan" are wedge issues designed to alienate Democratic voters from their donor-oriented leaders. NAFTA was a good example.) It also shows that the Harris campaign is flexible and quick to change direction when they see an opportunity. That's, well, not something Democrats are renowned for.

    My own reservations are largely because I really hate tipping and the whole gratuity-driven sector of the economy (which is part of the reason I've been so reluctant to put my cup out, despite all the poorly-compensated work I do for public consumption). I worry that exempting tips from taxation will just encourage more companies not just to offload their labor costs but to monetize their tip-making opportunities. I worry that exempting tips from taxation will result in more "gig workers," poorly regulated and often unprotected. On the other hand, I know that tips have never been properly accounted for, and that more stringent enforcement is likely to be onerous and unlikely to be cost-effective. A more honest economy would have less, not more, tipping. Fayyad also makes points about the nature and quality of working for tips, which I can well imagine is even worse than stated.

    A big part of the subtext is that Trump and the Republicans don't just want rich people to have to pay lower tax rates, they want to make it easier for them to cheat and pay even less (or nothing at all).

  • Nick Hanauer: [08-16] A very good sign: Kamala Harris is going right at corporate greed: "Greedy CEOs have milked the average American household for $12,000 since the pandemic. As a businessman, I can explain how they're doing it."

  • Ginny Hogan: [08-14] Can Harris and Walz meme their way to the White House? "The online jokes are not just about having fun. They represent a new found political energy within the Democratic Party."

  • Paul Krugman:

    • [08-15] Is it morning in Kamala Harris's America? That was supposed to be Reagan's winning formula, back in 1980, in a contest between optimism and "malaise." Clinton in 1992 and Obama in 2008 promised change, but couldn't (or wouldn't) deliver. Harris at least has the look of change, especially in contrast to Biden and Trump.

    • [08-12] Trump calls Harris a 'communist.' That shows how worried he is. Or how dumb he is? Or how old he is, given that he learned the charge from Roy Cohn, who was Joe McCarthy's lawyer (and McCarthy was a has-been when he died in 1957, when Trump was 10).

  • Josh Marshall: [08-12] Team Happy vs Team Mad: "Team Mad" hardly need any explanation: they're mad not just as hell but as hatters, but I haven't heard of any presidential-level politician described as "happy" since Al Smith. (Maybe Hubert Humphrey, but I was around in 1968 and I don't remember him as being very happy that year.) But evidently this was already a thing with Harris in 2020:

    As Marshall notes: "Happy isn't the only or most important part of a political campaign. Especially when there's quite a lot not to be happy about." On the other hand, when you're suddenly reprieved from impending doom, it's natural to feel down right euphoric. That will wear off soon enough, but not quite so quickly with a candidate who can smile and laugh as with one that can only snarl and scowl (and whine).

  • Farah Stockman: [08-12] Harris should take divisions over Gaza seriously.

  • Hunter Walker: [08-15] Bernie Sanders makes the progressive case for Kamala Harris.

Walz:

Biden:

  • Joshua A Cohen: [08-16] When will the Biden dead-enders admit they were wrong? "Hey, can we circle back to when many supposedly intelligent people were making one of the most obviously ridiculous political arguments of all time?" I don't doubt that there are past debates worth circling back to in order to see who was right and who was wrong -- the war resolutions in 2001 (Afghanistan) and 2002 (Iraq) are still instructive, and even the Lincoln-Douglas debates (1858) are worth remembering -- but this one was just a flash in the pan. But at this point, are there still any "dead-enders" left to extirpate? Why be sore winners? It's a nasty habit, like desecrating the corpses of the slain. But in this case it's also a silly one. The "dead-enders" weren't even that -- unlike, e.g., those few Hillary Clinton supporters who carried their grudges well into Obama's winning campaign. They were simply trying their stiff-upper-lip best to be loyal to the presumptive nominee, a guy the rest of us would very probably have voted for in November, no matter how ill-advised we thought his candidacy. If any of them have since failed to support Harris, I haven't noticed. The only laments I have noticed came from Trump himself.

  • David Dayen: [08-16] The inflation reduction act at two: "Challenges remain, but there's been a lot of progress on restoring an industrial base, creating union jobs, and transforming our energy economy."

  • Harold Meyerson: [08-12] There are some damned good reasons why Joe Biden moved to the left: "Biden's economic progressivism has been both historic and (had he only been able to explain it) good politics." One thing this reminds me of is that Franklin Roosevelt was really good at explaining things. His bank holiday "fireside chat" was possibly the most brilliant thing any American president ever did. My other key thought here is that Democrats are expected not just to complain but to solve problems, and for most problems, the answers are to the left. That's one reason Republicans are so bad at governing: they keep looking right, running away from answers. There is also a long section here on Jonathan Chait, but you know about him already.

  • Nicole Narea: [08-13] Biden wants to free you from all those subscriptions you meant to cancel but didn't: "It's the latest way Biden is trying to combat pesky 'junk fees' driving up prices."

And other Democrats:

  • Colbert I King: A rerun of Chicago '68? Only if Harris lets it happen. The violence of 1968 was almost exclusively due to Mayor Daley and his police, so that part is unlikely to repeat. The wars, or at least the president's culpability, are very different, and so is the impact of those wars on the protesters. While Humphrey was the probable nominee, he still had to secure his nomination from a relatively open and contested convention, whereas Harris has this one sewn up. And while Israel/Gaza is divisive among the Democratic rank-and-file, I don't know of a single left-leaning Democrat who isn't supporting Harris. She needs to walk a fine line, both here and all the way to November. If she's really lucky, the ceasefire and prisoner exchange will kick in the day before the convention. If not, that's one more grudge to bear against Netanyahu.

  • Ezra Klein: [08-18] Trump turned the Democratic Party into a pitiless machine. This could be a bit more succinct, but it frames the 2024 election well enough: on one side, you have a party of pragmatists who want to get good things done and will compromise to make that happen, and on the other side you have a self-aggrandizing nihilist criminal and his personal cult of dysfunctional maniacs, plus hangers-on who think they can wheedle some quick bucks.

    There is a contradiction at the heart of the Republican Party that does not exist at the heart of the Democratic Party. Democrats are united in their belief that the government can, and should, act on behalf of the public. To be on the party's far left is to believe the government should do much more. To be among its moderates is to believe it should do somewhat more. But all of the people elected as Democrats, from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Senator Joe Manchin, are there for the same reason: to use the power of the government to pursue their vision of the good. The divides are real and often bitter. But there is always room for negotiation because there is a fundamental commonality of purpose.

    The modern Republican Party, by contrast, is built upon a loathing of the government. Some of its members want to see the government shrunk and hamstrung. . . . The Trumpist faction is more focused on purging government institutions of the disloyal. . . . Either way, to become part of the government as it exists now -- to be engaged in the day-to-day process of governing -- is to open yourself to suspicion and potentially mark yourself for a later purge. . . . For the Republicans, if government is trying to do something, they want to try and stop it. Just reflexively. It is something that's bred into the Republican Party that makes it hard to maintain an organization that is supposed to be functioning in government.

    Democrats have their own ideological tensions. But Trump's victory turned Democrats into a ruthlessly pragmatic party. It was that pragmatism that led them to ultimately nominate Joe Biden in 2020. It was that same pragmatism that led them to abandon him in 2024.

  • Timothy Noah: [08-01] How the Democrats finally took on Big Pharma: "Millions of jobs? Rising wages? Those are great, but the unsung economic achievement has come in making health care much more affordable. The victories, starting with insulin prices, are remarkable.

Legal matters and other crimes:

  • John Herrman: [08-19] How do you break up a company like Google?

  • Elie Honig: [08-16] Jack Smith can still hurt Donald Trump: "It's time to start thinking about the potential uses of an evidentiary hearing."

  • Ian Millhiser:

    • [08-12] The First Amendment is in grave danger if Trump wins: "Three Supreme Court justices want to drastically roll back the First amendment. Trump could make it five."

    • [08-15] What can be done about this Supreme Court's very worst decisions? "It is important to hang onto grudges against the Supreme Court." He mentions five cases in particular. Back when Barrett was being confirmed, there was a lot of talk about reforming the Supreme Court. I felt then that such talk was premature: you didn't have the power to actually do anything about it, and you wouldn't get the support until you could point to actual examples where the Supreme Court is subverting democracy through arbitrary rulings. These five cases are the sort examples that help build the case. Now, you still have to build a sufficient political power base to implement radical change. Roosevelt couldn't do it even after his 1936 landslide. On the other hand, he didn't have to. The phrase I recall from my brilliant 8th grade US history class was "the switch in time that saved nine." After 1936, the Supreme Court stopped blocking New Deal programs for the sheer hell of it. And Roosevelt lasted long enough that he eventually nominated most of the Court, and for the first (and it now seems, sadly, the last) time in history the Court became a progressive force in American law. It is still possible that the middle-third of the Court (Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett) could try to bend a bit with the winds to save their jobs. If not, they'll just keep adding weight to the already strong case for overriding them.

    • [08-19] Republicans ask the Supreme Court to disenfranchise thousands of swing state voters.

  • Nicole Narea: [08-12] Violent crime is plummeting. Why? "Donald Trump says crime is out of control. The facts say otherwise."

  • Jeffrey St Clair: [08-16] Scam science and the death penalty: the case of Robert Roberson.

Climate and environment:

Economic matters:

Ukraine War and Russia:

America's empire and the world:

Other stories:

  • Chico Harlan/Michael Kranish/Isaac Stanley-Becker: [08-17] Jared Kushner wants to turn a wild stretch of Albania into a luxury resort: In terms of graft, Trump was just a distraction. This is the guy who really reaped dividends from his time in the White House.

    The former senior White House adviser [and Trump son-in-law] has accepted billions from the sovereign investment funds of countries that he dealt with as a government official, and is now investing in countries his father-in-law would deal with if reelected. Kushner makes an estimated $40 million in management fees, regardless of what happens to the investment, and stands to make much more if the deals are profitable, according to a recent letter from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon.

  • Daniel Judt: [08-13] To build working-class power, we need a workers' education movement: "A century ago, labor colleges transformed American unions. It's time to bring them back."

  • Max Moran/Henry Burke: [08-13] What we talk about when we talk about the revolving door: "Bringing tech and finance executives into government because they are 'the country's smartest and hardest-working people' is faintly ridiculous." Response to a Matthew Yglesias piece (link below) I saw because it was hugely ridiculous and meant to write about but didn't get around to. Maybe some day.

  • Gary Shteyngart: [04-04] Crying myself to sleep on the biggest cruise ship ever: "Seven agonizing night aboard the Icon of the Sea." Bottom banner says, "This article was a gift from an Atlantic subscriber." I thought I'd pass it along, leaving the full URL intact on the off chance that it might work for you. (I usually strip the extraneous "GET" attributes, a habit I initially got into to get rid of Facebook callbacks.) Long article, only lightly sampled, as I have zero interest in ever embarking on a cruise ship, no experiences to compare with, and a kneejerk reaction that people who do have too much money and are too self-indulgent -- even though I wouldn't oppose either trait on principle. Still, like indulging in arty porn, I have occasionally thought about reading David Foster Wallace's cruise ship voyage account in A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again. Looks like you can still find a PDF of the original article here: Shipping Out: On the (nearly lethal) comforts of a luxury cruise.

Obituaries

  • Corey Robin: [08-15] Farewell to a working-class hero: "Pat Carta was part of a generation of workers and organizers whose immense knowledge about overcoming fear to build class consciousness and worker power will never be found in a book."

Books

Chatter

  • Tony Karon [08-19] [Responding to Bhaskar Sunkara: "I never want to hear the word 'vibes' again"] You're retiring from paying attention to US presidential politics? As Neal Postman warned all those years ago, a political system in which TV ads are the basic idiom is about nothing but "vibes"

I don't go looking for memes, but sometimes they find me:

  • link: Elon Musk is doing an incredible job of educating the public about how capitalists end up aligning with fascists to maintain their wealth and limit the power of the working classes.

  • link: In 2017 this guy paid $750 in taxes. In 2017, taxpayers paid $45 Million for this guy to go golfing.

  • link: Universal health care is such a complex beast that only 32 of the world's 33 developed nations have been able to make it work.

Local tags (these can be linked to directly):

Original count: 219 links, 12161 words (15834 total)

Current count: 255 links, 14286 words (18776 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Monday, August 12, 2024

Music Week

August archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 42798 [42761] rated (+37), 34 [39] unrated (-5).

I went ahead and pushed Speaking of Which out late last night, on schedule for the first time in many weeks. I'm probably not done with it, but figured that at 270 links, 12539 words -- I do love that little counter I programmed in a week or two ago -- I figured I had enough to present. Anything additional I come up with today will be flagged by the red border bar. [PS: Not much. Today's been shot to shit.]

Writing this mid-afternoon Monday. I probably won't post until late, but I wanted to get it ready, so I don't slip up and delay it again. At this point, I'd much rather work more on Speaking of Which than on Music Week, not least because I find it easier and more relaxing to do, but also because I feel like I know what I understand what I'm reading there, and I'm able to write about it with some coherency.

Whereas with music I just drop a lot of names and dates, and arbitrary knee-jerk reactions, and have little if any inspiration to write actual criticism. That feeling is being reinforced today as I'm only fifth straight B+(*) or less album -- trying to whittle down the demo queue while unpacking this week's haul pushed it back up again, all the more aggravated because I can't see the small print I need to file it all properly. (Optometrist has been telling me for years that I need cataract surgery, but somehow I flunked the surgeon's exam a couple weeks ago, so have to wait until inevitably become even more debilitated.)

I suppose my self-doubts were pricked by the latest batch of Questions and Answers, only one of which is less than a year old. I thought the one on Michael Brecker was worth not just answering but putting a bit of time and thought into. That took some time getting to, and in the end turned out rather unsatisfactory, as I still can't point to any albums that justify his reputation. I started to explain more here, then decided to add that as a PS, and leave it there.

I don't have much to say about the music below. Again, only one A- record, which like Jay Skeese last week, sounded qualitatively superior from the beginning, although I don't see it coming close to the top of the annual list. Some leftover hip-hop and country from the previous week's searches, some jazz from poll ballots and the demo queue, and a lot of old stuff from the Q&A. Gabriel Sielawa was recommended by a reader in a Q I just decided to treat as a tip.

I have an essay in a new book, The Death Project: An Anthology for the Living, edited by Gretchen Cassel Eick and Cora Poage. The essay is called "Reading the Obits," which has been significantly revised from an old blog post. Very pleased to be part of this project.

New records reviewed this week:

Livio Almeida: The Brasilia Sessions (2024, Zoho): Tenor saxophonist from Brazil, based in New York, has mostly worked with Arturo O'Farrill, second album as leader (first on a real label), quartet with keys, bass, and drums. B+(**) [cd]

Robby Ameen: Live at the Poster Museum (2024, Origin): Drummer, from Connecticut, based in New York, early Latin influence with Dizzy Gillespie, Eddie Palmieri, and Horacio "El Negro" Hernandez. Sextet with two saxophonists (Bob Franceschini and Troy Roberts), trombone (Conrad Herwig), Fender Rhodes, and bass, playing "Oleo" and six originals. B+(**) [cd]

Olie Brice/Rachel Musson/Mark Sanders: Immense Blue (2022 [2024], West Hill): British bassist, many groups since 2011, trio here with tenor sax and drums. B+(**) [bc]

Bridgetown Sextet: Functionizin' (2023 [2024], Rivermont): Portland-based trad jazz group, "actually a septet" (see back cover photo), but I'm counting even more credits. Old songs, from Jelly Roll Morton through Fats Waller. B+(**) [sp]

Melissa Carper: Borned in Ya (2024, Mae Music): Country singer-songwriter, from Arkansas, plays banjo and upright bass, started in a family band. half-dozen albums since 2015, appeared recently in Wonder Women of Country, along with Brennen Leigh, who co-wrote several songs here. She also pulls out two unexpected covers -- "That's My Desire" and "Every Time We Said Goodbye," and namechecks Hank Williams, Leadbelly, and Hazel Dickens in the title song. A- [sp]

Morten Duun: Code Breaker (2024, Cmntx): Guitarist, from Denmark, aka Morten Duun Aarup, mostly a trio with trumpet (Brandon Choi) and drums (Wouter Kühne), plus piano on two tracks, interesting as far as it goes, but he adds voice on four tracks, which is where I lose interest. B+(*) [cd]

Orrin Evans and the Captain Black Big Band: Walk a Mile in My Shoe (2024, Imani): Pianist-led big band (less than conventional, at 11 pieces, but supplemented with guests -- among whom vocalist Lisa Fischer gets "very special" status) fifth group album since 2010. B+(*) [cdr]

The Sofia Goodman Group: Receptive (2023 [2024], Joyous): Drummer, based in Nashville, couple albums, eight-piece group playing her original pieces. Fairly slick postbop, nicely arranged. B+(*) [cd]

Richard Guba: Songs for Stuffed Animals (2024, self-released): "Veteran saxophonist, debut album": three original pieces, five jazz standards, nicely done, reminds me in spots of Horace Silver. B+(**) [cd]

Monika Herzig's Sheroes: All in Good Time (2023 [2024], Zoho): German pianist, also plays electric, moved to US 1988, studied at Indiana, albums from 2000, formed her Sheroes band in 2016, currently seven women, with Jamie Baum (flutes), Reut Regev (trombone), Camille Thurman (tenor sax), Leni Stern (guitar), Gina Schwarz (bass), and Rosa Avila (drums), playing originals by her and Schwarz, plus a Beyoncé cover. B+(**) [cd]

Ize Trio: The Global Suites (2024, self-released): "Multi-cultural" trio of Chase Morrin (piano, compositions), George Lernis (percussion), and Naseem Alatrash (percussion), jazz with Middle Eastern flavors, joined here by John Patitucci (bass, get a "featuring" on cover but plays on only 2 of 10 tracks) and by singers Farayi Malek (2 tracks) and Heiraza (5 tracks). [cd]

Karen Jonas: The Rise and Fall of American Kitsch (2024, self-released): Country singer-songwriter from Virginia, seventh album since 2014. B+(*) [sp]

Rosemary Loar: Vagabond Heart/Curação Vagabundo (2024, Atlor Music): Singer and actress, mostly theatrical, Discogs credits her one previous album, from 2003, but website claims four, and hasn't been updated for this one yet. Title song, from Caetano Veloso and Gal Costa, is the only Brazilian venture, and the only other non-English title is from Sting. Other than that, three originals, and a bunch of show tunes. With pianist Frank Ponzio as music director/co-producer, bass-drums-percussion, and a bit of harmonica in lieu of horns. B+(***) [cd]

Mai-Liis: Kaleidoscope (2023-24 [2024], OA2): Canadian jazz singer-songwriter, has a previous album from 2021, backed by piano, guitar, bass, and drums, with guest spots for horns and vibes. B+(*) [cd]

Paula Maya: Rio De Janeiro (2024, Yellow House): Brazilian singer-songwriter, last name Niemeyer, plays piano, her six originals supplemented by a Jobim standard. B [cd]

Megan Moroney: Am I Okay? (2024, Columbia Nashville): Country singer-songwriter, second album, seems pretty good, quite consistent. B+(***) [sp]

Sam Newsome/Max Johnson: Tubes (2023 [2024], Unbroken Sounds): Saxophonist, started on tenor but has focused on soprano at least since 1998's The Tender Side of Sammy Straighthorn, and that's what he plays here, along with toys and treatments, accompanied by bass (often the most interesting thing here). B+(**) [sp]

Miles Okazaki: Miniature America (2022 [2024], Cygnus): Guitarist, eclectic mix of albums since 2022, gathers ten musicians here for "22 vignettes exploring the wonder of chance encounters and 'found' compositions." The musicians are all prominent names (not all-stars, but people you should know, like Patricia Brennen and Jacob Garchik). Unfortunately, three of them are vocalists, and while they (Ganavya, Jen Shyu, and Fay Victor) don't always rub me the wrong way, they do so way too often for me here. B [cd]

Michael Pagán: Paganova (2023 [2024], Capri): American pianist, based in Kansas City, debut album 1995, accent suggests Latin heritage, and there's much more than tinge here, driving the rhythms behind saxophonists Michael Herrera and David Chael. B+(***) [cd]

The Palomar Trio [Dan Levinson/Mark Shane/Kevin Dorn]: The Song in Our Soul (2023, Turtle Bay): Swing trio from New York, with tenor sax/clarinet, piano, and drums, playing old standards, including Jelly Roll Morton and Edmond Hall. B+(**) [sp]

Planet D Nonet: Echoes of Harlem: A Salute to Duke Ellington Vol. 2 (2024, Eastlawn): Detroit group, founded by James O'Donnell (trumpet) and RJ Spangler (percussion) back in 2010, when they were working with John Sinclair, and their repertoire extended from Bennie Moten to Sun Ra, only recently turning to Ellington. B+(***) [cd]

Real Bad Man & Lukah: Temple Needs Water. Village Needs Peace. (2024, Old Soul Music/Real Bad Man): Los Angeles-based producer Adam Weissman, has a dozen albums since 2020, mostly collaborations with underground rappers, this one from Memphis. B+(**) [sp]

Tarbaby: You Think This America (2022 [2024], Giant Step Arts): Pianist Orrin Evans, took this group name from his 2006 album, sixth group album since 2009, various horn players over the years but just the core trio here, with bass (Eric Revis) and drums (Nasheet Waits). Songs from each and nall, plus covers of Sam Rivers, Fats Waller, Oliver Lake, Andrew Hill, Paul Motion, and Bad Brains. B+(***) [bc]

Juanma Trujillo: Howl (2024, Endectomorph Music): Guitarist, from Venezuela, based in New York, fifth album since 2018, quartet with Kevin Sun (tenor sax), Andrew Schiller (bass), and Matt Honor (drums). Slippery enough, but tends to slip past me. B+(**) [cdr]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Phil Ranelin: The Found Tapes: Live in Los Angeles (1978-81 [2024], ORG Music): Trombonist, moved to Detroit in the 1960s, did some Motown session work, in 1971 co-founded the Tribe (an important if very underground group with Wendell Harrison and Marcus Belgrave), later moving to Los Angeles where Horace Tapscott had been at the center of a similar community-oriented free jazz movement, going on to found a new band, Build an Ark. Previously unreleased live tapes, more tribal vibes. B+(***) [sp]

Old music:

Joanne Brackeen [Featuring Michael Brecker]: Tring-a-Ling (1977 [1978], Choice): Pianist, born JoAnne Grogan in California, married saxophonist Charles Brackeen in the 1960s but started releasing her own records in 1975, and easily eclipsed him. Fourth album, "featuring Mike Brecker," the saxophonist in the Brecker Bros. (1975-81), who already had a ton of studio work on rock albums. Brackeen pushes him hard here, and he responds credibly. B+(**) [yt]

Michael Brecker: Don't Try This at Home (1988, Impulse!): Tenor saxophonist (1949-2007), his eponymous 1987 album wasn't technically his first but his run as a leader/star started there, with this as its sequel. Producer Don Grolnick took over piano on 2 tracks, and brought in big names -- Herbie Hancock, Charlie Haden, Jack DeJohnette, Mark O'Connor, Peter Erskine -- limiting Brecker's touring band to bit roles: Mike Stern (guitar, 6 tracks), Joey Calderazzo (piano, 2), Jeff Andrews (bass, 4), Adam Nussbaum (drums, 3). The result is pretty scattered, I'd say "not even fusion." Of course, if the saxophonist was as great as some critics claimed, it shouldn't matter (cf. Sonny Rollins). But he isn't, so it does. B- [sp]

Michael Brecker: Now You See It . . . (Now You Don't) (1990, GRP): Third album, three Brecker originals, two each by producer Don Grolnick and keyboardist Jim Beard, ends with a Bobby Troup blues, with a revolving cast of guitar-bass-drums-percussion. That backing is rather lacklustre, but the saxophone, as least on the slow ones, sounds pretty good. B [sp]

Michael Brecker: Tales From the Hudson (1996, Impulse!): With Grolnick gone, he's co-producing, lining up stars like Pat Metheny, Dave Holland, and Jack DeJohnette, with pianist Calderazzo spelled on two tracks by McCoy Tyner. With less muddle in the middle, he finally juices up the saxophone. B+(*) [sp]

Michael Brecker: Time Is of the Essence (1998 [1999], Verve): Sixth album, George Whitty produced, group is reduced by a quartet, with Pat Metheny (guitar), Larry Goldings (organ), and any of three drummers (Elvin Jones, Jeff "Tain" Watts, Bill Stewart). I'm still not convinced he's a great saxophonist, but he can be a pretty good one, and Metheny can be a pretty good guitarist, too. B+(**) [sp]

Don Grolnick [Featuring Michael Brecker]: Hearts and Numbers (1985, Hip Pocket): Pianist (1947-96), played in fusion groups Dreams and Brecker Bros. before recording a pair of well-regarded albums on Blue Note (I'm thumbs up on Nighttown but not Weaver of Dreams). This was his first, playing as much synth as piano, and taking the closing title song solo. B [sp]

Herbie Hancock/Michael Brecker/Roy Hargrove: Directions in Music: Celebrating Miles Davis & John Coltrane: Live at Massey Hall (2001 [2002], Verve): Live set, piano, tenor sax, trumpet, backed by John Patitucci (bass) and Brian Blade (drums). Each brings an original in the style, they collaborate on one more, and cover the obvious bases, plus a version of "My Ship" that won a Grammy. B+(*) [sp]

Pat Metheny: 80/81 (1980 [1981], ECM): 2-LP set, recorded over four days in May, 1980, the guitarist is backed by an exceptional rhythm section (Charlie Haden and Jack DeJohnette), and joined by two tenor saxophonists, Dewey Redman and Michael Brecker (both on three tracks, one with Redman only, three with Brecker only. short final track with neither). B+(***) [sp]

Gabriel Sielawa: Terra (2022, Bangue): Brazilian, I think, sings and plays guitar, bass, cavaquinho; first (probably only) album, very little on the web, recommended by a virtual friend. B+(*) [sp]

Brian Wilson: I Just Wasn't Made for These Times (1995, MCA): Beach Boys genius-turned-madman, promised to be coming out of all that when he released a solo album in 1988 that wasn't either, and wasn't followed up either, at least until this short (29:27) collection of remakes from the madman period dropped seven years later (or the solo album). Some of these songs once seemed like mad genius, but here the singer sounds tired, as if nostalgia is all there is left. B- [sp]

Brian Wilson and Van Dyke Parks: Orange Crate Art (1995, Warner Bros.): Parks wrote all of the songs, so all Wilson had to do was sing. Parks wrote song cycles, long on concept with eclectic borrowings that should be interesting but, at least in my limited experience, aren't. B- [sp]

Brian Wilson: At My Piano (2021, Lakeshore): Solo, no vocals, songs you no doubt know, may not impress as jazz, but the melodies are lovely as ever, harmony too. B+(**) [sp]

Limited Sampling: Records I played parts of, but not enough to grade: -- means no interest, - not bad but not a prospect, + some chance, ++ likely prospect.

Keith Jarrett: The Sun Bear Concerts (1976 [1989], ECM, 6CD): I still don't feel up to taking on the entire 6+ hours, but a 41:14 excerpt on YouTube ("Sapporo, Pt. 1") is really quite good. Maybe, someday. ++ [yt]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Art Baden: How Much of It Is Real (Rainy Days) [08-16]
  • Geoff Bradfield: Colossal Abundance (Calligram) [09-06]
  • The Haas Company [Featuring Frank Gambale]: Vol. 2: Celestial Latitude (Psychiatric) [09-01]
  • Hot Club of San Francisco: Original Gadjo (Hot Club) [09-13]
  • Danny Jonokuchi Big Band: A Decade (Bandstand Presents) [08-23]
  • Doug MacDonald and the Coachella Valley Trio: Live at the Rancho Mirage Library (DMAC Music) [10-01]
  • Jonathan Powell: Mambo Jazz Party (Circle 9) [08-09]
  • Dafnis Prieto Sí o Sï Quartet: 3 Sides of the Coin (Dafnison Music) [09-27]
  • Catherine Russell/Sean Mason: My Ideal (Dot Time) [08-26]
  • Spanish Harlem Orchestra: Swing Forever (Ovation) [08-23]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Sunday, August 11, 2024

Speaking of Which

Opened this file Tuesday afternoon, August 6, after posting Music Week. When I woke up early Tuesday, my wife informed me that Harris had picked Tim Walz as her running mate. I went back to sleep, and when I woke up again, the song in my head was "Happy Days Are Here Again." It's rare not to be disappointed by a Democrat politician. I still expect Harris to come up short, possibly often, but every time she doesn't is gratifying.

Opening the file so early added a "hot take" element, especially to the Walz coverage. It also meant that I had some opportunity to collect Chatter in real time, before it became impossibly lost in the daily avalanche. As of Friday, which is when I usually start, I had 107 links, 4538 words (not counting this paragraph).

Late Sunday it was up to 265, 12229. That's probably enough for now, as my eyes are glazing over, and my indifference is rising. I can always add the odd bit on Monday, while excusing another paltry Music Week -- but actually, I have some other work to get to on Monday, so I might not even do that.

I can point to a new batch of Questions and Answers -- the first I've done this year. All four are music-related, so I'll mention them again when Music Week comes out.

Top story threads:

Israel:

America's Israel (and Israel's America):

  • Michael Arria:

  • Giorgio Cafiero: [05-02] The US and Israeli role in Sudan's path to war: "Israel and the US's desire to consolidate Khartoum's position in the Abraham Accords has emboldened militaristic authoritarianism in Sudan."

  • Hamid Dabashi: [08-08] Just like her predecessors, Kamala Harris is fully on board with Israel's genocide: I don't have any inside info to dispute this, but I doubt that any US Democrat -- Republicans like Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham are another story, as is the somewhat less explicit Donald Trump -- articulates any desire for genocide no matter how reflexively their solidarity with Israel supports it. Their "two state" talk may just be blather, but the subtext is that they want some kind of accommodation for coexistence -- with few details and no pressure, of course. There is also good reason to expect that Democrats, given their domestic programs, will be more oriented toward negotiated peace -- although there are contraindications, like their fondness for military spending, and their relative hawkishness on Ukraine. But given the politics (by which I mean money) around Israel, someone in Harris's shoes would be best served by operating behind the scenes, preserving the public appearance of alignment until she can actually change things. I have no idea whether she's thinking she should change US direction on Israel, but until she can, I don't see much value in blaming her. But it's a fair question for the public, who have few other options, to pursue.

  • Ahmed Moor: [08-05] In Washington's streets, a new popular consensus on Palestine: "While Congress cheered Netanyahu, grassroots mobilizations of the Democratic base marked a sharp break from the party's support for Israel."

  • Mitchell Plitnick: [08-08] Promising signs that Palestine advocacy is building political power in Washington: "The Israel lobby built its strength on the fact that its opposition was politically weak. Kamala Harris's choice of Tim Walz over Josh Shapiro and the massive cost it took to defeat Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush show this is no longer the case."

  • Aaron Sobczak: [08-06] Poll: Most Americans don't want to send troops to defend Israel: "The lowest level of support in recent years -- from both political parties."

Israel vs. world opinion:

Election notes:

  • Cori Bush: D-MO, elected in a big upset in 2020, displacing a 10-term incumbent as a would-be Squad member. She called for a ceasefire in Gaza, and has voted against military aid to Israel, which made her a target in AIPAC's purge of Democratic Party dissidents. She lost the primary last week.

  • Thomas B Edsall: [08-07] Two opposing developments that changed American politics: "A pair of major developments in recent years -- the ascendance of Donald Trump and the emergence of Black Lives Matter protests -- have decisively altered the nation's two political parties." Trump, as party leader, has become the sharp focal point for all sorts of crazy thinking on the right (including things he doesn't seem to understand, but supports anyway, because he knows he's their leader). The left doesn't have a comparable leader figure, not that Bernie Sanders couldn't have filled that role had he prevailed, but it's fitting that the left has been driven from below, through protests.

    But BLM, important as it was, was just one of several upheavals, of which Occupy Wall Street was especially important for re-introducing class struggle (framed as the 99% vs. the 1%; while you may think it was just a phase, it specifically brought the student debt issue to the fore). Also mention the Keystone Pipeline protests, which won out. Also a tremendous uptick in labor organizing. And now we have the anti-genocide protests. Plus another constellation of issues, like abortion.

    It further occurs to me that this ground-level shift to the left by Democrats follows a similar, earlier change on the right, which was largely driven by right-wing media (especially if you recognize that the Tea Party was essentially astroturfed). Trump's emergence as party leader didn't depend on any new ideas. He simply recycled what Fox fed him, adding the conceit of his own personality cult. The delay is easy to understand. The right was funded by rich folk who wanted to protect their business empires from the scourge of public interest (also unions, of course), so they plotted to take over government, largely by making politicians beg for their money. The pressure on ordinary people to move left came not from secret interest groups but from fear of what the right was getting away with.

    Edsall does have some reason for focusing on BLM. He cites a 2018 article by Matt Grossman: People are changing their views on race and gender issues to match their party. As Democrats increasingly recognized the perils of the right, they came to feel solidarity with their fellow victims, to the point where, as Grossman puts it, "liberal-leaning voters moved away from [Trump's] views faster than conservatives moved toward them."

  • Michael Tesler: [08-08] Why immigration is a better issue for Trump than it was in 2020. As an issue, it's better because he's running against Biden's record, not on or against his own. And Republicans have had nearly four years to amplify it as a constant talking point. Also, to some extent, Democrats, including Biden, have run away from it, which neither makes them look smart nor strong.

  • Daniel I Weiner/Owen Bacskai: [08-09] Unregulated money continues to corrode US politics. Reforms are needed.

  • Sam Wolfson: [08-09] Brats, dads and bravado: this US election will be decided on vibes: "Personality is always central to elections. But this year, it's about who you think the candidates could be." I found this piece first, and thought it generic enough to slot here (under elections), but later found much more talking about "vibes" (our buzz word of the week), steering strongly toward Harris-Walz:

    • Fareed Zakaria: [08-10] Harris is winning the all-important battle -- of vibes.

    • Charles M Blow: [08-07] Harris, Walz and Democrats' joyful campaign: Democrats may have little to complain about the Biden administration, but the big promise to protect us from the depredations of Trump and the Republicans hasn't worked out so great. He mentions a bunch of examples, which seemed to be snowballing as Trump dominated the airwaves and inched up in the polls, while Biden appeared increasingly hapless.

      I underestimated how much soul damage Democratic voters had suffered over the past three and a half years -- not in the main because of the Biden administration, but because of the seemingly endless culture wars -- and how that damage had jelled into a form of electoral depression.

      Harris changed that almost instantly: "She isn't articulating policy positions that differ substantially from President Biden's. She is, however, allowing herself to be the vessel for pent-up liberal energy." I also like this bit:

      Last year, when Biden was gearing up to announce his re-election bid, Terrance Woodbury, a founding partner at the consultancy HIT Strategies, whose research includes surveying Black voter sentiment, told me something that has stuck with me: Young Black voters -- young Black men in particular -- are less responsive to political messages of fear and loss and more responsive to messages of gain and empowerment. . . .

      Republicans have slammed Harris as a D.E.I. candidate, tossing around the acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion to insinuate that she didn't earn her place. But overwhelmingly, one of the reasons Democrats are excited about her is that she's highly qualified and also happens to be a woman of color. They recognize that she represents all that is good about D.E.I., that it isn't about the granting of privilege but the dismantling of it.

      Personally, I'm totally bored with all those checklist firsts. I'm not inclined to think of her in those terms at all. On the other hand, D.E.I. is an insult we can embrace as a principle, and run with.

    • Jennifer Rubin: [08-08] Walz brings the vibes, but that's not all: "On education and agriculture, this vice-presidential pick's experience runs deep."

    • David Sirota: [08-10] Harris-Walz's good vibes aren't enough: Sure, but why not enjoy them while you can? It's not like we've had enough good vibes in our lives to get used to them, let alone to overdose on them. Savor the feeling. Isn't this what democracy is supposed to feel like? Sure, after they win in November, we'll still have challenges and problems, to which they won't always have answers or be helpful, but work from that. At least you won't have to start out from Trump again. And if they lose, the only reason to think about that now is for motivation to keep it from happening. Afterwards, there will be plenty of time for lessons learned. But after the dread of Biden losing his place on the teleprompter or trying to negotiate a flight of stairs, we need good some vibes. Enjoy.

Trump:

  • Brooke Anderson: {08-01] How Trump hijacked the Republican Party.

  • Isaac Arnsdorf/Josh Dawsey/Hannah Knowles: [08-07] Trump took a private flight with Project 2025 leader in 2022: "Trump took the flight to speak at a Heritage Foundation conference, where he said, 'They're going to lay the ground work and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do.'" Now Trump is trying to disclaim their plan.

  • Jamelle Bouie: [08-09] The real reason Trump and Vance hate being called 'weird'. Republicans are losing their grip on the Nixonian bequest of "the silent majority." They haven't been either for a long time now, but Democrats were too timid to point it out, until one did, and instantly it was obvious to all.

  • Frank Bruni: [08-08] Donald Trump, prince of self-pity.

  • Abbie Cheeseman: [08-11] Trump campaign hack could indicate wider election disruptions, experts warn.

  • David French: [08-11] To save conservatism from itself, I am voting for Harris: Filed here instead of under Harris, because this is really about Trump, not Harris. I agree with virtually nothing French writes here. I don't even fully buy this:

    The only real hope for restoring a conservatism that values integrity, demonstrates real compassion and defends our foundational constitutional principles isn't to try to make the best of Trump, a man who values only himself. If he wins again, it will validate his cruelty and his ideological transformation of the Republican Party.

    I believe that conservatism is so utterly corrupt and rotten, so selfish and cruel, it deserves Trump, and those are the reasons he's attracted to it -- although his vanity is probably a bigger one. I do suspect that many people who identify as conservative, possibly including French, are decent and honorable, at least in their personal lives, but they falter when they try to tell other people how to live, because they simply don't understand how the world works beyond their own perception and projection. If they could, they'd be welcomed by Democrats, who by and large are tolerant and respectful of all sorts. They might even help make us better people. But while French's vote is welcome, his reasoning is still selfishly parochial. He needs to work on that.

  • Maureen Dowd: [08-10] Trump, by the numbers: Anyone who can recall engaging with Trump 20+ years ago is bound to come up with unsettling images:

    From the first time I went on an exploratory political trip with Trump in 1999, he has measured his worth in numbers. His is not an examined life but a quantified life.

    When I asked him why he thought he could run for president, he cited his ratings on "Larry King Live." He was at his most animated reeling off his ratings, like Faye Dunaway in "Network," orgasmically reciting how well her shows were doing.

    He pronounced himself better than other candidates because of numbers: the number of men who desired his then-girlfriend, Melania Knauss; the number of zoning changes he had maneuvered to get; the number of stories he stacked on his building near the U.N.; the number of times he was mentioned in a Palm Beach newspaper.

    But the flash forward to today:

    He is clearly befuddled by someone with brown skin who has come not to hurt Americans, but to save them from Donald Trump; someone who is not scary, as he is, but joyful, not threatening but thrilling.

    And, in Trump's worst nightmare, this dark-skinned someone is attracting huge adoring, dancing, laughing crowds.

  • Michael Grasso: [08-09] Donald Trump and the '80s aesthetic: "The pro-Trump Zoomer sees the 2020s as a degenerate age and the '80s as a time when men were men. It's why their homemade videos are filled with VHS scan lines, old Gillette commercials, and Van Halen's 'Jump.'"

  • Malcolm Harris: Tech billionaires love Trump now -- because he's one of them.

  • Brian Karem: [08-08] Trump left spinning by Kamala Harris' surprise strength: "Trump's implosion is nearly complete."

  • Glenn Kessler: [08-06] Trump's fusillade of falsehoods on debt and taxes: Fact-checks a Trump interview by Maria Bartiromo.

  • Ed Kilgore: [08-08] Trump's 2024 election-denial playbook: "Trump and his allies are laying the groundwork to overturn a possible 2024 loss -- and they don't intend to repeat the mistakes they made last time." They're going to make new mistakes? Could one be conceding they have no faith they can win honestly?

  • Susan Milligan: [08-06] Trump's campaign is drowning in rage: "Faced with a surprisingly united Democratic Party, the Republican nominee is trotting out the same old strategy."

  • Danielle Paquette: [08-10] A pastor said his pro-Trump prophecies came from God. His brother called him a fake. "Jeremiah Johnson became a sensation when he embraced politics. His brother Josiah, also a preacher, couldn't shake his concerns."

  • Matthew Stevenson: [08-08] Trump's wolves on Wall Street: Inside the Truth Social numbers. This has a lot more detail on the business/financial side than I cared to follow, but here's one sample that caught my eye:

    Nor does the SEC seem particularly concerned that inside traders in Digital World shares might well have gotten their tips from a Russian banker who bailed out Trump's Truth Social in 2021 with a loan from his Caribbean porn bank.

  • James D Zirin: [08-07] Trump's slur of Harris -- 'Is she Indian or is she Black?' -- echoes a creepy episode from his past. As does nearly every Trump story, but the devil's in the details.

Vance:

  • Aaron Blake: [08-07] It's getting worse for JD Vance: "A half-dozen polls in recent weeks have shown his already-underwhelming image deteriorating. And they suggest his past comments about childless women aren't helping."

  • Ben Burgis: [08-08] JD Vance got his faux populism from internet weirdos.

  • Michelle Goldberg: [08-05] JD Vance just blurbed a book arguing that progressives are subhuman: The book is by Jack Posobiec ("far-right provocateur") and Joshua Lisec ("professional ghostwriter"):

    The word "fascist" gets thrown around a lot in politics, but it's hard to find a more apt one for Inhumans, which came out last month. . . .

    As they tell it, modern progressivism is just the latest incarnation of an ancient evil dating back to the late Roman Republic and continuing through the French Revolution and Communism to today. Often, they write, "great men of means" are required to crush this scourge. The contempt for democracy in Unhumans is not subtle. "Our study of history has brought us to this conclusion: Democracy has never worked to protect innocents from the unhumans," write Posobiec and Lisec.

  • Andy Kroll/Nick Surgey: [07-16] In private speech, JD Vance said the "Devil is real" and praised Alex Jones as a truth-teller: "Vance gave the speech to the secretive Teneo network."

  • Clay Risen: [08-10] What's so new about the 'new right'? "JD Vance and his allies represent a mind-set that dates back to the McCarthy era and the dawn of the Cold War."

  • Bill Scher: [08-08] When Vance told Appalachians to leave Appalachia: "A decade ago, Vance wrote that the Appalachian poor should abandon their 'destructive' communities and stop blaming others for their misery. Now, all he does is blame." Also:

  • Alex Shephard: [08-06] Donald Trump has no heir: "Yes, Trump is just popular enough to win again this year. But no one has emerged yet to take the MAGA crown whenever he relinquishes it." So this is really about how far Vance has slipped in two weeks, from back when practically everyone was writing about him as heir-apparent.

  • Farah Stockman: [07-28] Decoding JD Vance's brand of nationalism.

And other Republicans:

Harris:

  • David Badash: [08-09] Fox host furious Kamala Harris loves to cook: This is causing some cognitive dissonance for me: she loves to cook; her husband is a serious jazz fan. Politics aside, these are people I could actually imagine enjoying socializing with. As hobbies and interests go, these are things that show a zest for life, and a willingness to engage it intellectually as well physically.

  • Jonathan Chait:

    • [08-06] Kamala Harris and Tim Walz need to pivot the center right now: "Does Harris really understand the assignment?" That's a rather peculiar term to use here: Just who's doing the assigning here? Barring some hidden power, that may just be Chait. After all, his definition -- "the assignment, to be clear, is to win over voters who don't like Donald Trump but worry Harris is too liberal" -- sounds exactly like Chait, who represents an electoral bloc of himself and hardly anyone else. I mean, how many people who don't like Trump still make such fine-grained distinctions among shades of Democrats that they'll hold their votes in sway? I doubt even Chait is that fickle. So what's he doing here? Well, he seems to feel it's his job to stamp out any hope that the Democratic Party might be able to accomplish anything by getting elected. He does this by steering Democrats to the corrupt, do-nothing "center."

      I'm old enough to remember when Democrats ran scared of being called "red," but does running away from your principles and beliefs really win elections? And even when you do manage to win one, how much loyal support do you gain by never implementing any serious reforms? The track record for Chait-approved centrists really isn't all that impressive. On the other hand, Republicans have built up an enthusiastic base by fighting for the wrongs they believe in. Maybe Democrats should consider fighting for some rights. Sure, they may lose, but if they can't take a stand for something, they're lost anyway. And even when Republicans win and make our lives more miserable, they will at least have sown some seeds, like the idea that winning next time might make a difference.

      After all, what do we have to lose (but Jonathan Chait)? I doubt we're even going to lose him, as it's easier to stoke his conceited liberal virtue-signaling by taking pot shots at easy Republican targets. For example, he paired his left-bashing post with this:

      PS: Luke Savage tweet on Chait's article: "Jonathan Chait brings us his only idea for the 700th time."

    • [08-09] Yes, She Can: "Bidenism brought Kamala Harris and the Democrats to the brink of catastrophe. Obamaism can save them." What the fuck? Chait tried to sum this up in a tweet:

      There was a campaign to persuade Democrats that Obama failed. The campaign succeeded. But it was wrong. It is now up to Harris to recover. I think she can do it.

      Uh, Obama did just fine for himself: he got a second term, he got rich, he got into movies, and he's building a gargantuan monument to himself next to Lake Michigan. But he didn't do so well for his Party. He entered in 2009 with strong majorities in both wings of Congress, accomplished very little with all that potential power, lost Congress, lost the State Houses and the Courts, and after eight years surrendered the presidency to Donald Trump. He did some decent things, and avoided doing some of the far worse things Republicans wanted, but even in foreign policy, where he had a lot of autonomy, his record is checkered at best. He got out of Iraq, then got back in again. He dug in deeper in Afghanistan, then got stuck. He faced crises in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Gaza, and Ukraine, and bungled them all. He did make some progress with Iran and Cuba, but it was so tentative Trump easily wiped him out. He made toothless gestures on climate change. He was still pursuing trade deals to the end that even Hilary Clinton wouldn't touch. So I can see how Democrast could think he failed. I'm surprised that so many Democrats still revere him. I suspect that's just sentimental attachment to the hope they once associated with him. But that's just my reaction.

      Let's instead consider Zachary D Carter, who tweeted:

      Odd piece. Chait seems to be going after Biden's economic record, but then doesn't. Credits Biden for a strong labor market, real wage gains, pins only "small" responsibility for inflation on Biden. Defends Obama by saying he wanted to do the same things.

      The worst thing he has to say about the IRA and Biden's domestic manufacturing program is that Trump might unwind it because a lot of it still hasn't been spent.

      I think Chait is too charitable with Obama's economic legacy and overstates how progressive movement-oriented Biden has been on the economy. Brian Deese was great at the NEC, but he came from BlackRock. Hather Boushey has been great at CEA, was a 2016 Clinton campaign economist.

      Biden's big post-ARA spending -- an infrastructure deal, domestic microchip manufacturing and green energy/tech manufacturing -- were all done through negotiations with Joe Manchin and Republicans, not Bernie and AOC.

      I do think Biden represents a significant change from the Obama era, but it's one in which party moderates and some conservatives embraced new ideas, not one in which radicals infiltrated the administration and bent it to their will.

      Biden treated progressives like they were part of the coalition, he didn't let them run the show.

      This is a long piece, and it touches on a lot of things, viewed through his own peculiarly neoliberal prism. It's never quite clear whether he hates the left on principle, or he is simply convinced that Americans are so indelibly reactionary that leftist politics is unworkable and has to be banished. The most telling line here is: "It is not clear if Harris or her allies recognize the full scale of the political devastation she actually inherits." His evidence comes from Biden's dismal approval ratings (as low as 32%). While that sounds grim, it doesn't necessarily follow that his administration, let alone his still-unimplemented policy preferences, are so unpopular. It's quite plausible that his low polls were personal: that many people who wanted to support him had simply lost faith in his ability to lead and communicate effectively. The ease with which his vice president, with little or no political standing of her own, was able to take over the campaign and revive it suggests that Chait's "devastation" wasn't real.

      As Carter tries to point out, fear of a left takeover isn't real either. The idea that the American left are some kind of bolsheviks scheming to seize power so they can arbitrarily dictate wokeness and undermine public morals is way beyond ridiculous -- although, following the red scare playbook, it's not just a staple of the right but a projection of their own antidemocratic dreams and fears. The left still attracts idealists, but most are wary of power, and are willing to compromise for modest reforms. They do, however, insist on tangible results, whereas the Democrats Chait admires are all talk but action only when their corporate sponsors see an angle.

  • Rachel M Cohen: [08-06] Kamala Harris's recent embrace of rent control, explained.

  • David Dayen:

      [08-09] Why Tony West matters: "It's more than his moves from government to corporate America. It's what he did while in government." West is Harris's brother-in-law and is now a campaign adviser. He held a high post in the Obama DOJ, then left to become chief legal officer at Uber.

    • [08-07] The irrelevant permitting bill: "A bipartisan measure to accelerate clean energy and fossil fuel projects has no constituency in Congress right now."

  • EJ Dionne Jr.: [08-11] Harris is beating Trump by transcending him: "The vice president and her running mate are achieving a radical shift in messaging."

  • Moira Donegan: [08-06] Kamala Harris's VP pick may signal a shift away from pivoting to the center.

  • Benjamin Hart: [08-05] Can Kamala Harris win just enough of the working class? The author talks to Ruy Teixeira, "once known as a Democratic oracle, but these days he's more of an apostate," as his 2002 book The Emerging Democratic Majority fizzled, while his new 2023 book (both with John Judis) Where Have All the Democrats Gone? never ignited. (I have an unread copy of the latter, figuring it relevant for my political study, but I'm finding less and less reason to crack it open.) What I hate about this title, and the thinking that goes into it, is the notion that winning by a nose is all that is necessary -- winning by a landslide, even though the Republicans are essentially conceding the interests of an overwhelming majority of Americans, is too much work or something. This kind of thinking caters to donors, who like a divided government where nothing gets changed and everyone is preoccupied looking for bribes.

    By the way, it's the Republicans who like to think in "just enough" terms, because for their purposes any majority (or plurality, or in the right circumstances slight shortfall) works just fine. Where they draw the line is offering any concession beyond empty words.

  • Elie Honig: [08-09] Kamala Harris and those 'lock him up' chants:

    "The vice-president -- and former prosecutor -- has it exactly right so far."

    It's become a recurring scene at the political rallies of Vice-President and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. Harris refers to the ongoing criminal cases against her electoral opponent, Donald Trump. The crowd begins to chant, "Lock! Him! Up!" And Harris calmly but firmly shuts it down. "Well, hold on," the VP said earlier this week to her own crowd, "You Know what, the courts are going to handle that part of it. What we're gonna do is beat him in November."

  • Ben Jacobs: [08-06] Republican operatives are 'thrilled' Harris picked Walz: At least that's their inevitable spin, not that any other Democrat in play wouldn't have ticked off their same "too liberal" boxes. Would Shapiro have escaped their slander for a moment? But now that he's off the ticket, they're equally delighted to accuse the Palestinian-loving Democrats of antisemitism:

    • Ed Kilgore: [08-06] The GOP's dumbest attack on Walz pick: Democrats are antisemites: Or as Sen. Tom Cotton puts it, "the antisemitic, pro-Hamas wing of the Democratic Party."

    • Marc A Thiessen: [08-07] Walz is Harris's first unforced error -- and an opportunity for Trump: "By picking a fellow leftist, Harris has a running mate who appeals to her base but not swing voters." You knew he, like the other hack operatives Jacobs cites, was going to swing against Walz, and you probably suspected it would be the old "too liberal" ploy, since for them every Democrat is way too liberal. The question is why they think we're so skittish to care. One thing that I like about Walz is that he not only knows good things to say, he has a record of getting good things done. The "too liberal" charge works best when exposing the words as hollow, insincere gestures. Sure, that's not what they think they're saying, but it's what voters react to: the idea that liberals are phonies, while Republicans are authentic, if for no reason other than that they're seriously committed to the awful things they want to do.

  • Ezra Klein: [08-11] Biden made Trump bigger. Harris makes him smaller. I would've been happy spending the rest of the campaign focusing on how evil Trump and Vance are, but hey, how petty and how ridiculous they are could work, too. And creepy -- that's the nuance that "weird" was aiming for.

  • Nicole Narea: [08-07] Why Kamala Harris's fundraising spree might prove more valuable than Trump's.

  • Robert J Shapiro: [07-29] Data don't lie: Harris has the facts to refute Trump's lies about the economy: "Trump's claims that the economy was better under his presidency than the Biden-Harris administration don't add up." Nice to know, but I'm not sure how persuasive that will be. This risks being an argument defending the status quo, instead of making the more important argument that you'll be better off with Harris than with Trump. It's probably true that a second Trump term will be worse, given that his first term was so much worse than either Obama's before or Biden's after, but it's the future that matters. Republicans have been increasing inequality and precarity since 1980, and those results have accumulated, bringing us ever closer to a breaking point. We've seen the data on that, and it's very conclusive. But how many people understand it? And how many can explain it?

  • Benjamin Wallace-Wells: [08-08] How Kamala Harris became bigger than Donald Trump.

Walz:

Biden:

And other Democrats:

Legal matters and other crimes:

Climate and environment:

Economic matters:

Ukraine War and Russia:

America's empire and the world:

Other stories:

Obituaries

Books

  • David Masciotra: [08-05] Joe Conason on how grifters, swindlers, and frauds hijacked conservatism: An interview with the veteran journalist, author of the 2003 book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth, and most recently The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers, and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism, who explains:

    Deception is central to the contemporary right for two reasons. One is that they've discovered, over a long period, that it is highly profitable to mobilize people's fears and resentments around mythical issues. You can pull in vast sums of money from the right-wing base. The second reason is that facts don't work for them. It is very hard, at this point, to make arguments on behalf of their positions that are fact-based. They push lies, conspiracy theories, fantastical inventions that support their ideological positions. To take one example, there is an idea that the minimum wage costs jobs. Not true. It's been debunked. No respectable economist believes it. Or if you cut taxes, you'll generate economic growth. Not true. It's been disproven over again. So, they rely on falsehoods.

    Also: "It would be good if Democrats paid attention to what I expose in The Longest Con. This is an argument that works because no one likes being ripped off."

  • Katha Pollitt: [08-06] What's left after wokeness? An interview with philosopher Susan Neiman, author of the 2023 book Left Is Not Woke, recently reprinted in paperback (with some changes, including note of Oct. 7). I've noted the book before, and am generally sympathetic to its argument, as I've long insisted that the criterion defining left and right is equality vs. hierarchy, and anything else is just a correlation or coincidence. Woke is probably a correlation, because it opposes one particular form of hierarchy -- how effectively I cannot say, but Neiman may have some views on that. I don't see much point in criticizing people who advocate for wokeness, because they're usually facing off against people who need to be opposed. (The opposite of "woke" seems to be "asshole.") But I do think it's worth defending the real left against anyone who would try to reduce us to simple anti-wokeism.

    This led me to an earlier interview and other bits (for more of which, see Neiman's website):

    • PS: In looking at her new introduction, I see that she defines left differently than I do: as belief in a bundle of social rights. I see equality as more fundamental, but for sure, social rights are an expression (aspirational, at least) of equality.

Music (and other arts?)

  • Corey Kilgannon: [08-11] A jazz DJ's lifetime of knowledge leaves Queens for a new Nashville home: "Phil Schaap's childhood home held what may be the largest collection of recorded jazz interviews, an archive that will now be housed at Vanderbilt University."

  • Tom Sietsema: Dining chat: Are restaurants as fraught as depicted in 'The Bear'? Spoiler alert, but answer is "dunno," followed by other questions he does know something about. I think we're 3-4 episodes into The Bear, and finding it pretty stressful and not very satisfying, but interesting enough we'll keep plugging away at it (unlike the similarly hyped Beef).

  • Jeffrey St Clair: [08-07] Sound Grammar: The best jazz records of the year so far: The author has made a regular practice of jotting down three records he's listening to each week, and I noticed that about a third of them were more than a little jazz. I had thought about inviting him last year, but I didn't get it done. I wasn't really looking for new critics to invite for the mid-year poll, but as I was reading one of his pieces, I decided to give him a shot. As you can see, he submitted a very credible list.

Chatter

  • Dean Baker: [08-05] [replying to: "Trump has now made 6 posts this morning gleefully celebrating the stock market being down today"] Come on, what else is Trump going to talk about, his plans for a nationwide abortion ban, huge tax increase on imports to offset the cost of tax cuts for the rich, sending food prices through the roof by deporting the farm labor workforce?

    I guess Trump could also [talk] about his plans for promoting the spread of measles and polio and make more threats against "crappy Jews."

  • geekysteven: [08-06] Harris choosing Tim Walz as her running mate sets a dangerous precedent that Democrats might do cool shit that voters love

  • Prem Thakker: [08-06] "You don't win elections to bank political capital -- you win elections to burn political capital and improve lives." - Minnesota Governor Tim Walz

  • Richard Yeselson: [08-06] [replying to "The Walz selection shows just how deep the Dems' antisemitism problem runs."] Dude: the senate majority leader is Jewish; the Secretary of State is Jewish; the Attorney General is Jewish; the leader of the leftist faction is Jewish; the "husband of the nominee" is Jewish. I'm Jewish/you're Jewish so I ask you because Jews disagree: wtf are u talking about?

  • Kate Willett: [08-07] Hot take but I don't think it's actually bad for socialists if Republicans spend months saying this is socialism. [followed by picture of Tim Walz being hugged by school kids]

  • Mehdi Hasan: [08-07] Whether you're pro Cori Bush or anti Cori Bush, pro Israel or anti Israel, how can any American who c ares about democracy be okay with a lobby group - in this case, AIPAC - spending $15m to defeat one member of Congress (Bowman) & now $8m to defeat another (Bush)?

  • Teddy Wilson: [08-08] I've reported on the conservative movement and right-wing politics for more than a decade, and I've never seen anything like the collective temper tantrum and epic meltdown that has occurred the past few weeks. There is a palpable amount of fear, loathing and desperation.

  • Thoton Akimoto: [08-08] BREAKING: U.S. ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel boycotts Nagasaki peace ceremony after mayor disinvites Israel.

  • Zachary D Carter: [08-12] Nobody wants to talk about Brian Deese in this little spat that Yglesias and Chait are picking because he came from BlackRock and did a great job by doing stuff that Chait and Yglesias don't like.

    The idea that Biden was some kind of left wing radical is preposterous on its face. There's no political or economic principle being raised here, just one subset of democrats expressing disdain for another.

Local tags (these can be linked to directly): music.

Original count: 270 links, 12539 words (17034 total)

Current count: 272 links, 12620 words (17145 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Tuesday, August 6, 2024

Music Week

August archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 42761 [42729] rated (+32), 39 [36] unrated (+3).

I don't have much to say here, and want to move on, so let's keep this brief. Big Speaking of Which yesterday. I want to go back and edit a bit, but I'm afraid if I do it will drag on indefinitely. But if I post this now, I can go back with any revisions later (possibly including revisions here). I can also open a file for next week, which already has important stuff to report and comment on.

Only thing to note here is that this week is mostly hip-hop, and mostly underground at that. I finally added HHGA's The Best Hip Hop Albums of 2024 to my Metacritic File, and listened to about half of the unheard albums on the list. I remembered that their The Best Hip Hop Albums of 2023 produced a bonanza of finds, and hoped that this mid-year list would be half as productive. It wasn't even close, with Jay Skeese the only A-, although most of the rest were worth hearing. Of 60 albums on their 2023 list, 14 made my A-list (5 previously known to me). So far this year, it's only 2 of the 32 I've heard (1 previously known: Heems; leaving 37 still unheard).

I can't totally discount the possibility that my bad moods took a toll. And sure, one play (which is all nearly all of these got) has its limits, especially given how slow I am with words. I'll also admit that I spent a lot of time last week playing oldies. Also, the week was at least a day short, so I was surprised to find the rated count (32) as high as it is. No idea what next week will bring, other than that it's going to be hot. And we're officially in a drought now.

Hopefully I'll get to some questions this week.

New records reviewed this week:

21 Savage: American Dream (2024, Slaughter Gang/Epic): Rapper Shéyaa Bin Abraham-Joseph, born in London but raised in Atlanta, third solo album since 2017, also has three collaborations, all charted top-five in US. B+(**) [sp]

Adeem the Artist: Anniversary (2024, Four Quarters): Country singer-songwriter, from North Carolina, several albums going back to 2011, but only came to my attention with Cast Iron Pansexual in 2021, followed by White Trash Revelry, both well off the beaten path, which wasn't their only appeal. B+(**) [sp]

Apathy: Connecticut Casual: Chapter 2 (2024, Dirty Version): Connecticut rapper Chad Bromley, member of the Demigodz and Army of the Pharoahs, his own albums start in 2004, called a 2014 album Connecticut Casual, with hard beats and heavy vibes. B+(**) [sp]

Arrested Development: Bullets in the Chamber (2024, Vagabond Productions): Hip-hop group from Atlanta, had a massive debut hit in 1992, broke up after their 1994 album, regrouped in 2000 and have released albums regularly ever since, to little notice (at least to no notice by me). B+(*) [sp]

Awon & Parental: Sublime (2024, HHV): Rapper Antwan Wiggins, grew up in Virginia Beach, dozen-plus albums since 2008, working with French producer Raphaël Besikian, who favors jazzy vibes and explains that "hip-hop is the pinnacle of diversity and inclusion" and "one of the greatest blessings I've had." Ends with an instrumental version of the album, which is pleasant but unnecessary. B+(***) [sp]

Beans: Zwaard (2024, Tygr Rawwk): Rapper Robert Edward Stewart II, started out in Antipop Consortium, joined here by Finnish producer Sasu Ripatti, better known as Vladislav Delay. B+(*) [sp]

Blu & Evidence: Los Angeles (2024, Bigger Picture Music/New World Color): Rapper Johnson Barnes III, from Los Angeles, debut 2003, prolific since 2007, working here with producer Michael Perretta, who started with Dilated Peoples in the late 1990s. B+(**) [sp]

Brother Ali & unJUST: Love & Science (2024, Travelers Media): Underground rapper since 2003, has a light touch. B+(*) [sp]

Cavalier: Different Type Time (2024, Backwoodz Studioz): Rapper, from Brooklyn but based in New Orleans, couple albums since 2014. B+(**) [sp]

Common & Pete Rock: The Auditorium Vol. I (2024, Loma Vista): Big-name rapper, debut 1992 as Common Sense, when his ambitions were more modest, has done quite a bit of acting since 2002, as well as producing a steady stream of quite respectable albums. Rock (Peter Phillips) produces, goes back as far, especially for his duo with CL Smooth. B+(***) [sp]

Flo Milli: Fine Ho, Stay (2024, RCA): Rapper Tamia Carter, from Alabama, second album or third mixtape -- the distinction eludes me, all with Ho in the title. B+(**) [sp]

Future & Metro Boomin: We Don't Trust You (2024, Epic/Freebandz/Republic Boominati Worldwide): Rapper Nayvadius Cash, from Atlanta, best-selling albums since 2012, working here with producer Leland Tyler Wayne, first of two collaborative albums this year, but they go back at least to 2013. Runs 17 tracks, 59:39, and they weren't done yet. B+(**) [sp]

Future & Metro Boomin: We Still Don't Trust You (2024, Epic/Freebandz/Republic/Boominati Worldwide, 2CD): So, less than a month later, they released another 25 tracks, 88:33, the last seven overflowing to a second CD. Strikes me as maybe a tad catchier, but not sure the difference is worth quantifying. B+(**) [sp]

Gangrene: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose (2024, ALC): Hip-hop duo, Alchemist and Oh No, fourth album since 2010. B+(**) [sp]

Fred Hersch: Silent, Listening (2023 [2024], ECM): Eminent pianist, more than 50 albums since 1984, mostly trios but I count 16 solo albums, including this one -- I'm not a big fan of solo piano, but 2015's Solo is an exception. This one, as the title implies, winds up a bit thin. B+(*) [sp]

The Hot Toddies Jazz Band: The Hot Toadies Jazz Band (2019-22 [2023], Prohibition Productions): New York-based trad jazz outfit, first album, considerable turnover between early and later sessions, the constants being Justin Poindexter (guitar/vocals), Gabe Terracciano (violin/vocals), and Patrick Soluri (drums), with featured singers Queen Esther (2019) and Hannah Gill (2022). B+(***) [bc]

Lupe Fiasco: Samurai (2024, 1st and 15th Too): Chicago rapper, 2006 debut was a breakout hit. Still has a pop touch. B+(**) [sp]

Roc Marciano: Marciology (2024, Marci Enterprises): Rapper Rakeem Myer, has a regular stream of albums since 2010, many plays on his alias, this being even more inscrutable than most. B+(*) [sp]

Masta Ace & Marco Polo: Richmond Hill (2024, Fat Beats): Rapper Duval Clear, from Brooklyn, started 1988 in Juice Crew, debut album 1990, more after 2000, teaming up with Canadian beatmaker/producer Marco Bruno in 2018. B+(**) [sp]

James McClaskey & the Rhythm Band: Later on Blues (2024, BigTone): From New Orleans, plays tenor guitar and sings, second album for band (has another supporting Annabelle Zakaluk), mostly blues, three originals, but also covers from Tiny Grimes (one Charlie Parker, another Art Tatum) and Coleman Hawkins. B+(**) [sp]

Midnight Sons: Money Has No Owners (2024, Chong Wizard): Philadelphia rapper Stephen Zales, aka Zilla Rocca, with Canadian DJ Chong Wizard, with most cuts featuring others (the ones I recognize are Blu, AJ Suede, and Alaska). Has a jazzy underground vibe. B+(**) [sp]

Moses Rockwell Featuring Plain Old Mike: Regular Henry Sessions (2024, Hipnott): Rapper from Rochester, has at least one previous album, don't know anything more about his partner here, but cover photos two bearded blokes, and Mike gets the producer credit, earning his "jazzy" cred. B+(***) [sp]

ShrapKnel: Nobody Planning to Leave (2024, Backwoodz Studioz): Hip-hop duo, Curly Castro and Mark Debuque, third album. Kind of patchy, sketchy too. B [sp]

Jae Skeese & Superior: Testament of the Times (2024, RRC Music/BarsOverBs): Rapper from Buffalo, fifth album since 2020, producer is Marcos Oviedo (German "with Spanish descents"), his first album 2009. Underground, smart, really nice flow. A- [sp]

Daniel Son & Futurewave: Bushman Bodega (2024, WavGodMusic): Toronto rapper Daniel Borley, Discogs credits him with 18 albums since 2017, 7 with producer Martin Budik (Futurewave). B+(*) [sp]

Kelsey Waldon: There's Always a Song (2024, Oh Boy): Deep country singer-songwriter from Kentucky, ninth album since 2010, fourth on John Prine's label. Always has that deep holler voice and vibe, but leans heavily on guests to stretch eight songs (including covers as well worn as "Hello Stranger," "Uncle Pen, and "Travelling the Highway Home") out to 27:45. B+(***) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Sonny Rollins: A Night at the Village Vanguard: The Complete Masters (1957 [2024], Blue Note Tone Poet, 2CD): Long regarded as a major item in the tenor saxophonist's oeuvre, but I've never been much of a fan. The original 1958 LP (6 tracks, 44:17; one afternoon track with Donald Bailey and Pete La Roca, the rest from the evening sets with Wilbur Ware and Elvin Jones) was expanded to two CDs in 1987, picking up tracks from 1975's 2-LP More From the Vanguard (which I once owned). I've certainly underrated those CDs (in my database at B- and B, with the 1999 2-CD reissue at B+, and now this one, conceived as a 3-LP set but also available as 2-CD (130:00), adding nothing new of consequence (possibly some extra patter). I might complain of too many drum solos, but they're not bad, and the saxophone is majestic. Still, I have enough experience with really great Rollins to find this a tad overrated. B+(***) [sp]

The Louis Stewart Trio: Louis the First (1975 [2024], Livia): Irish guitarist (1944-2016), seems to have been his first album (although he had previous side-credits, including Clark Terry, Benny Goodman, and Jesus Christ Superstar). Mostly trio, with Martin Walshe (bass) and John Wadham (drums), dropping down to solo or bass duo on occasion. B+(***) [bc]

Old music:

Pat Metheny: Bright Size Life (1975 [1976], ECM): First album for the now-famous guitarist, a trio with Jaco Pastorius (bass) and Bob Moses (drums). Before he found his fusion schtick, he had a lot going on. B+(**) [sp]

Jumaane Smith: I Only Have Eyes for You (2014, self-released): Trumpet player, also sings (but not much here), first album, side credits include Rashied Ali in 2005, also Alicia Keys and Michael Bublé, the latter opening with a guest vocal here. Some nice trumpet, but song selection is odd, and the string backdrops uninspired. B- [sp]

Jumaane Smith: When You're Smiling (2020, Zinn Music): Trumpet player, plays hot, sings with some enthusiasm, picks more upbeat songs this time. I'm not finding any credits. But he hasn't totally lost the strings. Or the milquetoast guest singers? B [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Patricia Brennan Septet: Breaking Stretch (Pyroclastic) [09-06]
  • Dylan Hicks & Small Screens: Modern Flora (Soft Launch) [09-06]
  • Dave Rempis/Jason Adasiewicz/Joshua Abrams/Tyler Damon: Propulsion (Aerophonic) [10-04]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Monday, August 5, 2024

Speaking of Which

I started working on this back on Thursday, the day after I posted Music Week and minor updates to last week's massive Speaking of Which (final: 263 links, 11360 words). For a while, it looked like I might actually wrap this up on Sunday evening, but didn't make it. Probably just as well, although the imminent Harris VP pick may upset some apple carts. Even if it happens (Tuesday morning, I now hear), consider it unknown to this post.

PS: Harris picks Tim Walz as VP ahead of multistate tour. For now, the best link is Perry Bacon Jr.: [08-06] Tim Walz is a bold, smart choice for Harris's running mate.

Last week I stayed clear of Israel's latest round of "targeted assassinations," most significantly that of Hamas diplomat Ismail Haniyeh (conveniently in Tehran; I imagine Mossad is already shopping movie rights to that story). Last week's lead story title ended "as US officials say a ceasefire deal is close." No one's saying that this week, as Haniyeh was Hamas's lead negotiator in those talks, which Netanyahu had managed to sideline for weeks, and now simply blew up. Rather, I devoted a large chunk of last week's post to Netanyahu's speech to Congress. Some key article cited there:

While we're at it, let's also reiterate:

This reminds me of Andrew Gillum on DeSantis: "I'm not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist, I'm simply saying the racists believe he's a racist." (Gillum also noted: "he's got neo-Nazis helping him run the state.") I have at least one article below on how Trump is deciding that some Jews are "good" (love Israel, support Trump) and "bad" (oppose Trump, hate Israel), and can easily find more, e.g.:

For deeper background, see:

I also did a Google search on trump on war with iran, but it mostly revealed past deeds, not current words. E.g.:

McGeorge Bundy once explained that the difference between presidents Kennedy and Johnson was that Kennedy wanted to be seen as smart, but Johnson wanted to be seen as tough. You can use the relative importance of smart and tough as a scale for weighing most presidents. We like to think of Obama as being on the smart side, but he picked many moments to prove he could be tough (like his first order to kill Somali pirates, his numerous drone strikes, his raid on Osama Bin Laden; on the other hand, he caved in every time he ran afoul of Netanyahu, which wasn't so smart, and betrayed a deficit worse than toughness: of courage). But Trump's idea of smart doesn't extend much beyond cheating on his taxes and paying off a porn star. And while he brags about being "a very stable genius," the quality he most wants to project to the world is how very tough he is (e.g., his boasts that were he still president, Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine, and Hamas wouldn't have attacked Israel).

While there isn't a lot of reason to think that Trump, in his rare moments of sober reflection, wants to blunder into war, his self-image, inflated ego, his lack of analytic skills, and his incapacity for empathy all make him susceptible to the suggests of the "tough guys" he likes to surround himself with. So sure, it's quite possible that Ben-Gvir has the measure of his man. You certainly have to admit that his cunning has him playing Netanyahu like a fiddle, amplifying his power enormously.

We will, of course, continue to hold Biden and Harris responsible for own their contributions to Israel's genocide and warmongering, but we should always be clear that Trump's malice, which pervades every pore of his campaign, is much more dangerous than Biden's indifferent cowardice, despicable as it is. As for Harris, all I can hope for is that she keeps her head down until she's in a position to do something about it. Then, by all means, she must, and failure there will be catastrophic, but until she has that power, mere speculation is unlikely to be helpful. There will always be more to do later.

Top story threads:

Israel:

Israel's long-standing policy of assassinating political opponents was brought to the fore last week with the murder of Ismail Haniyeh (head of the Hamas political bureau, and chief negotiator in the "ceasefire" talks Biden has promoted and Netanyahu has sabotaged at every turn). This immediately followed Israel's major escalation of bombing in Lebanon, which included the killing of a prominent Hezbollah commander. The calculation here is pretty obvious, even though it is rarely commented on. Israel is not merely killing for the hell of it, they want to provoke reprisals, which they can use to justify further killing. They are gambling that their targets cannot hurt them, or if they do land a lucky punch -- as Hamas did on October 7 -- they can escalate to previously unimaginable levels of mass destruction.

But Israel has one weakness: it depends on American support, both to replenish its supply of munitions and to prop up an economy that has never (well, not since 1950) been so extensively mobilized for war for so long. Netanyahu knows that he cannot sustain his genocidal war without American support, so he and his allies are pulling out all the stops to keep unthinking, uncritical support flowing. You see this in the flood of propaganda, including Netanyahu's obscene speech before Congress. You see this in the astounding money that's going into purging independent thought in American politics. But the real linchpin would be if he could maneuver the US into joining the war. He achieved a partial success in getting the Houthis to fire on Red Sea shipping, with the result that the US and UK have joined Saudi Arabia in bombing Yemen. But the real prize would be getting the US to go to war against Iran. Or at least Lebanon.

It helps here to understand that Israel doesn't actually care about Iran. The essential background here was explained by Trita Parsi in his 2007 book, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States. The key point here is that while the US soured on Iran with the 1980 hostage crisis, Israel remained close to Iran throughout the 1980s -- you might vaguely recall that Israel was the intermediary in the Iran-Contra scandal -- but only turned against Iran in the 1990s, after Saddam Hussein ceased to be a viable foreign threat. Israel switched to Iran because the Americans already hated Iran, which made them easy to play with a ridiculously inflated story of Iran's "nuclear program." Obama's negotiations with Iran were intended to allay Israel's fears, but Netanyahu rejected them because Israel never feared Iran: they only faked it to cater to American prejudices. When Trump killed the deal, he capitulated to Israel, allowing Netanyahu to dictate America's understanding of allies, enemies, and interests.

While Trump did this for the most craven of reasons, Biden followed blindly because his long experience with the Israel lobby had taught him that no alternative course was imaginable. Still, providing "arms, money, and [freely ignored] advice" was the easy part. Committing US troops to conventional war against an unconquerable nation like Iran would be a much more daunting order. Of course, Israel isn't insisting that the US actually invade Iran, like their fiascos in Afghanistan and Iraq. They would be perfectly happy to see the US conduct an Israel-style assault, where massive bombing denies any responsibility for cleaning up the mess. Going back to WWII, the US is used to seeking definitive solutions that lead to peace, but Israel has always understood that each victory is just a prelude to the next war, which they must eternally prepare for. Peace for them is nothing but false hope and mass delusion, which is why their warrior caste breaks it at every opportunity.

Of course, America hasn't quite become a pawn in Israel's game. Biden has little appetite for war against Iran, or even against Lebanon -- although he also has little will to resist bombing Yemen and Syria, or to move aircraft carrier groups supposedly to deter attacks against Israel. Biden, in contrast to Trump, retains at least some sense of human decency, so he can't really endorse Israel's genocide, but he tries hard to not see it, either, so he readily parrots Israel's lies and clichés -- which so far is all that Netanyahu has needed.

But it would help to see the game he and his far-right allies are playing: they don't care about Iran, and they don't worry about foreign attack; they only care about the US and Europe as a meal ticket, and even there they don't care how unpopular they become, as long as those in power toe their line; what they do care about is grinding the Palestinians down to dust, to utter insignificance, not just in Gaza but everywhere they control; unlike some genociders, they are not obsessed with killing every last Palestinian, as they know that's not the only way to render them inconsequent, but they also have no qualms about killing indiscriminately, and see that as instrumental to their cause.

On some level, most Israelis must realize that they cannot keep killing and destroying indefinitely. True, no other army has the means and will power to stop them. And there's little chance that Israelis, who have grown up under a regime that has systematically inculcated the belief that Jews are eternal victims but in Israel have become invincible warriors, will develop a conscience and decide they've gone far enough (let alone too far). On the other hand, world opinion, even in the so-called western democracies that currently sustain Israel's military and economy, is turning against Israel's war, not just because most people find this killing and destruction abhorrent when done by anyone, but because we increasingly see it as rooted in inequality and hatred, in the fundamentally unjust belief that might makes right.

We see this most clearly in America, where our most reactionary political elements, including the neocons (who led us into the Israel-inspired Global War on Terror) and the Christian Zionists (with their dreams of Armageddon) are by far the most enthusiastic backers of Israeli genocide. Granted, there is still a significant rump faction of Democrats who are loyal to Israel, but their loyalty depends on misinformation and myths, not on a belief in violence. They do want to see a ceasefire and humanitarian relief, and generally accept that diversity, democracy, and equality are not just desirable but necessary. They just have trouble holding Israel to their otherwise general beliefs. But unlike the right-wingers, it should till be possible to reason with pro-Israel Democrats. One can make a strong case that Israel is harming itself by pursuing such extreme policies.

Note: The assassination of Hamas eminence Ismail Haniyeh has become a big enough story to warrant its own section, between this one (which is mostly limited to Israel's domestic politics and military operations) and the next one (which deals with US politics and support for Israel). As usual, there is another section following on Israeli propaganda and world opinion, especially around the genocide charge. The subdivisions are useful because there's so much material to cover, and it's nice to keep similar pieces together, but it's also difficult, in that many pieces lap over from one area to another. For instance, articles specifically on the US reaction to the Haniyeh assassination may be included in the US section. The assassinations and escalation in Lebanon hasn't yet mandated its own section, so pieces on that are mostly in the US section, as my view is that Israel's attacks on Lebanon (and Iran) are mostly attempts to lead US policy.

The Haniyeh assassination:

  • Fatima AbdulKarim/Mohammed R Mhawish: From Gaza to Ramallah, Haniyeh remembered as advocate of unity.

  • Nasim Ahmed: [08-01] Ismail Haniyeh: assassinated in Israel's war on peace and quest for endless occupation. Notes that "Western sources consistently portrayed Haniyeh as a moderate figure within Hamas."

    The political murder of Haniyeh fits a troubling pattern of Israeli behaviour. Political observers have long noted Israel's fear of what is often referred to as a Palestinian "peace offensive." Throughout its history as an occupation state, Israel has been accused of targeting moderate Palestinian leaders who show the potential for engaging in meaningful peace negotiations. This strategy, critics argue, is aimed at closing the door to peace and maintaining a state of perpetual conflict that serves Israel's long-term goal of establishing its illegal sovereignty over all of historic Palestine.

  • Ramzy Baroud: [07-31] It's both criminal and desperate; that's why Israel assassinated Ismail Haniyeh. He also notes: "Israel chose the time and place for Haniyeh's murder carefully." Israel has persistently attempted to link Hamas with Iran, which has never made a lot of sense, but the opportunity to kill him in Iran will leave an indelible impression, as well as serving as a major embarrassment to and provocation of Iran.

  • Juan Cole: [08-02] Turkey's Erdogan denounces killing of Haniyeh, blocks Israel at NATO, boycotts it, and threatens intervention.

  • David Hearst: Ismail Haniyeh killing: Netanyahu's only goal is to set the region on fire.

  • Fred Kaplan: [07-31] What Israel's killing of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders could mean for war in the region.

  • Qassam Muaddi: [07-31] Israel assassinates head of Hamas political bureau amid regional escalation: "Israel assassinated Hamas politburo head Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran after a series of mounting regional tensions that included unprecedented Israeli attacks on the 'Axis of Resistance,' including airstrikes on Beirut and Yemen."

  • Ashraf Nubani: [08-05] Killing Hamas leader: an act of Israeli desperation. I understand the impulse to write something defiant like this, but I don't sense the desperation. Israel saw an opportunity and, consistent with their principles, acted on it, with little regard for future consequences, because they really aren't worried about things like that.

  • Abdaljawad Omar: [07-31] The real reason Israel is assassinating Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, and why it won't stop the resistance: "Israel's assassination of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders doesn't aim to weaken the resistance. Its real motive is to restore the image of military and intelligence superiority in the eyes of the Israeli public." I think the author is overthinking this. Once Israel's leaders decided they could get away with killing everyone even remotely associated with Hamas, with no worries about killing other Palestinians, any opportunity to hit someone on their list was automatically greenlighted. The author desperately wants to think that the resistance is a factor Israel must reckon with, but Israelis don't care. If their attacks push more people to resist, they'll just kill more. Once the telos is genocide, resistance is just positive feedback.

  • Paul R Pillar: [08-01] Trigger happy Israel and its thirst for revenge: "The cross-border assassinations reflect a national rage playing out in Gaza's carnage -- and Netanyahu's desire to keep the war going forever."

  • Reuters: [07-31] Haniyeh was the pragmatic leader of Hamas.

  • Muhammad Sahimi: [07-31] Assassination of Hamas leader in Iran puts new president in a trap: "Depending on how Pezeshkian responds, it may force the US to get directly involved in defense of Israel." No mention that the trap was solely the work of Netanyahu until six paragraphs in:

    Dialogue between Iran and the United States is, however, the last thing that Israel, and particularly Benjamin Netanyahu, wants at this stage. If anything, Netanyahu would expand the war to Lebanon in hopes that Iran will react strongly and enter the war directly. Neither Hezbollah nor Iran wants a war with Israel at this stage, but no one should be under the illusion that if Israel begins a full-scale war with Lebanon and Hezbollah, Iran will sit it out.

  • Erika Solomon: [08-04] Hamas may emerge battered, but not beaten, from Israel's latest blows: "The assassination of two Hamas leaders may be a short-term setback, analysts say, not enough to prevent the group from emerging intact -- and possibly more radicalized." I have very little faith in articles like this, where reporters have very little access to primary sources, and everyone they do have access to has their own interests to promote. The line here, hardly surprising given where it's being published, is basically what Israel wants you to believe: that yes, we're inflicting serious short-term losses on Hamas, but no matter what we do, Palestinians will rebound to attack again, so Israel just has to keep fighting forever, beating them down (you know, "mowing the lawn"). Still, this argument depends on sleight of hand, confusing the idea of Hamas with its organization (which was never as monolithic as supposed), but also assuming that the dynamic remains extremely polarized (that Israel and Hamas can do nothing but fight until one or the other dies).

    I am reasonably certain that as long as Israel acts like Goliath, many Palestinians will want to resist, and will search for leverage they can use to assert their dignity and fight back. Hamas was one of many organizations that attempted to channel Palestinian desires for justice into effective political action. I think it's fair to say that it failed, repeatedly, but most definitively on or shortly after October 7, when in an act of desperation, the organization exploded like a suicide bomber. I suppose it's possible that there is still some sort of residual organization in Gaza, more likely as isolated cells than under any sort of unified command. Emigres like Haniyeh could continue to represent themselves as Hamas for diplomacy, but that just made them targets for Israel. No doubt there are others formerly associated with Hamas, some with their militia and many more mere civil employees of the Hamas-run de facto governance (now destroyed), and those people would continue to look for opportunities to resist, but they no longer constitute an effective force. Within a week or two, Israel could simply have declared victory over Hamas, and no one would have disputed them. That they didn't is because Hamas is their idea as much as it ever was a Palestinian idea. Hamas is Israel's ticket to genocide, so as long as they want to keep killing Palestinians -- and clearly they are nowhere near satiated yet -- they have to keep the idea of Hamas alive. Which is what they've done. And will continue to do, as long as you keep buying their hasbara.

  • Syeda Fizzah Shuja: [08-01] Haniyeh's assassination unleashes a new era of political violence.

  • Robert Wright: [08-02] The Haniyeh assassination will haunt Israel. Cites David Ignatius (below), quoting: "The Israelis are still stuck in a zero-sum game. But Israelis should ask themselves how well the hard-nosed, forever-war approach has worked in practice." They'd probably answer that they're still fighting, and killing more than they are losing, so it's working out just fine.

  • Middle East Monitor: [08-04] Massive rally in Istanbul to mourn Hamas leader Haniyeh, support Palestinians in Gaza.

America's Israel (and Israel's America):

Israel vs. world opinion:

  • Yousef Aljamal: [08-02] Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. Where is the outrage? That's not the question I would ask. People who know about this are plenty outraged -- probably more than is good for their own health. The bigger problem is who doesn't know? And who doesn't care? The question of starvation was raised almost instantly, with the blockade of food imports and a bombing campaign directed at agricultural resources (especially greenhouses). Since then, we've seen some deaths reported, but it's not clear how they're being counted -- or if they're being counted. The broader issues of malnutriton are hard to quantify, let alone report.

  • Kribsoo Diallo: [08-03] African attitudes to, and solidarity with, Palestine: From the 1940s to Israel's genocide in Gaza: "Kribsoo Diallo reviews African perspectives on Israel's genocidal war on Gaza, the rise and fall of Zionist influence in Africa, and the state of African grassroots solidarity with Palestine."

  • Faris Giacaman: [07-30] Netanyahu's willing executioners: how ordinary Israelis became mass murderers: "After ten months of relentless genocidal war, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that both the Israeli state and society are partners in the genocide. The picture that emerges is a genocide from above and below." Obvious reference here to Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's 1996 book, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, which argued that the Nazi Judeocide was a reflection of widespread vitriolic anti-semitism among ordinary Germans, as opposed to the view that it was an aberration driven by fanatical Nazis, often operating in secret. I haven't read that book, but I've always been suspicious of its thesis, which just doesn't strike me as the way things work. Still, this seems like a fair question to ask of Israelis right now. I can't really tell: there is a lot of personal dislike of Netanyahu in Israel, but there doesn't seem to be much serious opposition to his war policy (which some would argue is a personal stay-out-of-jail strategy). While I recognize his war as flagrantly genocidal, Israeli propaganda takes great pains to deny and deflect, and therefore to shelter supporters from having to acknowledge the consequences of Israel's actions. If they knew better, would they care?

    But I will note that there are several reasons to think that Israelis are more popularly aligned with their government's genocidal policies than Germans were in the early 1940s: Israel is a much more open democracy, so those (except Palestinians) who oppose government policy can (generally) speak out and assemble to protest without fear of jail and torture; while the press in Israel has been fairly tightly controlled, there is still much more information available about the atrocities than was publically available in Germany; the Holocaust took place under cover of total war, toward the end of a long era of European imperialism, where racism was casually accepted and rarely challenged, whereas today most of us know better; in particular, we know much about the Nazi example, and about many other examples of systematically racist behavior, some also amounting to genocide. For an Israeli (and even more so if you're simply an ally of Israel) today, it's much harder to pretend you don't know what's going on, and/or that there's nothing you can do about it.

    By the way, some old pieces on Goldhagen's book:

  • Robert Kuttner: [08-02] Bibi's death wish:

    Is Netanyahu deliberately provoking a regional war that will be disastrous for Israel? Unless he is certifiably insane, his motive has to be to drag in the U.S., not as mediator but as more explicit military protector. And the strategy is working. . . .

    But Israel is certainly guilty of the most barbarous sort of ethnic cleansing in the West Bank. And Israel's reckless killing of civilians in Gaza violates international law as well as human decency, whether or not it meets some legal test of genocide.

    If you need a primer on the daily humiliations inflicted on the Palestinian population, you owe it to yourself to read Nathan Thrall's book, A Day in the Life of Abed Salama. Israel's actions in the occupied West Bank meet any test of apartheid, and Israel is behaving precisely like a colonial power.

    In some respects, the South African apartheid regime was more benign. They didn't kill Nelson Mandela, and in the end they released him in full recognition that he would be the country's next president. If only F.W. de Klerk, the last president under apartheid, who recognized the inevitability of Mandela and the end of white rule, were a role model for Netanyahu.

    This example is a reminder that if you want peace, you need strong and credible leadership on the other side, to sell the deal to people who have little if any reason to trust you. Israel could have done that with Arafat in 1993, but instead they undercut and marginalized him, even bolstering Hamas to weaken Fatah. They could have done that with Hamas when it won elections in 2007, but they rejected the results. Israelis like to complain that they've never had a "partner for peace," but the more serious problem is that Palestinians have never been allowed to choose their own leaders. It was the British who selected Hajj Amin Ali Husseini and his successors. Israel arranged for Jordan to rule the West Bank from 1948 until they were ready to take it over in 1967, and even later made sure it was Jordan and not the Palestinians running the Waqf. Israel brought in Arafat rather than deal with the Intifada leaders.

  • Craig Murray: [08-02] The Israeli nihilist state: "The apartheid state appears to have no objective other than violence and an urge for desolation."

  • Joseph Massad: [07-29] Why the West created a new dictionary for Israel and Palestine: "Seeking ideological uniformity on the issue, western officials and their media accomplices have long recognised the centrality of language to their political indoctrination project."

  • Nylah Iqbal Muhammad: [08-03] Understanding the connections between the Congo and Palestine genocides: "Friends of the Congo Executive Director Maurice Carney and Professor Eman Abdelhadi discuss the intersections between the genocides in the Congo and Palestine."

  • Zainab Nasser: [08-04] Living remotely: a Palestinian expatriate's struggle from Gaza to Beirut: "The sun rises over Beirut and the city stirs to life. For many, it's a new day filled with promise and potential, maybe hope or pain. But for me, a Gaza-born expatriate who spent 25 years in Gaza, each dawn brings a blend of hope and dread."

  • Corey Robin: [08-03] Two paths for Jewish politics: "In America, Jews pioneered a way of life that didn't rely on the whims of the powerful. Now it's under threat." Starts with a personal story:

    Having never thought that it wasn't, I flashed a puzzled smile and recalled an observation of the German writer Ludwig Börne: "Some reproach me with being a Jew, others pardon me, still others praise me for it. But all are thinking about it."

    Thirty-one years later, everyone's thinking about the Jews. Poll after poll asks them if they feel safe. Donald Trump and Kamala Harris lob insults about who's the greater antisemite. Congressional Republicans, who have all of two Jews in their caucus, deliver lectures on Jewish history to university leaders. . . . But as I learned that summer in Tennessee, and as we're seeing today, concern can be as revealing as contempt. Often the two go hand in hand.

    Consider the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which the House of Representatives recently passed by a vote of 320-91. The act purports to be a response to rising antisemitism in the United States. Yet the murder of Jews, synagogue shootings, and cries of "Jews will not replace us" are clearly not what the bill is designed to address. Nearly half of Republicans believe in the "great replacement theory," after all, and their leader draws from the same well.

    The bill will instead outfit the federal government with a new definition of antisemitism that would shield Israel from criticism and turn campus activism on behalf of Palestinians into acts of illegal discrimination. (Seven of the definition's eleven examples of antisemitism involve opposition to the State of Israel.) Right-wingers who vocally oppose the bill -- Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, Tucker Carlson, and Charlie Kirk -- have little problem with its Zionist agenda. They just worry that it will implicate those who believe the Jews are Christ killers.

  • Ilan Pappé: [08-01] To stop the century-long genocide in Palestine, uproot the source of all violence: Zionism. This led me to another historical piece worth perusing:

  • Rick Staggenborg: [07-31] Why do good people support genocide? "I met with a Zionist to discuss whether it was a 'plausible' case that Israel's tactics constituted genocide."

    At her request, I supplied links to the sources of my claims, including Israeli newspapers and mainstream press articles citing Israeli sources. She said little about the information I shared. Instead, she raised new arguments each time we met for why Israel had "no choice" but to continue its wholesale slaughter of the population of Gaza.

    I eventually realized that she was able to support the destruction of an entire people because she didn't want to confront the facts. I think she suspected that knowing the whole truth might undermine her deeply held beliefs about Israel and perhaps Zionism itself.

  • Kathleen Wallace: [08-02] How will our great grandchildren look back on this chapter? "What is going on in Palestine is, as they say, simply a laboratory for the rest of the world. To not take a stance on such horror is to sign your own death warrant." Not too far back, the author also wrote:

    • [06-07] Does America have narcissistic personality disorder? "As a way of feeling powerful, the worst narcissistic traits are often emulated, and I think this is what we are seeing in the MAGA movement." The author notes "nine basic criteria to diagnose the personality disorder," and finds the US "currently meets all of them."

      1. A grandiose sense of importance.
      2. A preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success and power.
      3. A belief that they are special in such a way that only other high-status peoples or institutions can understand them.
      4. A need for excessive admiration.
      5. A sense of entitlement.
      6. Interpersonally exploitative behavior.
      7. A lack of empathy.
      8. An envy of others or a belief that others are envious of him or her."
      9. Arrogant and haughty behaviors or attitudes.

    • 05-03] More than just protests for Palestine: existential hope for the world: "Americans have been told that Israel is their only true ally in that region of the world. But nobody wants to know how that situation came to be."

  • Robert Zaretsky: [08-05] Israel's use of torture is a travesty -- just like it was for the French in Algeria 70 years ago.

Election notes:

  • Karen Greenberg: [08-04] Will election 2024 traumatize us? Drawing on her experience with the Guantanamo prison program, the author asks the question, is our political system designed to resign us to a state of "learned helplessness," where we give up all hope?

    The goal was simple: to reduce that prisoner to a profound state of complete paralysis and disempowerment in which, having no hope of relief or escape, he would do whatever his captors wanted. Detainees would see that there was no way out but to answer their captors' questions, which, it turned out, often led them, in desperation and a state of learned helplessness, to confess to things they hadn't done, to confess to whatever their captors wanted to hear.

    Having studied and written about the nightmare of those prisoners and Guantánamo for so many years now, it's been supremely jarring to see the term "learned helplessness" re-emerge in connection to the current unnerving state of American politics and the 2024 presidential election. Yet, in many ways, it seems a strangely appropriate lens through which to view the world of Donald Trump and the rest of us. It was true, as many commented, that a sense of learned helplessness indisputably crept into the mindset of so many of us in this country -- at least prior to Joe Biden's decision not to pursue a second term as president.

    But with Biden's exit, the election feels far less gloomy right now. No matter how improbable election of Kamala Harris may have seemed before Biden dropped out, it now feels like we finally have a fighting chance, and with that comes a sense of euophria that has been sadly lacking from our lives since, well, practically forever.

  • Rebecca Jennings: [08-02] An influencer is running for Senate. Is she just the first of many? "Caroline Gleich's Utah Senate campaign is a sign of the blurring lines between digital creators and politicians." This doesn't strike me as so weird. She sounds like a good candidate.

  • Ed Kilgore: [07-31] What ever happened to RFK Jr.?

Trump:

Vance:

And other Republicans:

Harris:

Biden:

And other Democrats:

Legal matters and other crimes:

Climate and environment:

Economic matters:

Ukraine War and Russia:

America's empire and the world:

Other stories:

Obituaries

Books

  • Usman Butt: [2023-07-09] Avi Shlaim's memoir Three Worlds: Mossad, Mizrahim, and the loss of Iraqi Jewry: "Avi Shlaim's memoir is an elucidating account of split worlds under duress. Deeply researched, Shlaim reveals the factors behind his leaving Iraq for Israel, and how the Israeli secret services stoked tensions to facilitate this exodus."

  • Louis Menand: [07-22] When yuppies ruled: "Defining a social type is a way of defining an era. What can the time of the young urban professionjal tell us about our own?" Refers to Tom McGrath: Triumph of the Yuppies: American the Eighties, and the Creation of an Unequal Nation.

  • Jordan Michael Smith: [08-02] The foreign policy mistake the US keeps repeating in the Middle East: "In 2024, the US faces some of the same challenges in the region that it did in 1954." Review of Fawaz A Gerges: What Really Went Wrong: The West and the Failure of Democracy in the Middle East, a title which alludes to Bernard Lewis's 2002 book, What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response. I read the latter back when I was desperate to read anything on the Middle East, but it mostly just showed me how idiotic western orientalists can be. I haven't read any of Gerges's many books -- most appear to be primers on jihadism for his UK readers -- but he's been working long enough for the imperialist ardor to wear thin. So expect some insights, but also some aggravation. For instance, consider this pull quote:

    The real lesson of America's Cold War policies is that interfering in other countries should only be done when our most vital interests are at stake, we have competent leaders, and we can do more good than ill.

    On the surface, that seems sensible, but every clause melts into goop the moment you reflect on it. Rather than dissect it, let me suggest instead:

    1. Never interfere in other countries. If they are friendly, be friendly. If they are hostile, be wary. If they stink, take your business elsewhere. But don't think that you can or should change them. Ever.
    2. Only domestic interests are vital. Governments are responsible for taking care of their own people, within their own territory, and nothing more. Anyone who thinks "we" have an interest outside the country is wrong, and up to no good.
    3. It's ok to conduct international relations, as long as it's done in a fair and open manner, with mutual respect, not clouded by the projection of power or avarice.
    4. Competent leaders are good. I wish we had some. But no one can judge the competency or fitness of other people's leaders. So don't.
    5. It's impossible to calculate the balance of good and ill: the terms are poorly defined, hard to quantify, and especially hard to anticipate well into the future. The best one can do is to avoid ill at every opportunity. That should leave room for good.

    From WWII on, US interaction with the Middle East has produced one blunder after another, each couched in the notion that we have material interests in the region that need to be advanced or at least defended through alliances with groups that had their own independent and sometimes conflicting interests, and deveoped through ideologies that have only served to further muddy the picture, and to totally befuddle the minds in Washington who think they are in charge. It wasn't always like that. Pre-WWII US interaction was relatively benign: American missionaries established great universities in Beirut and Cairo, tactfully enough that they didn't get tagged as Crusaders; the US refused to join the Great War against the Ottoman Empire, and refused a mandate over post-war Turkey.

    Things started to change in the 1930s when American oil companies came to Saudi Arabia, but even there they made much more equitable arrangements with Aramco than the British did with their Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The Eisenhower policies Gerges is so critical of were still rooted in past good will, even as it was rapidly being squandered to backstop British imperialism and the global oil monopoly, and ultimately to gratify Israel's every whim. One can imagine ways to unwind some of the worst effects, but there's little chance of that happening until you first realize that the entire project was rotten from the start.

  • Alexander Sorondo: [07-31] The short shelf-life of the White House tell-all: "Fly-on-the-wall West Wing books age like milk. Why do journalists and publishers bother?" Maybe they like milk? So few books stand the tes to time, it's almost silly to think that they should. One may question the value of "insider" stories, as compared to broader-based studies and deeper histories, but there's no reason they can't contribute something.

    Franklin Foer's book on Biden, The Last Politician, gets a mention, especially because something very significant (October 7) happened just a month after it came out. I'll admit I bought a copy, then didn't read it in a timely fashion, and at this point probably never will. But when I bought it, I thought there was a deficit of information on how Biden was operating around lots of issues -- especially on the Afghanistan retreat, which I thought he got a bum rap for, but with Biden it's hard to tell what's art and what's just klutziness.

    While it's always possible to publish too soon, books do take long enough to write that authors can get beyond first impressions and instincts. I rather doubt that Thomas Ricks meant to call his Iraq War book Fiasco, but by the time he finished, the title was obvious. Similarly, I thought Rajiv Chandrasekaran's reporting from Iraq was really shallow, but by the time he turned it into a book (Imperial Life in the Emerald City) he had a real story. The author here seems to prefer memoirs over journalism, but his examples (Bill Barr, James Comey, Anthony Scaramucci) aren't very persuasive.

Music (and other arts?)

Chatter

Local tags (these can be linked to directly): music.

Original count: 254 links, 12958 words (17123 total)

Current count: 256 links, 12995 words (17190 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Wednesday, July 31, 2024

Music Week

July archive (finished).

Music: Current count 42729 [42703] rated (+26), 36 [23] unrated (+13).

My Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll threw me off the usual Sunday/Monday post schedule, although the sheer quantity of news I reaped for yesterday's Speaking of Which would have been excuse enough (249 links, 11258 words before today's additions).

ArtsFuse published my intro/overview essay, Diversity Brings Riches: A Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll, on Friday, at which time I enabled the totals and ballots on my archival website:

There was a glitch early on where the points totals in the tables on ArtsFuse got mangled, so had to be fixed. I've received some feedback on the poll, but not very much. I sent a notice out to my "jazzpoll" mailing list, but as best I can figure, only about half of those messages get past the spam traps (gmail seems to be exceptionally harsh). I put out two announcements on X, but the first (link to essay) only has 164 views (1 retweet, 3 likes), and the second (link to updated Music Week) got 222 views (2 retweets, 5 likes). I also did two notices on Facebook, like this one, with 1 share and 5 likes.

A Google search reveals:

Also, a couple critics published their ballots (which are all available through the link above). Chris Monsen wrote up his extended mid-year list. I also suspect that I provoked All About Jazz into polling their writers for this all-star break edition list. (As I understand it, their call went out a week after my invites, but they were first to press.)

I've scarcely touched my metacritic file, but should get back to it if/when demands on my time lighten up. Its main value is as a prospecting tool, which I haven't much needed while I had so many jazz albums to search out. I'm pretty sure I'll return to it when the year-end lists start coming in, but between now and then it's likely to only be an occasional hobby. I'm also not sure I'll continue updating my Best Jazz Albums of 2024 file, although it's pretty comprehensive for now. An even more vexing question is whether I'll make a serious effort at the download links I've been accumulating. More pressing is that I've fallen behind the queue of promo CDs (although much of that mail I just opened today).

I did manage to wrap up the July Streamnotes file, and to open a new one for August. Rated count is light this week, as I've had several days where I didn't want to multitask while writing, or didn't feel up to it. I also found myself tiring of looking for unheard albums that got poll votes, especially as many proved inaccessible. Still 189 left in the tracking file, so maybe I just need a break. It's tempting to just take August off. I have a lot of stuff to do around the house. Also a couple of web projects that need attention. I need to rethink my writing ambitions. There are also some health questions.

I've just finished reading Amy Kaplan's Our American Israel: The Story of an Entangled Alliance. It's a pretty good general history of Israel since the 1940s, with its long drift from left to right, fought mostly on the level of myth, where the intertwined alliance brings out the worst in both. That focus often ignores real political issues -- like the American preoccupation with the Cold War and the postcolonial order of petrostates, and how Israel could somehow deny Arabs (especially Palestinians) any real agency in their fate. They are always treated as an irreconcilable other, to be fought and subdued, and there is nothing they can do about it, so they cycle endlessly between violence and conciliation, only to find that neither stance makes any difference. This fixed gaze saves Kaplan from having to give them any consideration.

The section on Lebanon is pivotal, as Israel shifted direction from justifiable defense to unconscionable offense. Of course, we now know that the latter was always part of the game plan, which is part of the reason we forget how brutal the shift appeared at the time. There is a passage here describing the devastation of West Beirut that will make you think of Gaza today. By that point the right-wing had taken charge in Israel, with Begin as PM, and Sharon running the war. And as the left in America (and to some ultimately fruitless extent in Israel as well) started to have misgivings, the American right embraced the Israeli right ever more firmly. The book's coverage of Christian Zionism is the most detailed I've read, and is truly scary -- in large part because it's really hard to grasp that people can actually believe such nonsense. The book then moves on to neocon militarism, and to the war on terror (with Israel as its guiding light, and "start up" profiteer).

Along the way, the focus on myth offers in-depth discussions of such cultural artifacts as the books/movies from Exodus to Schindler's List to The Late Great Planet Earth to Homeland to World War Z.

New records reviewed this week:

Daymé Arocena: Alkemi (2024, Brownswood): Afro-Cuban jazz singer, first appeared in Jane Bunnett's Cuban group Maqueque, fifth album since 2015, all on this British label. B+(*) [sp]

Carlos Bica: 11:11 (2024, Clean Feed): Bassist, from Portugal, wide range of albums from the late 1990s on (last one was Playing With Beethoven, and I didn't much care for it). This is a quartet which can run rough or refined, with José Soares (sax), Eduardo Cardinho (vibes), and Gonçalo Neto (guitar/banjo). Has a bit of vocal. B+(**) [sp]

Zach Bryan: The Great American Bar Scene (2024, Belting Bronco/Warner): Country singer-songwriter, one I've underrated in the past, and may well again, as he has a knack for making exceptional songs seem ordinary. Runs over an hour. B+(**) [sp]

Chick Corea & Béla Fleck: Remembrance (2024, Thirty Tigers): Piano and banjo duo, third album together, after The Enchantment (2007) and Two (2015). No recording date(s) given, but this "last project" (which includes audience applause) was obviously recorded before pianist's death in 2021. B [sp]

Jon De Lucia: The Brubeck Octet Project (2023 [2024], Musæum Clausum): Alto saxophonist, several albums, modeled on Dave Brubeck's early (1948-50) group, with trumpet, trombone, two more saxophones (Scott Robinson on tenor), piano (Glenn Zaleski), bass, and drums. Nice sense of group interplay. B+(***) [cd]

Divr: Is This Water (2022 [2024], We Jazz): Swiss piano-bass-drums trio (Philipp Eden, Raphael Walser, Jonas Ruther), first album. B+(*) [sp]

FUR [Hélène Duret/Benjamin Sauzereau/Maxime Rouayroux]: Bond (2023 [2024], Budapest Music Center): French-Belgian trio: clarinets, guitar, drums. Nice atmospherics B+(**) [sp]

Marshall Gilkes and WDR Big Band: Life Songs (2022 [2024], Alternate Side): Trombonist, debut 2004, often drawn to big bands (Maria Schneider, John Fedchock) and Latin (Brian Lynch), third album with the German radio orchestra. Vibrant and lush, the Sabeth Pérez vocal a plus. B+(***) [sp]

Ciara Grace: Write It Down (2024, self-released): Singer-songwriter, can't find much about her, had to look the album up by title as artist name didn't do the trick (found me a single, instead). First impression is I like her, though. [PS: Would have found out more had I gotten her name right, including a previous album from 2016.] B+(***) [sp]

The Gringo Pistoleros: The Rise and . . . Subsequent Fall of the Texas Alien (2024, self-released): Recorded in Austin, with Cory Grinder (presumably from somewhere else) just passing through, "named in homage to the great Tim Henderson" (who? Discogs lists 11 with that name, pictures 0). B+(**) [sp]

Christopher Hoffman: Vision Is the Identity (2024, Out of Your Head): Cellist, has a couple previous, core group here has keyboards (Frank LoCrasto) and drums (Bill Campbell), but four (of seven) tracks add guests: Henry Threadgill (alto sax), Ryan Scott (guitar), Anne Webber (flute), Alfredo Colón (EWI). Short (24:20). B+(*) [sp]

Johnny Blue Skies: Passage Du Desir (2024, High Top Mountain): "Metamodern" country singer-songwriter Sturgill Simpson, not sure if his name is on the cover or not but it appears everywhere the record is mentioned. B+(**) [sp]

Norah Jones: Visions (2024, Blue Note): Singer-songwriter, tends to be slotted as jazz given her record label, but little reason to read much into that. Her 2002 debut was a huge crossover hit, with US sales topping 11 million. Ninth studio album, co-wrote most songs with producer Leon Michels. B+(*) [sp]

Pat Metheny: MoonDial (2024, BMG): Popular jazz guitarist, mostly played fusion since 1975 but has occasionally ventured off the beaten path, which in recent years has included novel instruments. Here he plays baritone guitar, not technically novel, but going deep into "the instrument's nature," he finds "resonant contemplation." B+(*) [sp]

Kim Myhr & Kitchen Orchestra: Hereafter (2020 [2024], Sofa Music): Norwegian guitarist, various albums since 2005, also credited here with voice, organ, synthesizer, drum machine, and piano, with a fairly large postclassical ensemble (but no real string section). B+(*) [sp]

O.: WeirdOs (2024, Speedy Wunderground): "O. (15)" at Discogs, "jazz-fusion duo from London, UK," Joe Henwood (baritone sax) and Tash Keary (drums), first album after a single and an EP, instrumental, sort of a funk-grunge synthesis. B+(*) [sp]

Revival Season: Golden Age of Self Snitching (2024, Heavenly): Atlanta producer Jonah Swilley and rapper Brandon Evans, first album. B+(***) [sp]

Splitter Orchester: Splitter Musik (2024, Hyperdelia, 3CD): Berlin-based composer-performer collective, founded 2010, with members of ten different nationalities, fourth album, each disc a single piece (51:47, 41:36, 78:00). Sort of an ambient industrial feel. Hard to nail down much on an album this long because it's impossible to concentrate like that, but just let it go, and you may wind up suspecting there's something to it. B+(**) [sp]

Stemeseder Lillinger Quartet: Umbra II (2023 [2024], Intakt): Austrian pianist Elias Stemeseder, with German drummer Christian Lillinger, cover adds "feat. Peter Evans & Russell Hall" -- trumpet and bass. They've done this before -- not just Umbra but Penumbra and Antumbra. B+(***) [sp]

Kevin Sun: The Fate of the Tenor (2022 [2024]. Endectomorph Music): Tenor saxophonist, impressive Trio debut in 2018, has been on a roll ever since, knows his history and lore. Live set here, another trio, with Walter Stinson (bass) and Matt Honor (drums). B+(***) [sp]

Kenny Warren: Sweet World (2023 [2024], Out of Your Head): Trumpet player, based in Brooklyn, played in Slavic Soul Party, has several albums on his own, this one with cello (Christopher Hoffman) and drums (Nathan Ellman-Bell). B+(**) [sp]

Stian Westerhus & Maja S.K. Ratkje: All Losses Are Restored (2024, Crispin Glover): Norwegian guitarist and vocalist, at least established as such in careers established in the early 2000s, but credits aren't clear here, and two voices intertwine. Hard to tell how deep the story line is, as despite considerable skill I never care enough to follow. B [sp]

Wimps: City Lights (2023, Youth Riot): Punk rock trio from Seattle, fourth album since 2013, 13 songs, 26:43. B+(***) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Fingers: The Complete Fingers Remember Mingus (1979-93 [2024], Jazz in Britain, 3CD): British quintet -- Lol Coxhill (soprano/tenor sax), Bruce Turner (alto sax/clarinet), Michael Garrick (piano), Dave Green (bass), and Alan Jackson (drums) -- recorded Remember Mingus in 1979, the five tracks (plus "Softly, as in a Morning Sunrise") there doubled here for two CDs, and supplemented with later BBC shots for a third. B+(***) [bc]

Pat Smythe Quartet: New Dawn: Live 1973 (1973 [2024], British Progressive Jazz): British pianist (1923-83), probably best known for his 1960s work with Joe Harriott; quartet here features fusion guitarist Allan Holdsworth (1946-2017), with Daryl Runswick (bass) and Soft Machine drummer John Marshall. B+(***) [sp]

Old music:

Mike Cooley/Patterson Hood/Jason Isbell: Live at the Shoals Theatre (2014 [2020], Southeastern): Three singer-songwriters, all started out in the Drive-By Truckers, Isbell went solo circa 2007, Hood has a couple solos albums, Cooley just one from 2012 but gets lead billing here because the theatre seems to have been his childhood dream. B+(***) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • John Alvey: Loft Glow (Jazz Music City) [08-25]
  • Charlie Apicella & Iron City Meet the Griots Speak: Call to Action/Call to Prayer (OA2) [08-16]
  • Welf Dorr/Elias Meister/Dmitry Ishenko/Kenny Wollesen: So Far So Good (self-released)
  • Morten Duun: Code Breaker (Cmntx) [07-19]
  • Russell Haight: Go Forth (OA2) [08-16]
  • Eric Jacobson: Heading Home (Origin) [08-16]
  • Omer Leshem: Play Space (Ubuntu Music) [09-27]
  • David Liebman & the CNY Jazz Orchestra: If a White Horse From Jerusalem . . . (CNY Jazz Arts Foundation) [08-10]
  • Rosemary Loar: Vagabond Heart/Curação Vagabundo (Atlor Music) [07-18]
  • Matt Mitchell: Zealous Angles (Pi) [08-16]
  • Planet D Nonet: Echoes of Harlem: A Salute to Duke Ellington Vol. 2 (Eastlawn) [07-19]
  • Dred Scott/Moses Patrou/Tom Beckham/Matt Pavolka: Cali Mambo (Ropeadope) [09-20]
  • Piet Verbist: Flamenco Jazz Summit: El Mar Empieza Aquí (Origin) [08-16]
  • Philip Weberndoerfer: Tides (Shifting Paradigm) [08-23]
  • Miguel Zenón: Golden City (Miel Music) [08-30]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Tuesday, July 30, 2024

Speaking of Which

Opened this file on Friday, July 26, early evening. Thought I might wrap this up Monday evening, but I had a very stressful day, got bummed out, and accomplished little. Hence, this week's piece has lapsed into Tuesday, but coverage of [07-30] will be spotty, at best.

One thing I did accomplish on Monday was to write a bit of code that I'm using here, and should save me a lot of trouble in the future. As I've been writing these posts, I've often wondered how much I had written. It then occurred to me that I could measure the post using two Linux shell commands:

fgrep 'href' FILENAME | wc -l
wc -w FILENAME

The former counts links (assuming there is no more than one link per line). The latter counts words. I usually omitted the wc options, since it's easy to visually pick out the number I wanted: the default counts lines, words, and characters. My first thought was to wrap those two commands into a shell script, then run it and append the answer to the web page. Then it occurred to me that I'm already reading the file to find a few directive lines (mostly used for the title and date), so I could count links and words as I go, then add a directive to print them out at (or near) the end. (Which gives me a bit of flexible control, as opposed to just automatically appending the stats to every page -- something I still may decide to do.)

At present, the link counts match the program output, but the word counts vary somewhat. Obviously, word counts depend on how you delimit words (e.g., is a "hyphenated-word" 1 or 2 words?). I used wc just because it was easy and close enough for my purposes. The new code also takes the easy route, using the PHP str_word_count() function, which at least initially produced larger word counts (e.g., 11616 vs. 8674, so in this case +25.6%). But rather than try to tune the PHP code to better match the wc results, I thought maybe I should aim for more useful results. I knew that a lot of the text in these particular files appeared in HTML tags and comments, which never appears as words on the web page, so I tried removing them -- using a regular expression replace:

preg_replace('/<[^>]*>/', ' ', LINE)

I then called the word count function both on the edited line and on the original one -- I was curious what the effect was, and wound up printing out both totals. I also eliminated the directive lines from the word count, since like markup they do not appear in the page, and I was already separating those lines out. For the page cited above, the word counts wound up at 7996 (tags stripped) and 11616 (total). I can imagine refining this further. The most obvious thing is I'm not checking for HTML entities right now, which are few (so have little practical effect), and are rather complicated (so would require much more complex code).

I don't doubt that my programming skills have atrophied over the score-plus years since my last full-time job, but it's always a good feeling to see that I still have some.

One more new formatting tic this week. I thought I'd like to have some way to draw extra attention to articles that seem especially important. What seemed like the simplest, most intuitive way was to change the • bullet to something that would stand out more, like this -- a bright red star.

I've applied this in a few places, and probably should in a few more. (This was a very late addition to the file.) I figured I could do this with CSS, but ran across the problem that once an element was selected for the star, any child elements also inherited the star. (There's a Sarah Jones example below, which is actually pretty unusual.) I haven't found a way in CSS to prevent or stop such inheritance, so resorted to another hack to undo it.

Top story threads:

Israel:

America's Israel (and Israel's America):

Netanyahu wangled an invitation to speak to a joint session of Congress, first lining up his right-wing allies to float the invite, then giving the Democratic leadership little choice but to join in. He may be massively unpopular in Israel, but when he appears in Washington, he can preen like he owns the place, as he essentially does. And his exhibition of power over Washington helps maintain his perch in Israel, where regardless of his many faults, he is widely seen as the one guy who can force presidents to kowtow. The whole spectacle was deeply embarrassing for all concerned. So while he got the ovations he expected, his message just underscores how deeply out of touch Israel is with world opinion. Mustafa Barghouti was absolutely right: "a disgusting speech in a session of shame to the U.S. Congress."

Other stories in this nexus:

  • Michael Arria: [07-25] The Shift: Biden's legacy is genocide. Biden's withdrawal elicited "sentimental tributes," but not from those who focused on his defense and support of genocide by Israel.

  • Dexter Filkins: [07-22] Will Hezbollah and Israel go to war? That's really up to Netanyahu, who is fully able to push Hezbollah's buttons to get whatever level of back-and-forth he wants -- thus far, enough to provide cover for the real wars against Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank, and to keep the Americans in line with their depiction of Iran the puppet master on many fronts. As last week showed, escalating the bombing of Lebanon is easy within those parameters. Launching a real ground war isn't so easy, with little to gain and a fair amount to lose.

  • Nicole Narea: [07-25] What Kamala Harris really thinks about Israel and Gaza: "Biden's approach to the war in Gaza has been divisive. Would Haris chart a new path?" I have a whole section for Harris, where I'll slot pieces on every other aspect of her campaign and politics, but for now I'd rather compartmentalize and keep her Israel stuff here, as a subset of the Washington-based group-think that lets American politicians and their cronies avoid having to think or care about the issue. I don't think anyone really knows what she thinks here, because the position she's in doesn't allow thinking, or doing for that matter.

    Maybe when she is president, she will be in a position to do, and therefore will need to think. But right now, all she really has to do is to avoid the pitfalls being laid out for her. (Having to meet with Netanyahu is just one such pitfall.) I'm not unsympathetic to people who regard Israel (or at least Gaza) as the biggest political issue of the moment, but through the election, I think they/we should give her a pass. I'm pretty sure that she's no worse than Biden, and undoubtedly a lot better than Trump. You don't have to endorse her (at least for this). You can even rag on Genocide Joe if you want. But this is just speculation, and probably not helpful at all. Of course, once she's elected, the gloves can come off. My hope, and that's really all it is, is that she'll listen better than Biden, and act more decisively. The time to talk specifically to her is when she's ready to listen and act.

  • Kelley Beaucar Vlahos: {07-24] Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel': "Video surfaces showing the Palantir tech giant strugglig to answer questions about client's use of AI-generated kill lists."

  • Brett Wilkins: [07-24] Ben-Gvir endorses Trump, says he's more likely to back war on Iran: "The Israeli security minister, who leads the far-right Jewish Power party, accused the Biden administration of thwarting Israel's victory against Hamas."

Israel vs. world opinion:

Election notes:

Trump:

Vance:

Trump's running mate, a Republican Senator from Ohio, one thing you can say for him is that he's gotten more press attention than any VP candidate since Sarah Palin, and probably more, since he's not just a turbocharged gaffe machine but has a more philosophical side that is also easy to chew over. I'm pretty sure that had Trump picked Doug Burgum or Elise Stefanik, this phase would be done by now.

  • Karyn Amira: [07-29] JD Vance's selection as Trump's running mate marks the end of Republican conservatism. Problem here is the author's definition of conservatism: "a philosophy that supports smaller and less-centralized government because consolidated power could be used to silence political competition and deny citizens their liberties." That's almost exactly wrong: conservatives believe in order defined by their preferred hierarchy, which is necessarily enforced by power in a state that they seek to control. That's precisely what Trump and Vance believe in.

    On the other hand, Amira's definition actually describes an obsolete version of liberalism, which has been cynically used by conservatives to oppose the modern democratic state. From the progressives in the early 1900s through the New Deal and Great Society, liberals came to realize that laissez-faire capitalism had ceased to expand "liberty and justice for all," and if left unchecked would revert to a new version of feudal aristocracy. So they came up with a very successful alternative, where the state, embodying the will of the popular majority, would organize and regulate countervailing institutions, their powers limited and regulated in the public interest.

    Needless to say, the would-be lords of neofeudal capitalism hated this, and fought to preserve and extend their superiority with every trick they could muster -- including adopting the time-tested rhetoric of classical liberalism, but redirected against the democratic state -- which they characterized not just as a revival of pharoahs and czars but as something more impersonal and nefarious, as totalitarianism -- and really against the people it represented.

    But while "small government" may have been useful rhetoric when the government was held by people conservatives reviled, have you ever seen conservatives once they control the state reduce its size and power? You might point to deregulation, but that's effectively a transfer of power from public to private hands. Similarly, tax cuts and credits are transfers of money from public to private hands. By debilitating public interest functions, conservatives seek to discredit the state as a means by which the people can help themselves. Conservatives may see the state, in the wrong hands, as a repressive force, but given power, they eagerly use that force for their own ends, especially against the people they see as enemies, which is most of us.

    Trump and Vance aren't the end of Republican conservatism. They're more like its apotheosis, grown powerful and arrogant enough they can quit pretending they're doing anyone any favors but themselves. Maybe they mark some kind of denouement for conservative naïveté, but few real world conservatives were ever so deluded.

  • Maureen Dowd: [07-27] JD Vance, purr-fectly dreadful.

  • Elizabeth Dwoskin/Cat Zakrzewski/Nitasha Tiku/Josh Dawsey: [07-28] Inside the powerful Peter Thiel network that anointed JD Vance: "A small influential network of right-wing techies orchestrated Vance's rise in Silicon Valley -- and then the GOP. Now the industry stands to gain if he wins the White House." There hasn't been a VP pick this explicitly tied to donor choice since the Koch Network (uh, Mitt Romney) picked Paul Ryan in 2012. And while Republicans are more likely to brag about their corruption, what are the odds that Harris's VP pick will be traceable to another megadonor? (I mean, beyond the default conspiracist pick: George Soros?)

  • Paul Elie: [07-24] J.D. Vance's radical religion.

  • Rebecca Jennings: [07-25] J.D. Vance didn't have sex with a couch. But he's still extremely weird. "The rumors were easy to believe, especially when the potential VP has such terrible ideas about sex."

  • Sarah Jones: [07-26] Dear J.D. Vance, childless cat ladies are people too. Emphasis added:

    "Normal people" see this bleak prospect for what it is, and they have rejected it repeatedly in the voting booth. That probably won't change. Vance's comments are weird, cruel, and, yes, creepy. They don't reflect the way most people think or live, even if they do have biological children. By attacking childlessness, the right cheapens parenthood, too. The act of having children is no longer about joy but conquest. I can't imagine anything sadder, though I am but a childless cat lady. Vance's worldview is poisonous to parents and children, too: Babies should be loved and wanted for their own sake, not because they're future nationalists or tradwives. The right offers a small and selfish vision that is authoritarian to its core. Their America belongs only to the righteous few, but my America belongs to everyone. I may never give birth, but I too have a stake in this country. We're all responsible for creating a future worth living in. It will belong to somebody's children, if not to ours.

    By the way, Jones also wrote:

    • [07-23] A woman can win, which probably belongs with the Harris articles, but is more about how Hillary Clinton's didn't win, and the precedent that doesn't really set.

    • [07-30] American freak show. I've thought of myself as weird much of my life, so I've learned to flip the insult and see weirdness as a more interesting attribute. And that's just one of many pejoratives that I've been prodded into reconsidering based on my experiences with the people they are and are not applied to. For instance, people who call themselves "patriots" because they support wars and who call people who don't support those wars "traitors" not only have a very shabby vocabulary, they're also, in my mind at least, making "patriots" appear to be horrible people, and "traitors" to be fundamentally decent ones. So I was initially reluctant to jump on the bandwagon that labels Trump, Vance, et al. as "weird." (I see Tim Walz getting credit here, but Seth Myers has been leaning in to this line of attack for several years now.) It just feels to me like we need some qualification, like in the song: "well I hear he's bad/ hmm, he's good-bad, but he's not evil." Surely, lots of people are simply "good-weird," but Trump and Vance are venturing into real "weird-evil" territory.

      Any formerly weird child can attest to how difficult it is to shrug off this label. What are you going to do, put your fingers in your ears and chant "I'm not weird, you're weird" until somebody eventually believes you? I was a little awkward in my day, and I know that's not how things work. You can refute the attack only by not being weird -- an idea that seems to elude many conservatives. They've left themselves few options. To address the attack, the bizarre right would have to reconstitute an entire movement, and that will take time and political will. Both are in short supply. Go on, then, and call the right weird, as long as it's part of a bigger argument. Progress ought to be normal, and it's worth fighting for, too.

      But I'm starting to appreciate the advantages of flipping scripts like this. And when you think about it, there's a lot of not just weird but very bizarre thought going on with the far-right these days. I mean, I'm 73, and my thinking has evolved a lot over the years, but I can still remember things that I learned as norms and rules when I was a child, like the 10 Commandments, the 7 Deadly Sins, the Boy Scouts' 12 laws, the Golden Rule, the maxim that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and strategic bits of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, and much more that I never really rejected even though I eventually disposed of most of the dross and cant they were wrapped up in. And because I can remember, and still largely respect, those norms and rules, it's really easy to see just how far many right-wingers have strayed from principles they claim as exclusively their own, and how ridiculous they look when they do. In some ways, calling them "weird" is the kindest way you can point that out. Their weirdness may even be their one saving grace. It certainly won't be in their Project 2025.

  • Ezra Klein: [07-17] The economic theory behind J.D. Vance's populism: Interview with Oren Cass, who was Mitt Romney's domestic policy director in 2012, who since "evolved" and founded American Compass, a think tank catering to "populist" Republicans.

  • Paul Krugman:

  • Bradley Onishi: [07-27] J.D. Vance will be a more extremist Christian VP than Mike Pence: "The vice presidential pick's Catholicism hasn't received a lot of attention, but it's the key to the populist radicalism he wants to impose on America."

  • Andrew Prokop: [07-25] J.D. Vance has made it impossible for Trump to run away from Project 2025: "He wrote the forward for a new book by Project 2025's architect -- and has backed some of its most extreme ideas." The book is Kevin D Roberts: Dawn's Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America, coming out on Sept. 24.

  • Corey Robin: [07-26] Like a diary, only far more masculine: Reading J.D. Vance's, from his blog days.

  • Robert Schlesinger: [07-29] J.D. Vance proves it: Trump hires the very worst people: Trump's new running mate will haunt him just like all of the fools and weasels from his first administration."

  • Alex Shephard: [07-26] Is J.D. Vance the worst vice presidential pick ever? Fair question, unless you know much about American history, in which case it's way too early to tell. It also depends on what you mean by "worst." John Tyler and Andrew Johnson probably helped their tickets win, but were really terrible presidents. Some others that didn't become president were also pretty notoriously bad, like Aaron Burr and John Calhoun (two terms, under two presidents who were polar opposites in every aspect except for their loathing of Calhoun). Then there was Spiro Agnew, the only VP ever forced to resign. And what about Dick Cheney? If memory serves, the only VP ever to finish his term with a single-digit approval index. Then there are the ones who never won anything. They tend to be easily forgotten, but tag reads "Palin Lite," in case you want a hint. So with competition like that, Vance hardly has a chance. But it's early days, and at least he's in the running.

  • Ed Simon: [07-17] J.D. Vance keeps selling his soul. He's got plenty of buyers.

    Mr. Vance is more a product of the Upper West Side and New Haven, Capitol Hill and Cambridge, than of the Appalachian hollers. "Hillbilly Elegy" owed much of its critical and commercial success to how it flattered its audience about their own meritocratic superiority over the people whom Mr. Vance was supposedly championing, and reaffirming some of the most pernicious stereotypes about the residents of Appalachia. "What separates the successful from the unsuccessful are the expectations that they had for their own lives," Mr. Vance wrote. In his telling, those who fell into poverty, unemployment or substance abuse hadn't dreamed big enough.

    He points to whole books written about Vance's book, like:

  • Matt Stieb: [07-27] J.D. Vance can't stop saying the dumbest things imaginable.

And other Republicans:

  • Emily Bazelon: [07-27] The right-wing dream of 'self-deportation': "Some conservatives have a grim proposal to make undocumented immigrants leave: exclude their children from schools." I hadn't heard of "self-deportation" until Mitt Romney adopted it as his anti-immigration platform in 2012. It is quite the euphemism. It basically means systematically treating immigrants (and, to be sure, anyone who looks or sounds like an immigrant) so cruelly they resign themselves to leaving on their own. Or it could just as well drive them to turn to crime, which expedites the regular deportation process.

  • Jenny Brown: [07-27] Project 2025's anti-union game plan.

    From there, the plan is to bulldoze the protections US workers have built up over one hundred years of determination, sacrifice, and unity.

    It's ugly: abolish overtime pay laws, outlaw public sector unions entirely, get rid of health and safety protections, eliminate the federal minimum wage, make it harder to receive unemployment, and put children back to work like in the 1920s.

    Hitting building trades workers, they would get rid of requirements for prevailing wage pay and project labor agreements in federal projects.

    There's more. They want to get rid of the Department of Education. Ban teaching women's history and African American history in schools -- lest we get ideas about how to change things! Ban abortion nationwide. (The AFL-CIO details the whole alarming list here.)

  • Patrick T Brown: [07-19] Pro-lifers helped bring Trump to power. Why has he abandoned us? Because you're losers? You don't think he ever actually cared about you, did you?

  • Thomas B Edsall: [07-24] What the Trump-Vance alliance means for the Republican Party. One thing that occurs to me here is that the more Republicans like Vance talk about supporting American workers, the more ground that opens up for Democrats to appeal to same, only with more realistic programs and greater credibility. It encourages them to lean left, rather than crawl scared toward the right (like so many have been doing since Reagan).

  • Jack Herrera: [07-28] Trump says he wants to deport millions. He'll have a hard time removing more people than Biden has. "Even as Trump slams the president for open borders, the Biden-Harris administration has kicked out far more immigrants than Trump ever managed."

  • Hassan Alu Kanu: [07-29] DEI and the GOP: "Hey Republicans, your racism is showing."

  • Julius Krein: [07-23] Republican populists are responding to something real. One could argue that -- although Krein isn't very clear here -- but not that they're offering realistic responses to real problems.

  • Robert Kuttner: [07-30] The left's fragile foundations: "Could a weaponized Trump IRS wreck the progressive infrastructure by attacking the entire nonprofit ecosystem?" This is a big and important article. "Defund the left" has long been a major Republican goal. One small bit:

    These vulnerabilities remain in place today. It has long galled the right that Planned Parenthood is a major recipient of government funds; of its budget of over $2 billion, about $700 million comes from government health service reimbursements and grants. While the Hyde Amendment prohibits federal funding of abortion, 17 states allow Medicaid funding of abortion through their state contributions to the mixed federal-state program. In addition, Planned Parenthood is a major recipient of federal Title X family-planning support of its clinics. As right-wing groups keep complaining, money is fungible and federal family-planning funds free other money to pay for abortions. Under Trump, the government did bar Planned Parenthood from the Title X program in 2019, but this was restored by Biden in 2021.

    The battle to defund the left would be far more sophisticated under a second Trump administration. The Heritage Foundation's detailed blueprint, Project 2025, systematically targets the entire range of agencies, and one of its tactics is to undermine agencies that help progressive organizations such as the NLRB and numerous others. With a second Trump presidency, the right's war against Planned Parenthood will only intensify.

  • Michael Lind: [07-20] Trump's transformation of the Republican Party is complete.

  • Calder McHugh: [07-27] Republicans keep trying to copy Trump's humor -- and voters keep cringing. Perhaps the material never was funny in the first place -- just the buffoon delivering it?

  • Pamela Paul: [07-25] The Republican Party's elite conundrum: Let me condense this a bit (all her words, but with less wandering):

    Donald Trump loves to show off how smart he is. [But] Trump is shrewd enough to know that Americans don't like a guy who acts smart. So if his fumbles are strategic, it's not entirely dumb. In MAGA world, glorified ignorance actually serves as a qualification for higher office, empowering more effective rage against 'the liberal elite' and 'the ruling class.' This puts those Republican politicians saddled with inconvenient Ivy League degrees in an awkward position, like the guy who shows up in a tux for a rodeo wedding. In order to say in office and on message, they must reject the very thing that propelled their own careers. After all, the Republican Party has turned ignorance into a point of pride.

    Of course, this is ultimately about Ron DeSantis (Yale, Harvard Law), Ted Cruz (Princeton, Harvard Law), Josh Hawley (Stanford, Yale Law), Tom Cotton (Harvard, Harvard), and now J.D. Vance (Ohio State, but finally Yale Law).

  • Charles P Pierce:

  • Tessa Stuart: [07-25] Trump allies sure are talking a lot about civil war: "The former president's supporters keep raising the idea there's violent conflict in America's future." When lies don't suffice, Republicans will try extortion: vote for us, or we'll [insert threat here, ranging from shut down the government to killing you].

Harris:

Biden:

  • Dean Baker:

    • [07-22] A tribute to President Biden.

    • [07-18] Adjusting the Washington Post's Biden-Trump scorecard.

    • [07-26] Bloomberg says things are almost as bad as 2019, when Trump was in the White House: "Seriously, they probably don't want readers to walk away with that impression, but that is the implication of the piece they did complaining about people working multiple jobs."

    • [07-29] The biggest success story the country doesn't know about: "Yes, inflation has been punishing. But there is a mountain of good news that media have barely reported. Here's the real record the Democrats can run on."

      Under Biden, the United States made a remarkable recovery from the pandemic recession. We have seen the longest run of below 4.0 percent unemployment in more than 70 years, even surpassing the long stretch during the 1960s boom. This period of low unemployment has led to rapid real wage growth at the lower end of the wage distribution, reversing much of the rise in wage inequality we have seen in the last four decades. It has been especially beneficial to the most disadvantaged groups in the labor market.

      The burst of inflation that accompanied this growth was mostly an outcome of the pandemic and the invasion of Ukraine. All other wealthy countries saw comparable rises in inflation. As of summer 2024, the rate of inflation in the United States has fallen back almost to the Fed's 2.0 percent target. Meanwhile, our growth has far surpassed that of our peers.

      Furthermore, the Biden administration really does deserve credit for this extraordinary boom. Much of what happens under a president's watch is beyond their control. However, the economic turnaround following the pandemic can be directly traced to Biden's recovery package, along with his infrastructure bill, the CHIPS Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act, all of which have sustained growth even as the impact of the initial recovery package faded. While the CARES Act, pushed through when Trump was in office, provided essential support during the shutdown period, it was not sufficient to push through the recovery.

      One should also use every opportunity to stress that the CARES Act, at least everything that was good in it, was the result of leverage Democrats in Congress had. With the economy in free fall, Trump wanted something to save the stock market. That the act also helped unemployed workers, collapsing small businesses, and helped many stave off debt collection, was because Trump had to deal with Pelosi and Schumer. Without their help, Trump's own dismal record would have been that much worse.

  • Zachary D Carter: [07-24] You have no idea what Joe Biden for employment.

  • Elie Honig: [07-26] Let's knock off the 25th amendment talk.

  • Kerry Howley: [07-27] Exit ghost: "Watching Joe Biden say good-bye."

  • Umair Irfan: [07-23] Joe Biden's enormous, contradictory, and fragile climate legacy: "If elected, Trump could slow down Biden's progress, but the shift to clean energy is unstoppable."

  • Branko Marcetic:

    • [07-22] Joe Biden wanted this. This is a left view, but seems fair:

      There is a tendency, even among the Left, to overstate the extent of Biden's populism. This is, after all, a president who nickel-and-dimed Georgia voters on the $2,000 checks he had pledged, quickly abandoned his promise of a $15 minimum-wage increase that might have helped voters weather inflation, and refused to fight to keep transformative pandemic-era policies like Medicaid expansion and expanded unemployment insurance. However ambitious his Build Back Better legislation was, we sometimes talk about it as if it had actually become law, when the reality is it died -- and did so in large part because Biden considered getting a handshake with Republicans a higher priority.

      That his presidency became the unlikely vehicle for progressive economic populism tells us less about Biden himself than the state of the Left: a Left that, however disorganized and defeated, succeeded in dragging someone like Biden into adopting even a watered-down version of its political program. It did so not just through political pressure, but by changing the political landscape to such an extent that a man who had spent his life tacking right in the chase for political power came to realize there was a popular constituency for a left-populist agenda, and that it was worth his while politically, crucial to his legacy even, to give pursuing such a thing an honest-to-God shot.

    • [07-25] How Joe Biden became a steadfast Israel defender.

  • Nicole Narea: [07-24] So what does Joe Biden do now? "In an Oval Office speech, Biden said his farewells. But his job isn't done yet."

  • Noah Rawlings: [07-29] Build no small things: "A sampling of innovative projects made possible by the Biden legislative wins."

And other Democrats:

  • Lee Drutman: [07-28] The Democratic Party is (still) broken: "The sudden ascendance of Kamala Harris doesn't change the fact that the party suffers from deep, possibly fatal problems." I'm not sure how useful this analysis is. I don't doubt that the Democratic Party has structural problems, tied mostly to the need to raise huge amounts of money from interest groups that want favors not solutions, and the double standards that blame Democrats for all problems while excusing Republicans. But the Democrats do have one big advantage: in a two-party system, they're the only ones who are sane and conscientious and actually care about people, which should give them some advantages, wouldn't you think? However, the author seems to be wedded to a fantasy idea, explained in his book Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America.

  • Lulu Garcia-Navarro: [07-27] The Interview: Pete Buttigieg thinks the Trump fever could break.

  • Michael Podhorzer: [07-24] Democrats are poised to win. But only if they make the election about Trump. As I've been saying, all along.

  • Michael Tomasky: [07-25] The race the Democrats need to run now: "How the party can reshape this election so it isn't about Donald Trump's martyrdom." I dunno. I mean, there's something to be said for martyring Donald Trump. It's not that I don't think this has a place:

    That's all the more reason for Harris to make the race a contest between not only two people but two ideas of America, two extremely different visions of what the federal government can and will do to protect the rights of all Americans, especially vulnerable ones. That means talking about Trump's plans. But just as importantly, it means trying to make voters understand that the presidency is much larger than one person. It's an army of people with a set of beliefs who either will or will not protect abortion rights, defend workers' interests, insist upon the basic human dignity of migrants, fight for the human and civil rights of LGBTQ people, continue the fight against the effects of climate change, uphold civil liberties, and respect the principles of democracy.

    But anything that gets people to turn on Trump is fine with me.

Legal matters and other crimes:

Climate and environment:

In some ways, just another mid-summer week, but one with four days topping all-time heat records, and 104 (at least that's one count) active wildfires in the US.

Economic matters:

  • Jake Johnson: [07-25] Global 1% captured $42 trillion in new wealth over past decade.

  • Jean Yi: [07-24] The great telemarketing scam behind pro-police PACs. Before we got a phone system that announces caller IDs, we were plagued with 2-5 phone calls per week trying to shake us down for donations to help out our poor police. We probably still are, but simply don't answer any calls we don't recognize and welcome. We always figured these calls as scams, but this article makes it all much more clear. If any politicians wanted to do something that would immediately better the lives of most Americans, they would come up with a legal framework to destroy the entire telemarketing industry (and hopefully take junk texts and emails with it -- for now at least, I'm ok with advertisers buying stamps, which at least helps fund the post office, even though most of our mail goes straight to recycle).

Ukraine War and Russia:

America's empire and the world:

Other stories:

Obituaries

Books

Music (and other arts?)

Chatter

  • Dean Baker: [07-30] [in response to: X has SUSPENDED the White Dudes for Harris account (@dudes4harris) after it raised more than $4M for Kamala Harris.] Musk is using his control of X to make in-kind contributions to Trump in lieu of his pledge to contribute $45 million a month to a Trump super Pac

  • Ramesh Ponnuru: [07-31] Trump policing who's really black and who's a good Jew in the same week.

Local tags (these can be linked to directly): Netanyahu's speech, music.

Original count: 259 links, 11258 words (15482 total)

Current count: 264 links, 11362 words (15656 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Thursday, July 25, 2024

Music Week

July archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 42703 [42668] rated (+35), 23 [15] unrated (+8).

[07-26]: The Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll is public now. ArtsFuse has published my essay, Diversity Brings Riches: A Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll, which includes the leader board (top 50 New Releases, top 20 Rara Avis). I've unlocked the complete results on my jazzpoll website:

ArtsFuse has a comment facility. Thus far I've seen one comment, and tried replying to it. I'm tracking these comments in my notebook. I'm hoping they'll give me some fodder for my FAQ file. You can also query or comment direct to me.

Later today I'll send out a notice to the Jazzpoll mailing list: the usual links, of course, but also an appeal for voters to do some publicity of their own, possibly writing pieces about what they've learned from poll. I'm also looking ahead to the end-of-year poll. This has been a valuable practice run for what could be a much more ambitious task.

One thing I would like to do between now and then is to redesign the website to make it into a better integrated whole. This might wind up with putting all of the data into a single multi-year database, so we can track voters, artists, etc., over multiple years. I'm also curious about more statistical analysis. But even before that, we have to identify the missing pieces, and the questions they raise. If you are interested and willing to do some work, you can figure out how to get in touch.

By the way, according to my tracking file, I have rated 633 albums so far this year, of which 427 (67.4%) are jazz. So I'm not doing a very good job of easing into retirement.

I'm slowly decompressing after deep burial in the work of running my Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll. The website is up, but the results won't be public until ArtsFuse publishes my introductory essay -- which I turned in on Tuesday, so it shouldn't be much longer. After some initial panic, I finally counted 90 ballots, which is a bit more than half of the 159 ballots we received for the 2023 Poll. A couple dozen more invitees wrote back with apologies, mostly due to the very limited voting period I allowed and other demands on their time, but several just didn't like the idea (while expressing an interest in year-end voting -- I know of other critics who just don't like the idea of polls and lists in general, but they had taken themselves off my mailing list).

Voters were asked to vote for up to 10 "new releases" (first releases of new music recorded no earlier than 2014) and up to 5 "rara avis" (reissues or newly released music from 2013 or earlier). The 90 critics voted for 366 "new releases" and 109 "rara avis" albums. If memory serves, 3 albums got votes in both, and 3 more received one vote in the wrong time frame, so the total number of albums that received votes was 472, which is 5.24 per voter. I'd hazard a guess that about half of those records got 1 vote each. Also, at least half of them weren't in my tracking file before the poll, so were new to me. I've added them all now, and over the last 3-4 weeks I've listened to a lot of jazz I wasn't previously aware of (including all 5 A- records this week, and most of the high B+ records too).

As I've probably mentioned, I find lists most useful as a means for checking what I do and do not know. Donald Rumsfeld once made the distinction between "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns." Well, I keep the former are on a list as such, leaving only the latter as still unaccounted-for unknowns. So, thanks to the last few weeks, I now know much more about what I don't know. When the results are published, so can you.

As part of this exercise, I went ahead and prematurely compiled a Best Jazz Albums of 2024 file. (I didn't bother compiling the companion Best Non-Jazz list, because I didn't need it, and didn't want to bite off the extra work, least of all in maintenance -- indeed, I may not maintain the Jazz file until the need arises come November.) The most notable thing here is that the A-list has already reached 60 albums, whereas for recent full years, it has never grown beyond 87 albums. I can imagine three possible explanations for this bounty: this is a really great year for new jazz; I'm much better informed this year than ever before; and/or I'm growing soft and addled in my old age. Still, I've retained enough wits to discriminate between these 60 A/A- albums and 108 with B+(***) grades, and another 193 with lower grades. (Let's see: in 2023, that split was 85 A/A-, 225 B+(***), 532 lower, so comparing this year so far to last gives us: 70.5%, 48.0%, 36.2%.) So, sure, that's skewed pretty significantly. But I can't think of anything to do about it. The grading scale was never conceived of as a curve, and it's too late to change much now.

While working on the essay, I slowly pieced together a Speaking of Which, which wound up straddling the Republican Convention, Biden's withdrawal, and Kamala Harris's clinching of the Democratic nomination. The domestic politics did at least take my mind away from the international situation, which as far as I can tell is still very much out there -- especially the atrocities in and around Israel. One story I avoided was Netanyahu's speech to Congress. I thought the most telling moment there was when Biden praised and gave thanks to Joe Biden, and Republicans stood and applauded. Of course, it wasn't Biden they were applauding. Nor were they really showing how supplicant they are to Netanyahu (although they clearly are). They mostly relished how Netanyahu's embrace disgraced Biden and his administration. As I've noted many times before, the only time Republicans are up for a "bipartisan" deal is when they see it as a wedge between the Democratic leaders and their base. All of Washington may be in thrall to Israel, but it's not a good look for the self-anointed leaders of the free world.

Of course, I didn't really finish with last week, so next week's Speaking of Which will start as soon as this Music Week posts. And as I'm unlikely to be done on Sunday, next Music Week should again be delayed -- perhaps enough to give me most of a week (as long as I wrap up before the end of July, I'll be happy.) After that, I hope to slow down a bit, and take stock. I have lots of projects to work on around the house. I have some doctor stuff on tap. I also have a new website to think about. And I need to rethink the whole writing life. Besides, August is usually pretty miserable here in Wichita.

Meanwhile, a couple mid-year lists to check out:

New records reviewed this week:

أحمد [Ahmed]: Giant Beauty (2022 [2024], Fönstret, 5CD): Five more shows, each on its own disc each a single piece 44:15-49:40 long, from five consecutive nights in Stockholm (August 10-14, so after the April 2 Glasgow date on Wood Blues). Too intense to play straight through, possibly redundant if you're satisfied with Wood Blues, but something where you can just pick a disc at random when the mood strikes. A- [sp]

Alliance [Sharel Cassity/Colleen Clark]: Alliance (2024, Shifting Paradigm): Supposedly a group name, but two of the four women pictured on the cover are named in smaller print at the bottom: Cassity plays flute and alto/soprano sax, Clark drums, along with Hannah Meyer (piano) and Carmani Edwards (bass). A very sprightly hard bop outing. B+(**) [sp]

Beholder Quartet: Suspension of Disbelief (2024, Sachimay): Streaming sources list this as Beholder Trio, but cover says Quartet, as does a previous album -- a still earlier trio is simply credited to Beholder. Group of Dan DeChellis (piano), John Philip Tomasic (guitar), Jeffrey Slater (electric bass), and Zach Martin (drums). DeChellis has albums back to 1998, including a 1999 trio with Tomasic, and a later series of albums with avant saxophonist Gary Hassay. Very interesting album, even in the slow spots. A- [sp]

Oddgeir Berg Trio: A Place Called Home (2024, Ozella): Norwegian pianist, home is the island of Rolla, which is pretty far north, fifth trio album since 2018, with Audun Ramo (bass) and Lars Berntsen (drums). B+(*) [sp]

Isaiah Collier & the Chosen Few: The Almighty (2023 [2024], Division 81): Saxophonist, from Chicago, group is a quartet with piano-bass-drums, but aims higher, starting off with a gospelized Dee Alexander vocal, then a spiritual spot for Ari Brown. Three more tracks: more yearning, more vocals, more rafters-raising saxophone. B+(**) [sp]

Nick Dunston: Colla Voce (2022 [2024], Out of Your Head): Bassist, fifth album since 2019, also credit for "post-processing," on what is billed as "a warped narrative of sorts, hurtling from acoustic universe to electric universe, string to scream, raw to produced, New York to Berlin, and real to surreal." The strings and voices give it an air of opera, but very warped indeed, and I'd add, saved by the drums. B+(**) [cd]

Isabelle Duthoit & Franz Hautzinger: Dans le Morvan (2021 [2024], Relative Pitch): French clarinetist, also credited for voice (which is more like audible breathing), in a duo with the Austrian playing quarter tone trumpet. Second duo album, very sketchy. B+(*) [sp]

Nick Finzer: Legacy: A Centennial Celebration of JJ Johnson (2024, Outside In Music): Trombonist, eighth album since 2012, quartet with Renee Rosnes (piano), Rufus Reid (bass), and Lewis Nash (drums), all veterans of Johnson's 1980-90s groups. B+(***) [sp]

Gregory Groover Jr.: Lovabye (2023 [2024], Criss Cross): Tenor saxophonist, from Boston, name sounds like a smooth jazz alias (well, maybe not as much as Euge Groove), but he studied and teaches at Berklee, has his debut on a mainstream label, and lined up a batch of stars for backing: Joel Ross (vibes), Aaron Parks (piano), Vicente Archer (bass), Marcus Gilmore (drums) and Matthew Stevens (guitar on 3 tracks). B+(**) [sp]

Giovanni Guidi: A New Day (2023 [2024], ECM): Italian pianist, about a dozen albums since 2007, quartet here with James Brandon Lewis (tenor sax), Thomas Morgan (bass), and João Lobo (drums). He plays nicely, nowhere close to challenging his guest star, who nonetheless reveals that he'll probably make a great ballad album some day. B+(**) [sp]

Jo Harrop: The Path of a Tear (2024, Lateralize): British singer-songwriter, slotted jazz but not necessarily so, third album, has a nice feel and touch, and songs. B+(***) [sp]

Xaver Hellmeier: X-Man in New York (2022 [2023], Cellar Music): German drummer, based in Munich, but went to New York to study with Joe Farnsworth, which set him up for a first album recorded in Van Gelder Studios with what must be his dream band: Jeremy Pelt (trumpet), Eric Alexander (tenor sax), David Hazeltine (piano), and Peter Washington (bass). I've long admired that group (and Farnsworth), but it's been a while since they've put their skills to such inspired use. A- [sp]

اسم ISM [Pat Thomas/Joel Grip/Antonin Gerbal]: Maua (2022 [2024], 577): London-based piano-bass-drums trio, at least one previous album, they also form the core of the quartet known as [Ahmed]. Two pieces, the 41:15 title track, plus a 6:22 extra, with a very nice Bösendorfer grand that may have slowed the group down a bit, just to relish the sound. Title means "flowers" in Swahili. Not as dramatic as the [Ahmed] albums, but this should help Thomas get recognition as one of jazz's top-tier pianists. A- [dl]

Tobias Klein/Frank Rosaly/Maria Warelis: Tendresse (2022 [2024], Relative Pitch): Bass/contrabass clarinetist, originally from Germany (Saarbrücken), based in Netherlands, not much as leader but side credits since 1997 (most often in the group Spinifex). Backed here with drums and piano. B+(**) [sp]

Christian McBride/Edgar Meyer: But Who's Gonna Play the Melody? (2024, Mack Avenue): Bass duo, with each musician switching to piano for two tracks. McBride is probably the most famous jazz bassist of his generation, but I had to look Meyer up: 12 years older, from Tennessee, has a distinguished career in classical music, but also ventures into bluegrass with Mark O'Connor, Béla Fleck, and Chris Thile. Often engaging, but kind of self-limiting. B+(*) [sp]

The New Wonders: Steppin' Out (2024, Turtle Bay): Trad jazz septet, led by Mike Davis, who plays cornet, sings, and composed or arranged everything. Second album. B+(***) [sp]

Carlos Niño & Friends: Placenta (2022-23 [2024], |International Anthem): Based in Los Angeles, "an internationally celebrated producer, arranger, composer, musician, radio host, DJ, music consultant, writer, poet, and event organizer," "involved in the production of more than 100 records," although the only groups I recognize are Build an Ark and Hu Vibrational, and they're both a tad obscure. Fourth group album on this label -- Discogs shows earlier ones back to 2009 -- a sprawling (77:07) jumble of synths, flute (André 3000), horns, rhythm, voices. B [sp]

Omawi [Marta Warelis/Onno Govaert/Wilbert De Joode]: Waive (2023, Relative Pitch): Piano-drums-bass trio, fairly abstract in an intimate framework. B+(**) [sp]

Hery Paz: River Creatures (2023 [2024], Porta Jazz): Tenor saxophonist, from Cuba, second album, trio with Nate Wooley (trumpet) and Tom Rainey (drums). B+(***) [sp]

Frank Paul Schubert/Michel Pilz/Stefan Scheib/Klaus Kugel: Live at FreeJazz Saar 2019 (2019 [2024], Nemu): German free jazz saxophonist (alto/soprano), a couple dozen albums since 2005, here in a group with bass clarinet, bass, and drums, joint improv on a piece called "Where Is Charles?" -- no answer or further explanation offered, not that any is needed. B+(***) [cd]

SML: Small Medium Large (2022-23 [2024], International Anthem): Quintet of Anna Butterss (electric bass), Jeremiah Chiu (synths), Josh Johnson (sax/electronics), Booker Stardrum (drums), and Gregory Uhlmann (guitar), pieced this together from four sets of improv, with an ear toward finding an irresistible groove. B+(***) [sp]

Space: Embrace the Space (2024, Relative Pitch): Swedish piano-bass-drums trio, Lisa Ullén, Elsa Bergman, and Anna Lund. Second album, improv pieces, pretty tight. B+(***) [sp]

Natsuki Tamura/Satoko Fujii: Aloft (2023 [2024], Libra): Trumpet and piano duo, husband and wife, many records together (mostly in larger groups, all the way to big bands), but this is the basic mix, and very striking when they grab your attention. B+(***) [cd]

Terton [Louie Belogenis/Trevor Dunn/Ryan Sawyer]: Outer, Inner, Secret (2023 [2024], Tzadik): Tenor/soprano sax, bass, drums trio. B+(***) [sp]

Marta Warelis/Andy Moor: Escape (2022 [2024], Relative Pitch): Polish pianist, has been making the rounds since 2017, here a duo with one of the Ex guitarists. B+(**) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Cannonball Adderley: Burnin' in Bordeaux: Live in France 1969 (1969 [2024], Elemental Music): Alto saxophonist, a hard bopper who actually scored some crossover r&b hits, probably did his best work in the late 1950s, but had a strong series of albums with Riverside in the early 1960s, more mixed results later on with Capitol, before he died at 46 in 1975. So this is rather late in his career, a quintet with his brother Nate Adderley on trumpet, Joe Zawinul on keyboards, Victor Gaskin on bass, and Roy McCurdy on drums. A solid but not exceptional set, in a very nice package. B+(**) [cd]

Cannonball Adderley: Poppin' in Paris: Live at L'Olympia 1972 (1972 [2024], Elemental Music): A bit later, after Joe Zawinul left for Weather Report, with George Duke adding some funk on keyboads, Walter Booker the new bassist, Ray McCurdy back on drums, and brother Nat the stand out on cornet. B+(***) [cd]

Atrás del Cosmos: Cold Drinks, Hot Dreams (1980 [2024], Blank Forms Editions): Reportedly the first free jazz group to come out of Mexico, but not much known about they: this reissue is their only album in Discogs (which doesn't have the original), nor is there much evidence of members Ana Ruíz (piano), Henry West (sax), Evry Mann (drums), or Claudio Enriquez (bass). Opens with heavy piano (think Cecil Taylor), adds in the sax, then evolves into their own milieu. A- [sp]

Charlie Mariano: Boppin' in Boston 1947-1953 (1947-53 [2024], Fresh Sound, 2CD): Alto saxophonist (1923-2009) from Boston, a remarkably fluid player, was very quick to jump on the bebop bandwagon -- much quicker than the bands he played in early, judging from the opening tracks here. Digital breaks this into two volumes, the first ending with a Jan. 27, 1953 session, the second from later that year, a bit more consistent. B+(**) [sp]

Gerry Mulligan: Night Lights (1962 [2024], Philip): Baritone saxophonist, in a laid back mood with Art Farmer (flugelhorn), Bob Brookmeyer (valve trombone), Jim Hall (guitar), bass, and drums. B+(*) [sp]

The Oscar Pettiford Memorial Concert (1960 [2024], SteepleChase): A concert organized in Copenhagen shortly after the bassist's death at 37, features a number of local acts -- Erik Mosenholm Trio, Max BrÜel Quartet, Bengt Hallberg Trio (plus Alice Babs), Jazz Quintet '60 (with Svend Asmussen on violin), Louis Hjulmand Quartet -- finishing with Stan Getz (backed by Hallberg's Trio). Nice evening. B+(*) [sp]

Old music:

Beholder: Claim No Native Land (2017, Sachimay): Trio of Dan DeChellis (piano), Philip Tomasic (guitar/loops/effects), and Zack Martin (drums/electronics), seems to be their first album, nothing in Discogs on any of the group albums, although DeChellis and Tomasic had a trio album with a different drummer in 1999, and Tomasic had a solo guitar album the same year. B+(*) [sp]

Beholder: The Cicada Sessions (2022, Sachimay): Again, no doc here, other than same trio lineup, more varied, ends a bit ambient. B+(**) [sp]

Beholder Quartet: Omni Present (2023, Sachimay, EP): The piano-guitar-drums trio expands a bit, adding Jeffrey Slater on electric bass. Just a proof-of-concept 15:52 single. B+(*) [sp]

اسم ISM [Pat Thomas/Joel Grip/Antonin Gerbal]: Nature in Its Inscrutability Strikes Back (2014 [2015], Café Oto): British piano-bass-drums trio, the full significance of its iconography way beyond me. Three pieces, 62:47. B+(***) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Cannonball Adderley: Burnin' in Bordeaux: Live in France 1969 (Elemental Music) [04-26]
  • Cannonball Adderley: Poppin' in Paris: Live at L'Olympia 1972 (Elemental Music) [04-26]
  • Livia Almeida: The Brasilia Sessions (Zoho) [07-19]
  • Orrin Evans and the Captain Black Big Band: Walk a Mile in My Shoe (Imani) * [08-12]
  • Richard Guba: Songs for Stuffed Animals (self-released) [06-06]
  • Joel Harrison & Alternative Guitar Summit: The Middle of Everywhere: Guitar Solos Vol. I (AGS) [07-24]
  • Jason Kao Hwang: Soliloquies: Unaccompanied Pizzicato Violin Improvisations (True Sound) (09-15]
  • Lux Quartet: Tomorrowland (Enja/Yellowbird) [08-09[
  • Rose Mallett: Dreams Realized (Carrie-On Productions) [09-01]
  • Shelly Manne & His Men: Jazz From the Pacific Northwest (1958-66, Reel to Real) [04-20]
  • Brother Jack McDuff: Ain't No Sunshine: Live in Seattle (1972, Reel to Real) [05-17]
  • Terence McManus: Music for Chamber Trio (Rowhouse Music) [09-24]
  • Jason Stein: Anchors (Tao Forms) [09-13]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Wednesday, July 24, 2024

Speaking of Which

Big breaking news this week was the end of Joe Biden's campaign for a second term as president. This became public on Sunday, July 20. I started collecting bits for this post back on Thursday, July 18, and in the intervening days I collected a fair number of pieces on the arguments for Biden to withdraw. I've kept those pieces below (and may even add to them), while splitting the section on Biden, and adding one on Kamala Harris, who as Vice-President and as Biden's running mate is the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination.

Biden won all of the primaries, so an overwhelming majority of DNC voters were selected and pledged to Biden (and implicitly to Harris). Biden has endorsed Harris. And most of the people who put pressure on Biden to withdraw did so realizing that Harris would be his most obvious replacement. Opposition to Biden was almost never rooted in rejection of his policies or legacy. (Critics of Biden's deaf, blind and dumb support for Netanyahu's genocide may beg to differ, but they had little if any clout within the party powers who turned on Biden. Nor do Israel's supporters have any real reason to fear that Harris will turn on them.)

I originally meant to start this post with a bit from a letter I wrote back on Thursday [07-18], which summed up my views on Biden's candidacy at the time:

For what little it's worth, here's my nutshell take on Biden:

  1. If he can't get control of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza by early October, he's going to lose, no matter what else happens. For people who don't understand them, they're bad vibes, so why not blame the guy who was in position to do something about them. That may be unfair, but that's what uninformed voters do. And if you do understand them (which I think I do), Biden doesn't look so good either. He sees Ukraine as a test of resolve, and Israel as a test of loyalty, and those views are not just wrong, they kick in his most primitive instincts.

  2. Otherwise, the election will go to whichever side is most effective at making the election into a referendum on the other side. That should be easy when the other side is Trump, but it gets real hard when most media cycles focus on your age and/or decrepitude. That story is locked in, and isn't going away. When your "good news" is "Biden reads from teleprompter and doesn't fumble," you've lost.

  3. Even if Trump's negatives are so overwhelming that even Biden, incapacitated as he is, beats him (and surely it wouldn't be by enough to shut Trump up), do we really want four more years of this?

As of early Tuesday evening, I'm still preoccupied with trying to wrap up my jazz critics poll. I expect to mail that I will get that mailed in tonight, and hope that I may wrap this up as well, with the by-now-usual proviso that I may add more the next day, but certainly will have lots to return to next week.

As of late Wednesday evening, I figure I should call it a week. I still haven't gotten to everything, but I've deliberately skipped anything on the Netanyahu speech to Congress, and various other pieces of late-breaking news (including recent campaign rallies by Trump, which I overheard some of, and by Harris, which I gather was much more fun. If I do grab something more while working on Music Week, I'll flag it as usual. Otherwise, there's always next week.

One half-baked thought I will go ahead and throw out there is this: maybe this was the plan all along? I know it's hard to credit the Democratic Party insiders with devising much less executing such a clever plan. But if you wanted to get to where we are now, it's not that hard to imagine. If Biden hadn't run, Harris would have been his probable successor, but not without a bruising and potentially divisive primary fight. Biden's reelection campaign kept that from happening -- and to make extra sure, scotching the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary eliminated the two best opportunities potential opponents might gamble on. Biden wound up with an overwhelming majority of delegates locked in, and predisposed to Harris as his successor.

Biden's presumptive nomination also gave cover to Trump, who never had to face the age questions that dogged the slightly older Biden. Then Biden tanks the debate, which gives Trump a huge psychological boost, but drags out his withdrawal until after Trump's nomination becomes official. By the time he does announce, all the ducks are lined up for Harris, cemented by the record-breaking cash haul. No one will run against her, and all Democrats will unite behind her. It's not a very good example of democracy in action, but it's clean and final, and she enters the campaign against Trump with few wounds and very little baggage.

On the other hand, Trump, despite all the optimism he brought into the RNC just last week, has tons of debilitating baggage -- to which he's already added his "best people" VP pick, J.D. Vance. I've said all along that the winner will be the one who does the best job of making the election into an opportunity for the people to rid themselves of the other candidate. The odds of Trump being the one we most want to dispose of just went way up.

Make no mistake, there is something profoundly wrong with our democracy, and it goes way beyond gerrymanders and registration scheming. It mostly has to do with the obscene influence of money not just on who can run in elections and what they can campaign on, but also on what whoever manages to get elected can or cannot do with their post. This influence goes way back, and runs very deep, but it's pretty clear that it's gotten significantly worse over the last several decades, as income and wealth have become much more unequally distributed.

We are, of course, fortunate that not everyone with great sums of money wishes to harm most of us. It's mostly just Republicans who want to drive us to ruin, and who surely will if we allow them the power to do so. (The Supreme Court is one place where they already have that power, and it is already providing us with a steady stream of examples of how "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.") Rich Democrats may be every bit as self-interested and egocentric as rich Republicans, but at least they can see that government needs to work reasonably well for everyone, and not just for the rich at everyone else's expense. They understand things that Republicans have turned against: that life is not a zero-sum game (so you don't have to inflict losses in order to gain); that security is only possible if people sense that justice prevails; and that no matter how much wealth and power you gain, you still depend on other people who need to be able to trust you.

Perhaps you can and should trust rich Democrats in times of severe crisis, such as in this election. Today's Republican Party, with or without Trump, is threat enough. But know that those same rich Democrats don't trust you to make decisions they can support, which is why they hijacked the 2020 primaries to stop Sanders with Biden, and why they've micromanaged the 2024 process to give your nomination to Harris. And actually, I'm strangely OK with that.

Top story threads:

Israel:

America's Israel (and Israel's America):

Israel vs. world opinion:

Election notes:

  • Jeffrey St Clair: [07-19] Politics on the verge of nervous breakdown. This starts with the most detailed and credible account of the Trump rally shooting I've bothered to read, ranges wide enough to include a picture of Mussolini with a nose bandage after a 1926 assassination attempt, then moves on to Biden (pre-withdrawal), compares his tenure to that of Stalin and Brezhnev, doubles back to J.D. Vance, and winds up with a potpourri of scattered points, like:

    • As if to emphasize their indifference to the victims of the shooting, they're having an AR-15 giveaway at the GOP convention . . .

    • Days after a 20-year-old tried to nail Trump with an AR-15, a federal appeals court ruled that Minnesota's law requiring people to be at least 21 to carry a handgun in public is unconstitutional.

    • While the Democrats -- for some reason comprehensible only to Democrats -- have "paused" fundraising after the failed assassination attempt, a Trump-owned company is selling sneakers for $299 a pair with an image of his bloodied face after the rally shooting . . .

Republican National Convention:

Focus on the Convention here. Articles that focus on Trump and Vance, even at the convention, follow in their own sections.

Trump:

  • New York Times Opinion: Donald Trump's first term is a warning. This looks like they finally went back and reviewed their own reporting, and belatedly realized, oh my God, how could we just let all this happen?

    This week, Republicans have tried to rewrite the four years of Trump's presidency as a time of unparalleled peace, prosperity and tranquility: "the strongest economy in history," as Senator Katie Britt of Alabama put it. The difference between Trump and Biden? "President Trump honored the Constitution," said Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota. Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia offered Mr. Trump's first term as an example of "common-sense conservative leadership."

    The record of what Mr. Trump actually did in office bears little resemblance to that description. Under his leadership, the country lurched from one crisis to the next, from the migrant families separated at the border to the sudden spike in prices caused by his trade war with China to the reckless mismanagement of the Covid pandemic. And he showed, over and over, how little respect he has for the Constitution and those who take an oath to defend it.

    For Americans who may have forgotten that time, or pushed it from memory, we offer this timeline of his presidency. Mr. Trump's first term was a warning about what he will do with the power of his office -- unless American voters reject him.

    The timeline is mostly told through pictures, which are often shocking, and tweets, which are mostly stupid. One thing I was especially struck by was the prominence given to Trump's catering to the whims and desires of the right-wing in Israel, while still neglecting to point out their direct bearing on increasing hostilities and the ongoing genocide. Also seems to me like there's too much focus on Trump's national security lapses, which caters to the worst instincts of the so-called Security Democrats, when the real problem with Trump is not lack of vigilance but a general disinterest and even contempt for peace and real democracy.

    I expect this timeline will be recut into campaign commercials, fast and furious, driving home the point that Trump is nothing but trouble.

  • Anna Betts: [07-25] FBI director questions whether Trump was hit by bullet or shrapnel in shooting.

  • Jonathan Blitzer: [07-15] Inside the Trump plan for 2025: "A network of well-funded far-right activists is preparing for the former President's return to the White House."

  • Jonathan Chait:

    • [07-17] Trump invites China to invade Taiwan if he returns to office. Given all the credible charges you could lay at Trump, why bother with this bullshit? Trump has this dangerously stupid idea that if he can scare Taiwan, they'll pony up for more US arms and bribes for security. China's just the bogeyman in this scam. Chait has his own dangerously stupid idea here, which is that American deterrence is the only thing keeping China out of Taiwan. I'm not saying that Taiwan has nothing to worry about, but they do have more control over their own predicament than the ridiculous whims of presidents and pundits.

    • [07-19] Donald Trump cannot even pretend to change who he is.

  • John Ganz: [06-05] The shadow of the mob: "Trump's gangster Gemeinschaft."

  • Jay Caspian Kang: [07-19] Are we already moving on from the assassination attempt on Trump? "When an act of violence doesn't lend itself to a clear argument or a tidy story, we often choose not to think about it."

  • Ed Kilgore: [07-19] The old, ranting, rambling Trump was back at the Republican convention.

  • Eric Levitz: [07-19] The RNC clarified Trump's 2024 persona: Moderate authoritarian weirdo: "The Trump campaign is at once a savvy, disciplined operation and an illiberal narcissist's personality cult." Weirdo, sure, but considered in light of the whole package, weirdo loses all of its affectionate and amusing traits. "Moderate" is the word that hurts here, like a toenail cut into the quick. On some political policy scales, Trump may rate as more moderate than many other prominent Republicans (off the top of my head: Abbott, DeSantis, Cruz, Rubio, Cotton, Hawley, Vance, Gosar, Gaetz, Mike Lee, Nikki Haley, Liz Cheney), but every bit of his persona screams extremism -- he sees himself as a real fighter, as one real bad dude, and that's how he wants you to see him. That's the act he puts on, and that's what most of his fans are lapping up. Once you see that, the weirdo stuff falls into place, and should be viewed much more harshly: he's showing you that he doesn't care what others think, that he can be as weird as he wants, and there's nothing they can do about it.

  • Chris Lewis: [07-15] The dangerous authoritarian gunning to serve as Trump's grand vizier: "Russell Vought is rumored to be under consideration for chief of staff in a second Trump administration. This would be a disaster."

  • Nicole Narea: [07-17] Why tech titans are turning toward Trump: "Silicon Valley isn't right-wing, but its Trump supporters are getting louder."

  • Tom Nichols: A searing reminder that Trump is unwell: "His bizarre diatribe at the RNC shows why the pro-democracy coalition is so worried about beating him."

  • Matt Stieb:

  • Robert Tait: [07-25] Trump monetizes assassination attempt by using photo as book cover.

  • Maureen Tkacik: [07-18] The assassin amid the undesirables: "On the abiding despair of the failed Trump assassin's post-COVID, private equity-looted nursing home."

  • Li Zhou: [07-16] The Trump shooting points to shocking Secret Service security lapses.

Vance:

Trump picked Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate and potential vice-president, confirmed by the RNC, so he's very much in the news, and for this week at least, elicited quite a bit of response: much more than I suspect any of his competition would have generated.

  • Alex Abad-Santos: [07-19] The damsel-ification of Usha Vance: "What people project onto the would-be second lady fits a pattern of benevolent sexism about GOP wives."

  • Michael Arria: [07-16] The Shift: J.D. Vance's anti-Palestine record: "J.D. Vance is a strong supporter of Israel, and, like many U.S. Zionists, he attributes the allegiance to his Christianity."

  • Aaron Blake: [07-24] Could Republicans get buyer's remorse with J.D. Vance? "New polls show him to be unusually unpopular for a new VP pick. Here's how that compares historically, and what it could mean."

  • Ben Burgis: [07-16] On stochastic terrorism and speech as violence: Responding to Vance's tweet blaming Biden for the attempted shooting of Trump:

    In effect, conservatives like Vance are appropriating the idea, long put forward by some liberals, that overheated political rhetoric is itself a form of violence. The theory of "stochastic terrorism" holds that over-the-top rhetoric about a targeted individual or group has the effect of encouraging "lone-wolf" political violence -- that is to say, political violence carried out by individuals on their own initiative rather than terrorist organizations -- and that this makes the purveyors of the rhetoric responsible for the violence.

    Actually, the right is far more likely to employ verbal threats and agitation toward violence than the left is, largely because they're much more into violence as a tool of political power. It's hard not to believe that the atmosphere of malice they create has no relationship to occasional violent outbursts, but causality or even responsibility is hard to pin down. Burgis concludes, "let's not go down that road." But Vance is so imbued with the culture of violence that his own charge can just as easily be taken as encouragement for his "2nd amendment people" to take a shot at Biden. When Democrats criticize Trump, their obvious even if just implcit remedy is the ballot. But when Trump rails against "vermin," just what is he imploring his followers to do? And given that a couple of his follows have actually committed acts of criminal violence against his designated enemies, shouldn't we be alarmed at such speech?

  • Kevin T Dugan: [07-18] Why J.D. Vance wants a weak dollar. Is that a good idea? I'm not so sure it isn't. I've been bothered by trade deficits since the 1970s, when they mostly started to cover up the drop in domestic oil production. Since then, they've mostly worked to increase inequality both here and abroad.

  • Gil Duran: Where J.D. Vance gets his weird, terrifying techo-authoritarian ideas: "Yes, Peter Thiel was the senator's benefactor. But they're both inspired by an obscure software developer who has some truly frightening thoughts about reordering society."

  • Thom Hartmann:

  • John Ganz: [07-16] The meaning of JD Vance: "The politics of national despair incarnate."

    Vance himself, of course, is a winner in the cultural sweepstakes: his Hillbilly Elegy became a massive success, explaining the failures of the white poor. He made it okay to look down on them. After all, one of them said it was okay. Conservatives who reviled Trump's base turned to Vance as well as liberals who condescendingly wanted to "understand" them. It was really the same old conservative nonsense about "cultural pathology" applied to whites now instead of blacks -- a way to blame the poor for being poor, to "racialize" the white poor as the blacks had been; to find in them intrinsic moral weaknesses rather than just a lack of money and resources.

    But Vance always wanted to run with hares and hunt with the hounds. He wants to hold fast to the his wounded Scots-Irish machismo while simultaneously rising to heights of both American capitalism and cultural success. He took his background to be both an advantage and a handicap, a counter-snobbery that served him well as he entered the halls of power and wealth. Look back at the famous American Conservative interview that turned him into a sensation: ". . . the deeper I get into elite culture, the more I see value in this reverse snobbery. It's the great privilege of my life that I'm deep enough into the American elite that I can indulge a little anti-elitism. Like I said, it keeps you grounded, if nothing else! But it would have been incredibly destructive to indulge too much of it when I was 18." . . . Reverse snobbery, like all snobbery, comes from comparison, of a feeling of not living up, of wanting to best others. As Peter Thiel acolyte, he's familiar with René Girard's theories of envy and knows how that emotion gives rise to hate. Vance once said that Trump might be "America's Hitler" to a law school buddy. This is what that friend says now: "The through line between former J.D. and current J.D. is anger . . . The Trump turn can be understood as a lock-in on contempt as the answer to anger . . ." To people like that, Hitler, so to speak, has a point.

  • Jacob Heilbrunn: [07-17] With Vance selection, Trump doubles down on America first. One can readily fault Vance for lots of things, but calling him an "isolationist" -- "the heir to Charles Lindbergh, Pat Buchanan, and other GOP isolationists" -- is pretty flimsy.

  • Sarah Jones: [07-16] The billionaire and the bootlicker.

  • Ed Kilgore: [07-18] Who is J.D. Vance? His muddled RNC speech didn't tell us.

  • Paul Krugman: [07-18] J.D. Vance puts the con in conservatism. Well, it's always been there, but he takes it to especially extravagant lengths.

  • Eric Levitz: [07-17] J.D. Vance's GOP is for bosses, not workers: "Trump's 'populist' running mate won't change his party's class allegiances."

  • Nicholas Liu: [07-18] JD Vance wants to abandon Ukraine but bomb Mexico and Iran.

  • Ryan Mac/Theodore Schleifer: [07-17] How a network of tech billionaires helped J.D. Vance leap into power: "Mr. Vance spent less than five years in Silicon Valley's tech industry, but the connections he made with Peter Thiel and others became crucial to his political ascent."

  • Arwa Mahdawi: [07-20] Sorry, JD Vance, but being a 'childless cat lady' is actually not a bad thing.

  • Andrew Prokop: [07-17] J.D. Vance's radical plan to build a government of Trump loyalists: "Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people." Obviously, this isn't original with Vance. Republicans have been dreaming of this for years, and Trump did a fair amount of it during his first term -- especially in purging employees who think there might be something to fossil fuel-based climate change. It was part of Rick Scott's Senate plan, and is part of Project 2025.

  • Max Read: [2020-07-21] Peter Thiel's latest venture is the American government: This old article popped up, but should by now have spawned many updates. My view all along was that Trump was putting the VP slot up for bids -- in effect, he was shopping for the best dowry. Burgum made the short list because he has his own money. The rehabilitation of "Little Marco" also suggested that he brought some serious money into play -- every serious Republican candidate in 2016 had some kind of billionaire in the wings. (In 2012, Newt Gingrich griped that he couldn't compete, because he only had one billionaire, whereas Romney had four.) I don't know who was backing Rubio, but J.D. Vance was always a front for this guy, Peter Thiel.

  • Veronica Riccobene/Helen Santoro/Joel Warner: [07-16] J.D. Vance wants to crack down harder on abortion access.

  • Becca Rothfeld: [07-23] Hillbilly Elegy and J.D. Vance's art of having it both ways.

  • Martin Scotten: [07-22] JD Vance owes almost everything to Peter Thiel, a pro-Trump billionaire and "New Right" ideologue.

  • Ishaan Tharoor:

  • Benjamin Wallace-Wells: [07-15] Why Donald Trump picked J.D. Vance for Vice-President: "The Ohio senator is an attack dog for the former President, but he is also something more emergent and interesting: he is the fuse that Trump lit."

  • Robert Wright: [07-19] J.D. Vance, the tech oligarch's populist.

  • Simon van Zuylen-Wood: [07-24] Democrats might want to take J.D. Vance seriously: But isn't it so much more fun to take him as a joke? Does he really deserve anything else?

And other Republicans:

  • Dean Baker: [07-17] Decision 2024: Would people be willing to pay higher taxes to make Elon Musk richer?

    That is a question that should occur to people who read through the Republican Party's platform. Not only does the platform promise to extend the 2017 tax cuts, which will potentially put tens of billions of dollars in Elon Musk's pocket over the next decade, it also promises to "modernize the military."

    "Republicans will ensure our Military is the most modern, lethal and powerful Force in the World. We will invest in cutting-edge research and advanced technologies, including an Iron Dome Missile Defense Shield, support our Troops with higher pay, and get woke Leftwing Democrats fired as soon as possible."

    This looks to be hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars in additional spending over the next decade. Elon Musk, among others, is likely to be well-situated to get some of the contracts that will be involved in modernizing the military. . . .

    As far as how much Musk and other military contractors are likely to get out of an increase in spending, it is worth noting that excessive payments and outright fraud are already big problems with military contracting. However, the problem is likely to get considerably worse in a second Trump administration.

    There are a number of potential checks on fraud and abuse in place at present. These include the Defense Department's Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the Justice Department, which can investigate allegations of fraud.

    Donald Trump has said that he wants to remove these sorts of checks on his presidential power. They would all fit into his category of the "deep state." These people are likely the "woke Leftwing Democrats" who the platform promises to fire as soon as possible.

  • Zack Beauchamp: [07-19] It's Trump's party now. Mostly. "How the Trumpified GOP resembles Frankenstein's monster."

  • Tim Dickinson: [06-09] Meet Trump's new Christian kingpin: "Oil-rich Tim Dunn has changed Texas politics with fanatical zeal -- the national stage is next."

  • Abdallah Fayyad: [07-16] The crime wave is over but Republicans can't let go: "The GOP is still pretending that crime is spiraling out of control."

  • David Frum: This crew is totally beatable: "Democrats just need to believe they can do it."

  • Sarah Jones: [07-18] The GOP is still the party of the boss.

  • Christian Paz: [07-16] The clever politics of Republicans' anti-immigrant pitch: "The Republican National Convention featured plenty of angry rhetoric about immigration. It might find a receptive audience."

  • Nikki McCann Ramirez/Ryan Bort: [07-10] A guide to Project 2025, the right's terrifying plan to remake America.

Biden:

He announced he was withdrawing as the Democratic candidate for president in 2024 on Sunday, July 21, so the following links can be easily divided into before and after sections. More recent links first:

I had already collected a bunch of links before the withdrawal. While this should be a moot issue going forward, we shouldn't forget too readily what happened and why.

  • Intelligencer: [07-19] Pressure builds as more Democrats call on Biden to step aside: "Here are the latest developments on the efforts to get Joe to go." Following some earlier reports scattered about this section, he's getting the "live updates" treatment.

  • Russell Berman: 'I think it's happening': "The lone senator who has called on Biden to withdraw is growing confident that the president will leave the race."

  • Jonathan Chait: [07-18] The presidential nomination is becoming worthless for Joe Biden: "A devastating polling nugget shows what happens if he stays in."

  • David A Graham: [07-18] The end of Biden's candidacy approaches: "At the start of the day yesterday, it was conceivable that Joe Biden might manage to hold on to the Democratic nomination for president. But this morning, things seem to be slipping out of his grasp." He cites a number of reports of people who are close enough to Biden to have leverage but who still don't want to be seen with blood on their hands. There's also the all-important fear of "money drying up." The big selling point is fear of a Trump presidency, but if you're rich enough to splurge on politics, you don't have that much to fear. It's more a matter of hedging your bets.

  • Elie Honig: [07-19] The secret Biden tape that we shouldn't hear. That's special counsel Robert Hur's interview of Biden in conjunction with the "top secret" documents Biden found in his garage. At the time it was first disclosed, it was reported that the tape made Biden out like a doddering fool, so naturally Republicans in Congress set out to subpoena it.

  • Dhruv Khullar: [07-18] Doctors are increasingly worried about Biden: "Nine physicians weighed in on the President's health. Almost all were concerned that Biden's symptoms might go beyond a gradual, aging-related decline."

  • Eric Levitz: [07-18] Democrats are finally taking on Biden -- and giving the party a chance to win: "Pelosi, Schumer, and Obama have all signaled to Joe that it's time to go."

  • Nicole Narea: [07-18] Biden is betting on impossible promises to progressives: "Biden is trying to reinvigorate his candidacy by pushing progressive priorities." That might work better if the left had any real power in the Democratic Party, if Biden had the power to deliver, and if the promise didn't panic the corporate faction into dumping him.

  • Nia Prater: [07-18] The push to replace Biden is rapidly gaining momentum.

Harris:

  • Intelligencer Staff: [07-22] Kamala Harris is now the presumptive nominee: live updates: She cleared 2,579 delegates less than 36 hours after Biden dropped out and endorsed her.

  • Mariana Alfaro/Marianna Sotomayor: [07-24] House GOP leaders ask member to stop making racial attacks against Harris. Probably more where this came from:

  • Michael Arria: [07-22] Looking at Kamala Harris's record on Israel: "If elected president, many believe that Kamala Harris will continue Joe Biden's doomed policy in Gaza."

  • Karen Attiah: [07-24] The first clean-up job for Harris is Biden's horrible Gaza policy. I sympathize with the sentiment, but I don't see the political angle. The Biden administration needs to quietly shut the Gaza war down, with a stable ceasefire, with no Israeli troop presence in Gaza, and with some kind of international salvage/reconstruction effort, probably under the UN with some contingent of Arab volunteers. Harris should (and hopefully can) work behind the scenes to firm up the administration's resolve to do this, but also shouldn't be seen as getting her hands too dirty in the effort. She needs this, because if the war/genocide is still continuing in October, that's going to reflect very badly on Biden, and therefore (but probably somewhat less) on her. So yes, this is important. But advice like this -- Indigo Olivier: Kamala, denounce Netanyahu. Do it now. -- is neither likely to work on Israel, nor is it likely to gain her any voters.

  • Ryan Cooper: [07-23] What would President Harris do with Gaza?: "There are tentative signs that she would not indulge Israel's war as President Biden has done." This is pretty speculative. No one expects Harris to break with Israel, or even to rethink the fundamentals of the alliance, but it's possible to love Israel and still exercise some restraint to steer Israelis away from embarrassing themselves, as they have done ever since their defense against Hamas attacks turned into a campaign of genocide. Indeed, many Israelis -- not Netanyahu and his allies, who will take every atrocity they can get away with, but many of his wholeheartedly Zionist opponents -- expect the US to act as a brake on their own worst impulses. It is worth noting that when the Biden administration briefly held up supply of 2000 lb. bombs, Harris was disciplined enough to keep her messaging in line with the policy, while Biden waffled and gave up any pretense.

  • David Dayen: [07-23] Who is Kamala Harris? "The vice president has been a cautious political operator. Her vision for the future points in several directions."

  • Benjamin Hart: [07-24] Kamala Harris's biographer says she's always been underestimated. Interview with Dan Morain, author of Kamala's Way: An American Life.

  • Susan Milligan: [07-24] Sexism and racism only make Kamala Harris stronger.

  • Christian Paz: [07-18] Kamala Harris and the border: The myth and the facts.

  • Greg Sargent: [07-23] Fox News's awful new Kamala Harris smears hit nuclear levels of idiocy: "As right-wing media scramble for an effective attack on the vice president, a reporter who has closely examined Harris's career explains why her political identity is so hard to pin down."

  • Michael Scherer/Gerrit De Vynck/Maeve Reston: [07-23] Historic flood of cash pours into Harris campaign and allied groups: "Democrats reported raising more than $250 million since Biden announced he was leaving the presidential race and endorsed Harris."

  • Marc A Thiessen: [07-24] Harris is a gaffe-prone leftist. Why didn't anyone challenge her? "That would-be rivals are waiting for 2028 suggests they know our democracy will survive Trump." When I saw this title, I had to click on it, just to see who could be that dumb (although in retrospect I should have guessed). If you do bother to read this, you'll get a prevue of all the angles Republicans will use against Harris. If I knew nothing else, I'd take them as reason aplenty to vote for her. Still, I have to wonder whether the rest of the Republicans will even rise to Thiessen's level of sophistry. Consider this recent run of advice-giving columns:

  • Rebecca Traister: [07-24] The thrill of taking a huge risk on Kamala Harris: "The actual case for being unburdened by what has been." I think the author is really onto something here:

    None of us knows if we can do this. And we are about to do it anyway. And the combination of those truths helped me, in those vertiginous few minutes, to not feel panic but excitement. I felt excited about the future for the first time in years.

    More than that: I felt excited not in spite of my uncertainty, but because of it. I felt that our national political narrative was finally accurately mirroring our national reality: Everything is scary, we have never been here before, we don't know if we can do this, and precisely because these stakes are so high, we are at last going to act like it, by taking unprecedented, untested, underpolled, creative measures to change, grow, and fight at a pitch that meets the gravity of the urgent, existentially important task in front of us. No more clinging to the walls of the past for safety, no more adhering to models or traditions or assumptions that the autocratic opposition has shown itself willing to explode over the past two decades in its own efforts to win.

    Our aversion to uncertainty is part of how we got to this precipice. Too unwilling to take risks -- on people, ideas, and platforms, on the next generation of leadership -- Democrats have remained chained to the past.

    In some ways, Harris is the safe choice right now, but after Biden and Clinton, she doesn't feel like such a stale, stodgy compromise. She feels like a candidate who can fight back, who won't spend the next four months backpedaling and disclaiming. And why can't she win? Who really believes racist, sexist, red-baiting Republicans theses days? Just cowards who take their clues from the fear and shame of those being maligned? Traister addresses this here:

    There are certainly terrible things in store: the racism and sexism Harris will face, the monstrous and vengeful resistance to her rise, in which she will be accused of incompetence and radicalism and being an affirmative-action token and a barren cat lady and a welfare queen who has slept her way to the top, all according to the right's overfamiliar playbooks for how to discredit people they would rather not participate fully in this democracy and helped by a media happy to engage in double standards. We know there will be bad polls and gaffes. And those who feel scared about what is on the line, including possibly me, will be tempted to say, "I told you this would happen!" because in our moments of direst discomfort we take slim consolation in certainty, even when the certainty is about how awful we knew everything was going to be.

    But if we permitted that dismal comfort to guide us, we would not have any space to be shocked and inspired by how good some things can be: the giddy memes emerging from an improbably enthused online left, the cheerily halved "BIDEN/HARRIS" yard signs now reading simply "HARRIS." The $81 million in donations raised in 24 hours. The 58,000 volunteers who stepped up in less than two days to work phones and knock doors. The Sunday-night zoom call hosted by Win With Black Women and Jotaka Eaddy, which was scheduled to accommodate 1,000 women, that eventually had to make room for 44,000 participants, all within hours of Harris becoming the unofficial candidate. The next night, a call organized by Win With Black Men drew 53,000 registrants, well above its capacity, of whom 21,000 were ultimately able to attend.

And other Democrats:

Included here are pieces about the upcoming procedure for replacing Biden as presidential nominee, any candidates beyond Harris, and the upcoming convention.

Climate and environment:

Economic matters:

Ukraine War and Russia:

  • Blaise Malley: [07-19] Diplomacy Watch: Europe turns attention to GOP ticket: "Moscow, Kyiv, also react to eventuality of Trump returning to White House." This was written post-Vance, pre-Harris, so maybe the panic has subsided a bit. What hasn't changed is the war's stalemate, or more accurately, spiraling self-destruction.

America's empire and the world:

  • Wesley K Clark: [06-23] America is already great again: "Don't let doomsayers like Donald Trump fool you. On every meaningful metric of national strength, the United States under Joe Biden is a rising power -- and we have the economic means and necessary alliances to meet our gravest challenges." He's fighting bullshit with bullshit, which he wouldn't have to if he could just escape the "metric of national strength" Trump characterizes as greatness. I remember how Bill Moyers tried to convince LBJ to call his programs "the good society," but Johnson, ever the bullshit artist, insisted on "great" -- and got neither. Clark actually does a fair job of pointing out how the reforms Biden started, and further reforms that are broadly supported by the democratic wing of the Democratic Party, can make our lives better, can help the rest of the world, and put us in better alignment with peace and justice everywhere -- an analysis that could be much sharper with a bit less ego and arms hawking.

  • Tom Engelhardt: [07-18] Where did the American Century go? "The decline and fall of presidential America: are we now living in a defeat culture?"

  • Mike Lofgren: [06-23] Why can't America build enough weapons? That's really not the question we should be asking, but that anyone can bring it up should expose the hopeless trap we've locked ourselves into. "The debasement of the U.S. defense industrial base began, ironically, under Ronald Reagan, and won't be reversed until we abandon the free-market fundamentalism he introduced." This is a subject that merits a long screed, one I have no time or patience for now.

Other stories:

Adam Clark Estes: [07-11] Why I quit Spotify: Some things to think about, especially as "Spotify raised its prices in July for the second time in as many years." As I recall, in the announcement letter they touted all the extra podcast content the extra money will help them develop. (They develop things? I've never listened to a podcast there, so the all money they spent on Joe Rogan -- and on pissing off Neil Young and Joni Mitchell -- was wasted, as far as I'm concerned).

Bryan Walsh: [07-16] It's time to stop arguing over the population slowdown and start adapting to it: "The world population could peak in your lifetime."

Li Zhou: [07-19] The "largest IT outage in history," briefly explained: "Airlines, banks, and hospitals saw computer systems go down because of a CrowdStrike software glitch." Note that only Microsoft Windows users were affected ("Mac and Linux users were not affected").

Obituaries

John Otis: [07-24] Lewis Lapham, editor who revived Harper's magazine, dies at 89: "He turned Harper's into what he called a 'theater of ideas,' promoting emerging voices including David Foster Wallace, Christopher Hitchens and Fareed Zakaria." I only occasionally read Harper's (and later Lapham's Quarterly), but I've read a couple of his books, and thought he was a superb political essayist: Theater of War: In Which the Republican Beocmes an Empire (2003), and Pretensions to Empire: Notes on the Criminal Folly of the Bush Administration (2006). I should do a complete book rundown, but for now I just ordered a copy of his 2017 book, Age of Folly: America Abandons Its Democracy.

Larry Rohter: [07-23] John Mayall, pioneer of British blues, is dead at 90: "He was best known not for his own playing or singing but for recruiting and polishing the talents of one gifted lead guitarist after another, starting with Eric Clapton."

Giovanni Russonello: [07-24] Toumain Diabaté, Malian master of the kora, is dead at 58: "He believed that music could transcend national borders set by colonialism and restore ancient ties, even as it embraced the changes of a globalizing society."

Alex Williams: [07-19] Happy Traum, mainstay of the folk music world, dies at 86: "A noted guitarist and banjo player, he emerged from the same Greenwich Village folk-revival scene as his friend and sometime collaborator Bob Dylan."

Books

Zack Beauchamp: [07-17] Why the far right is surging all over the world: "The 'reactionary spirit' and the roots of the US authoritarian moment." Excerpt from a book the author has been working on: The Reactionary Spirit: How America's Most Insidious Political Tradition Swept the World.

Doug Storm: [2022-09-16] A crash course in the works of H Bruce Franklin . . . with H Bruce Franklin. I just read the late cultural historian's memoir, Crash Course: From the Good War to the Forever War, which does a good job of recounting the path of post-WWII militarism from the red scare into Vietnam, as he discovered it in real time, and also recounted a much more militant anti-war movement than I was ever involved in. The book ends rather abruptly after Vietnam, making me wonder whether he planned a second one, or just figured his later life just wasn't that interesting. The interview covers the book, as well as other works, like

Music (and other arts?)

Ian Bogost: The mid-year best-of list is a travesty: "The worst idea of 2024 so far." And here I was thinking that the worst idea of 2024 was using AI to select bombing targets on Gaza. Or using drones for terror bombing around nuclear power plants in Ukraine. Or major political parties picking two doddering idiots to debate the very serious issues facing America and the world. The author seems to have reconciled himself to end-of-year lists: "These annual rundowns arrive during a period of reflection, when a full year's worth of human art and industry is about to recede into history." That's an odd turn of phrase: don't things turn into history the moment they happen? Whether they recede or not depends on whether they still have continuing import, or have (like most things) turned into passing fancies. Even so, one suspects that passing fancies are precisely what end-of-year lists are meant to recognize.

But it end-of-year lists are ok, what's so bad about mid-year lists? The time chunks are arbitrary. Smaller ones give us less material to cover, but you don't have to think back so far, and when it comes to music albums, it's not like we have a scarcity problem. My mid-year jazz critics poll (89 voters) identified 468 albums, vs. the full-year 2023 total of 760 (159 votes). It sounds like he's complaining about the novelty, but I've been tracking mid-year lists for a decade or more. They're still not nearly as common as end-of-year lists, but I've tracked about 35 so far this year, which includes a majority of the music publications that Album of the Year follows. As far as I know, nobody's taking the 6-month time chunk seriously enough to run a second-half list at end-of-year time, but I have seen movement toward shorter time periods, with quarterly and even monthly retrospectives.

Paul Schwartzman: [07-11] Who killed the Kennedys? The Rolling Stones won't tell you anymore. Songs evolve, sometimes as historical references slip from memory -- "On the Sunny Side of the Street" lives on, but increasingly likely to substitute for "rich as Rockefeller" -- and sometimes when casual terms fell out of fashion, as when Louis Armstrong changed "darkies" to "the folks."

Mid-year best-of lists:

Chatter

Zachary D Carter: [07-25][Response to Matt Stoller: "Democratic Silicon Valley billionaire Reid Hoffman gives $7 million to Harris, immediately demands she fire FTC Chair Lina Khan."]

  • Hoffman is a fool, these Silicon Valley gazillionaires don't actually believe in democracy.

  • The US economy is great, business is booming, the threat to growth is Jay Powel refusing to cut interest rates, not Lina Khan enforcing the law.

Nathan J Robinson: [07-25]

  • The core problem that Republicans have, and the reason they struggle to win the popular vote, is that they seem to despise the majority of people who live in this country.

  • We hate cat ladies, LGBTQ people, teachers, baristas, union members, immigrants, the underclass, "DEI," librarians, Hollywood, welfare moms, civil servants, professors, students, environmental activists, atheists, Muslims. Am I missing anyone from the list?

  • ok well your little cult should go form its own country where you don't have to live with anyone who doesn't share your theocratic morality

Rick Perlstein: [07-25]:

  • This video I made of a beautiful nature scene slowly defaced by the ugliest, most arrogant building this side of Pyongyang: I feel like it Says Something about Obama, and how history might judge him.

  • An arcadian fantasy, then the banal reality.

  • Terrible at building a bulwark against incipient fascism. That may become the salient metric, like for James Buchanan or Neville Chamberlain.

Tikun Olam: [07-25] [Responding to Ami Dar: "Former IDF Chiefs of Staff and Mossad directors (i.e. just a bunch of antisemitic leftist traitors) write the Congressional leadership: 'Netanyahu poses an existential threat to the State of Israel.'"]

  • It's amazing how generals and Shin Bet chiefs who performed horrible crimes during their careers, all of a sudden develop a moral conscience after they retire.

Actually, there's a movie about this phenomenon. It's called The Gatekeepers, directed by Dror Moreh, came out in 2012, featuring interviews with six former Shin Bet heads. These people rise in the ranks based on their drive to dominate Palestinians, then when they retire, they realize they've accomplished nothing, leaving nothing but blown opportunities in their wake. But by then they've been replaced by younger men eager to proove they can be even more aggressive.

Rick Perlstein: [07-25]

  • Wow, the story the wily old pol who says "my opponent fucks goats" so the guy has to deny it has been one-upped by a twitter troll. Vance is just . . . a total loser.

This links to Jordan Liles: [07-23] No, JD Vance did not say he had sex with couch cushions: "A false online ruor about former U.S. President Donald Trump's running mate, a latex glove and couch cuishions spawned a number of jokes and memes." I must have heard of Snopes (a "fact-checking website," originally set up in 1994 as the Urban Legends Reference Pages) before, but can't ever recall consulting it. It is possibly useful for debunking false rumors, but it also does a nice job of propagating them, and possibly even turning them into an art form. I can see this as scurrilous, but it can also be kind of funny. For instance, this page links to six more stories on Vance:

  • JD Vance had middle-class upbringing in 4-bedroom house in suburban Ohio?
  • JD Vance said women should stay in violent marriages?
  • Trump mistakenly referred to JD Vance as 'JD Wentworth'?
  • JD Vance once called Trump 'America's Hitler'?
  • JD Vance's last name means 'bedbug' in Yiddish?
  • JD Vance says parents should have bigger say in democracy than non-parents.

The links are laid out in a grid, reminding me of those "prove you're not a robot" matrixes, challenging you to pick which ones are true and which are false. I'm not interested in playing, but will note that four sound somewhat familiar, and only one strikes me as implausible.

PS: I also stumbled across this: "When I get that feeling I want sectional healing . . ."

Initial count: 209 links, 10413 words. Updated count [07-25]: 228 links, 11635 words.

Local tags (these can be linked to directly): music.

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Wednesday, July 17, 2024

Music Week

July archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 42668 [42624] rated (+44), 15 [20] unrated (-5).

I put out the call for a Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll back on June 30, offering a July 14 deadline for ballots, which would give me a few days to wrap things up before ArtsFuse returns from vacation on July 17. Sure, I expected a light turnout: mid-year lists, while increasingly common as click-bait, don't have the same gravitas as year-end wrap-ups, so fewer voters would be prepared let alone interested; there are vacations and other distractions; the voting period was much shorter than for the year-end poll; and I didn't want to work as hard at rounding up voters. (Last year's 159 voters took a lot of hustle on my part, but in taking the poll over from Francis Davis, I really wanted to prove that I could do it, and it was very wearing.) I didn't do any prospecting for new voters, and hoped that sending a single message to my Jazzpoll mailing list would do the trick.

It didn't: by last Wednesday, I had only about two dozen ballots counted, with another dozen promises to vote later, and a half-dozen polite declines, out of approx. 200 invitees. I had figured that 50% (let's say 80) ballots would still be a good showing, and would generate a lot of information. But 25% struck me as way too low. I had reason to suspect that a big part of the problem was that many messages from my server were being flagged and sequestered as "spam," especially by the gmail servers. So I rebooted, and sent a second round of invitations out to a subset of the list -- the ones I hadn't heard from, skipping a few who hadn't voted in recent years -- in MailMerge-customized letters from my regular email account (which has been dicey enough of late). That took many hours I had wanted to avoid, but got an almost immediate response. I streamlined the invitation a bit, and extended the deadline to July 17 (tonight, or effectively tomorrow morning). As of last night, I had 78 ballots counted, and as I'm writing this I have 2 more in my inbox, so I'm happy with my 50%. [PS: By posting time, the count increased to 86.]

I'll need to move on from this to write an essay (intro, overview, whatever), as well as footnotes on various oddities and discrepancies in the voting. I've struggled with the essay the last couple years, so fear I may again. On the other hand, the data is really extraordinary, so just dive into that. And every time I do this, I come away even more impressed with the extraordinary knowledge and exemplary judgment of the fine people who participate in this Poll. There's nothing we need more in this increasingly complex and scatter-brained world than smart people who develop and share their expertise so that we all may benefit. I'm proud to do my bit, and to help them do theirs.

I might as well start here and disclose my own ballot:

NEW RELEASES

  1. Fay Victor, Herbie Nichols SUNG: Life Is Funny That Way (Tao Forms)
  2. Emmeluth's Amoeba, Nonsense (Moserobie)
  3. Luke Stewart Silt Trio, Unknown Rivers (Pi)
  4. Ballister, Smash and Grab (Aerophonic)
  5. Dave Douglas, Gifts (Greenleaf Music)
  6. The Core, Roots (Moserobie)
  7. James Brandon Lewis Quartet, Transfiguration (Intakt)
  8. Roby Glod-Christian Ramond-Klaus Kugel, No Toxic (Nemu)
  9. Ivo Perelman Quartet, Water Music (RogueArt)
  10. Mike Monford, The Cloth I'm Cut From (self-released)

RARA AVIS (REISSUES/ARCHIVAL)

  1. Sonny Rollins, Freedom Weaver: The 1959 European Tour Recordings (Resonance)
  2. Mal Waldron & Steve Lacy, The Mighty Warriors: Live in Antwerp (1995, Elemental Music)
  3. Alice Coltrane, The Carnegie Hall Concert (1971, Impulse!)
  4. Karen Borca Trio Quartet & Quintet, Good News Blues: Live at the Vision Festival 1998 & 2005 (NoBusiness)
  5. Mars Williams & Hamid Drake, I Know You Are but What Am I (1996, Corbett vs. Dempsey)

As lists go, this feels pretty haphazard and tentative. I keep an ongoing ranked list, but don't put much effort into maintaining it. What usually happens is that once I decide an album is A-, I scan the list from the top or bottom (depending on whether it's a real solid A- or a somewhat iffy one), find something that is roughly comparable, and insert the new record above or below that reference point. I fiddled with these a bit, but didn't do much rechecking. Fact is, I never do much rechecking.

This week's batch of reviews are mostly albums that popped up on ballots. I wasn't previously aware that the Kenny Barron, Ivanna Cuesta, Welf Dorr, and [Ahmed] albums existed. Tomeka Reid was one of those download links I've been sitting on -- I probably have nearly 100 stashed away, but I'm loathe to do the extra work when it's so easy to play a promo or stream something -- but it did well enough I felt obligated to listen to it. (Same for Braxton, with all 8 hours + 10:36, available on Bandcamp.) Beger, Borca, and Brötzmann were promo CDs, but they too can be found complete on Bandcamp. I learned about the Armstrong from hype mail the day it became available to stream.

I started to prepare a file with all of my 2024 jazz reviews, similar to my 2023 best jazz, but it isn't ready to be presented yet. I'll clean it up if I decide I want to mention it in my poll essay, or just discard it until end-of-year. (Once I've started it, it's just another thing to try to keep updated.) One thing I can note here is that when I divvied the 2024 file up into jazz and non-jazz sections, the split among new A/A- records was 52-to-25, with old music 12-to-5. That seems like a lot, given that I wound up with only 84 for all of 2023 (and 75 for 2022, 77 for 2021, 86 for 2020, 77 for 2019, 67 for 2018, 84 for 2017, 75 for 2016, 81 for 2015, 69 for 2014, 87 for 2014 -- that's as far as the file series goes back, and the record as far as I can easily tell. Makes me wonder if I'm going soft in my old age, but other explanations are possible, including that the Mid-Year Poll has made me aware of 237 albums I didn't previously have in my tracking file. Most I haven't played yet, but the dozens I have gotten to contributed to this skew.

Given all the extra work on the Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll, I didn't get around to Speaking of Which until Saturday, when I started with a long section on why Biden should withdraw from the Democratic presidential nomination. This all seems so obvious that it's hard to fathom the negligence and nonsense of whoever's conspiring to keep Biden in the race. On the other hand, much else that popped up in the week's news is hard to fathom. I certainly haven't had the time to figure it out.

The Trump shooting remains a story I know very little about, and have very little interest in pursuing, unless it turns out that my suspicion, as yet purely based on cynicism, that it was a staged PR ploy, turns out to be valid. (By the way, we've been watching the old Jane Marple mysteries. In one of them, the killer creates a blackout, kills someone else, then shoots herself, nicking the ear, so that when the lights come back on, she appears to have been the target (and very lucky). The ear was chosen because it bleeds readily but not seriously. It also emphasizes the luck involved, because it's generally very hard to shoot someone's ear without hitting their head. Of course, there are other ways to fake it, at little risk to Trump. The whole thing would take skill and timing, which seems beyond Trump and his cronies, the chances of such a scheme getting exposed are high, and it's hard to imagine that even Trump could lie his way out of it. On the other hand, how gullible is just about everyone involved so far? So it can't possibly be true, but they're playing it just like it was scripted. And everyone else seems to be falling for it.

Hardly any adds to Speaking of Which today: fixed a couple broken links, some typos. I'll open a file for next week after Music Week goes up. It'll be lower priority than the Poll, but good for the occasional break from thrashing on the Poll essay. I haven't been following the RNC, but I'm sure the people who have will be able to explain in its all its true horror.

There's also this story: Inae Oh: [07-16] The DNC's plan to force Biden's nomination is everything people hate about the DNC. If they go through with this, it won't have been the first time they gamed the rules to help Biden escape normal Democratic procedures: derailing the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, where Biden had performed poorly in 2016, while making South Carolina the first primary, eliminated the most likely path for someone more credible than Dean Phillips to challenge Biden, so no one risked it. This would be shabby in any case, but is especially galling from the people who sell themselves as the guardians of democracy.

The marvelous Swiss avant-jazz pianist Irène Schweizer has died at 83:

Here's my Grade List. I first got acquainted with her work when I reviewed a 2-CD compilation of her work in 2006:

IRÈNE SCHWEIZER: Portrait [1984-2004] (Intakt) Nothing in this year's bumper crop of solo piano is anywhere near as robust as the three solo cuts on this sampler from 14 albums. Eight duos, mostly with drummers, impress even more. The Swiss free jazz pioneer's straight rhythmic undertow rivals Jarrett's, and her pianistics challenge Cecil Taylor's. But as Schweizer demonstrates on the longest piece ("First Meeting," with trombonist George Lewis), her real talent is her spontaneous response to the challenges of such minuscule aggregations. One of the few compilations ever that makes me want to hear every single one of the source albums. A

Her duos with drummers were extraordinary, especially the ones with Han Bennink (1995 and 2015). The latter was my number one jazz record of 2015:

Irène Schweizer/Han Bennink: Welcome Back (2015, Intakt): Piano-drum duo, both should be household names by now, and indeed the Dutch percussionist is one of the very few Europeans to make Downbeat Hall of Fame ballot. On the other hand, I've had to write in the name of the Swiss pianist the last few years -- this year ahead of Myra Melford and Marilyn Crispell, who are similar players only in the sense that anyone can be described as similar to Cecil Taylor; Schweizer comes as close as anyone to matching Taylor, but she can also work in some boogie woogie or pennywhistle jive, and closes here with a bit of Monk that evokes "Lullaby of Birdland." In the late 1980s Schweizer started a series of duos with top avant drummers (Louis Moholo was the first, followed by Gunter Sommer and Andrew Cyrille). The best was her 1995 meeting with Bennink (although I also have the 1990 Pierre Favre at A). This return engagement belongs alongside. A [cd]

New records reviewed this week:

أحمد [Ahmed]: Wood Blues (2022 [2024], Astral Spirits): British quartet of Pat Thomas (piano), Joel Grip (bass), Antonin Gerbal (drums), and Seymour Wright (alto sax), originally formed as a tribute to bass/oud player Ahmed Abdul-Malik (1927-93), fourth album since 2017, unless the 4-CD Giant Beauty box came out ahead of it (looks like it did, by 4 days). I've had people tell me this is the best live band on the planet. They probably thought the same of Cecil Taylor in the 1970s. A- [sp]

Kenny Barron: Beyond This Place (2024, Artwork): Pianist, I first really noticed him as a duet partner for Stan Getz (People Time, 1991), but he started in the early 1970s (cf. Peruvian Blue, 1974), is a DownBeat hall-of-famer, one of the most storied jazz educators in history, and still pretty sharp entering 80s. Helped out here by Steve Nelson (vibes), Kiyoshi Kitagawa (bass), Johnathan Blake (drums), and especially Immanuel Wilkins (alto sax). A- [sp]

BassDrumBone: Afternoon (2023 [2024], Auricle): Mark Helias, Gerry Hemingway, and Ray Anderson: I've been filing their records under the trombonist since 1986. This one seems a bit muted, but that just brings out the craft in the BassDrum. B+(***) [cd]

Jamie Baum Septet+: What Times Are These (2023 [2024], Sunnyside): Flute player, debut 1996, Septet -- including Jonathan Finlayson (trumpet), Sam Sadigursky (reeds), Brad Shepik (guitar), and Luis Perdomo (piano) -- has four albums 2004-18, expands to nine credits here plus four more vocalists picking their spots. Choice cut is "Sorrow Song," even beyond Kokayi's words. Other vocalists don't fare so well. B+(*) [sp]

Albert Beger/Ziv Taubenfeld/Shay Hazan/Hamid Drake: Cosmic Waves (2023 [2024], No Business): Tenor saxophonist, born in Istanbul, grew up in Israel, studied at Berklee, has a 1995 album, came to my attention with a pair of 2005 albums with William Parker under Hamid Drake's name. The others play bass clarinet and bass, for a dicey free jazz jam, with the drummer as impressive as ever. A- [cd]

Anthony Braxton: 10 Comp (Lorraine) 2022 (2022 [2024], New Braxton House, 10CD): Alto sax legend, credited with "saxophones, electronics" here, with each composition (numbered 423-428, 432-435) running from 41:31 to 60:09. The first six are trio with Adam Matlock (accordion/voice) and Susana Santos Silva (trumpet); the last four are quartet, with a second saxophonist (James Fei) and two bassists (Zach Rowden, Carl Testa). Way too long for anything other than a glancing view, but the first trio has limited appeal: sure, the accordion isn't as grating as Braxton's bagpipe albums, but that's the direction, and the operatic vocals have no more appeal when sung over abstractions than they do over schmaltz. The quartet is similar musically but with fewer annoyances, which doesn't necessarily make it more interesting, or even listenable (though sometimes it is). Length: 490:36. B+(*) [bc]

George Cartwright & Bruce Golden: Dilate (2024, self-released): Saxophonist and drummer, played together in the final iteration of Cartwright's group Curlew (founded 1979, but I think we're talking 2002-03 here). Sounds mostly like electronics and percussion, but all the credits have to say is: "george licked sounds; bruce nailed sounds." Some bits I really like, but others wear me down and out. B+(*) [bc]

Ivanna Cuesta: A Letter to the Earth (2023 [2024], Orenda): Drummer, from Dominican Republic, studied there and at Berklee, based in Boston, first album, composed by, also credited with electronics, with Ben Solomon (sax), Kris Davis (piano), and Max Ridley (bass) -- all terrific here. Bit of guest vocal at the end (Pauli Camou). A- [sp]

Jeremiah Cymerman: Body of Light (2022-23 [2024], 5049): Clarinet player, fifteen-plus albums since 2007, first two pieces here appear to be solo, credits including synths, percussion, sequences, bass. The other two (longer) tracks add drums (Mike Pride) and either guitar-cello or violin. Either way this mostly comes off as ambient. B+(*) [sp]

Welf Dorr/Elias Meister/Dmitry Ishenko/Kenny Wollesen: So Far So Good (2022 [2024], self-released): Alto saxophonist, born in Germany, based in New York, first album appears to be a Flowers for Albert thinking of Einstein not Ayler, unless it was the group called Funk Monk. Backed by guitar, accordion/electric bass, and drums, has traces of soul jazz and funk fusion, but mostly as a vehicle for distinguished saxophone. A- [bc]

Edition Redux: Better a Rook Than a Pawn (2023, Audiographic): I lost track of Ken Vandermark's projects when he pulled most of his work behind the paywall, so I jumped on this new group as soon as I noticed it: Erez Dessel (piano/synth), Lily Finnegan (drums), Beth McDonald (tuba/electronics), and Vandermark (reeds, notably baritone sax). Piano tends to lead, but the real power remains the saxophonist. B+(***) [bc]

Bill Frisell: Orchestras (2021-22 [2024], Blue Note): Guitarist, long-established, leads a trio with Thomas Morgan (bass) and Rudy Royston (drums), featured here surrounded by symphony orchestras (Brussels Philharmonic, Umbria Jazz Orchestra), his (and some other) compositions scaled up by Michael Gibbs. Quick take is that the full strings on the first disc are a turn off. Dispensing with them, the second disc is rather enaging. B+(**) [sp]

Paul Giallorenzo Trio: Play (2021 [2023], Delmark): Chicago pianist, first trio album in 2012, second with this trio of Joshua Abrams and Mikel Patrick Avery. B+(*) [sp]

Erik Griswold/Chloe Kim/Helen Svoboda: Anatomical Heart (2023 [2024], Earshift Music): Pianist, based in Brisbane, Australia, a dozen-plus albums since 2002, has a fondness for prepared piano. Trio with drums and bass. The bit of jerkiness keeps it interesting. B+(**) [sp]

Sarah Hanahan: Among Giants (2024, Blue Engine): Alto saxophonist, first album, quartet with Marc Cary (piano), Nat Reeves (bass), and Jeff "Tain" Watts (drums), with extra percussion on 4 (of 8) tracks. Mainstream, with considerable power, and more than a little finesse. B+(***) [sp]

Simon Hanes: Tsons of Tsunami (2024, Tzadik): California-born, based in New York, plays baritone guitar here, has mostly worked under group names (Tredici Bacci, Trigger, Shimmer, Guerilla Toss; Tsons of Tsunami was the group name for a 2013 album called Fearless Riders of the Holy Curl. He describes these compositions as "surf-based," backed with trombone, horn, waterphone, vibraphone, and drums. B+(**) [sp]

Roger Kellaway: Live at Mezzrow (2023 [2024], Cellar Music): Pianist, first album 1963, first new one since 2019, with bass (Jay Leonhart) and drums (Dennis Mackrel) plus guest Roni Ben-Hur (guitar). He's always been a bop era pianist with a little stride in his style. B+(*) [sp]

Brian Landrus: Plays Ellington & Strayhorn (2023 [2024], Palmetto): Baritone saxophonist, also plays similar instruments, plus some piccolo and flutes, backed quite capably by Dave Stryker (guitar), Jay Anderson (bass), and Billy Hart (drums), playing fourteen songs you can't go wrong with. B+(***) [cd]

Nduduzo Makhathini: Unomkhubulwane (2024, Blue Note): South African pianist, started leading albums in 2014, got a big profile boost when Blue Note picked him up in 2020. Third album there, sings some (not fancy or dramatic, but quite agreeably), backed by Zwelakhe-Duma Bell le Pere (bass) and Francisco Mela (drums). B+(***) [sp]

Fabiano do Nascimento & Sam Gendel: The Room (2024, Real World): Brazilian guitarist, several albums since 2011 -- I particularly liked 2015's Dança Dos Tempos -- here in a very nice duo with soprano sax. B+(**) [sp]

Madeleine Peyroux: Let's Walk (2024, Just One Recording/Thirty Tigers): Jazz singer-songwriter, born in Georgia but grew up in France, ten or so albums since 1996, aimed early for Billie Holiday phrasing, returns after a six-year pause with a new batch of songs that defy expectations. I could see this one being taken for Americana, if you pardon the bit of French (in my book, that's a plus). B+(***) [sp]

Tomeka Reid Quartet: 3+3 (2023 [2024], Cuneiform): Cellist, based in Chicago, helped revitalize the post-2000 AACM, and has an impressive list of albums since her 2015 Quartet, finally a MacArthur "Genius" Fellow in 2022. Same group here, with Mary Halvorson (guitar), Jason Roebke (bass), and Tomas Fujiwara (drums). Three longish pieces: sags a bit in the middle but closes real strong. A- [dl]

Michael Shrieve: Drums of Compassion (2024, 7D Media): Drummer, played in Santana 1969-74, formed Go in 1976 with Stomu Yamashita and Steve Winwood, with later groups like Spellbinder. I recognized the name, and found him in my database, but in the New Age section, with two unheard albums (1984, 1989). Not much jazz there, but some of his many collaborators here count, starting with percussionists Jack DeJohnette, Zakir Hussain, Airto Moriera, and Babatunde Olatunji. Not just drums, but keyboards, sax (Skerik), and electronics (Amon Tobin). B+(*) [sp]

Harry Skoler: Red Brick Hill (2022 [2024], Sunnyside): Clarinet player, three albums 1995-99, this is only his third since, following a Mingus study in 2022. Strong support here on vibes (Joel Ross), bass (Dezron Douglas), and drums (Johnathan Blake), with one-track guest spots from Marquis Hill (trumpet), Christian Sands (piano), and Grégoire Maret (harmonica). B+(**) [sp]

Something Else! [Featuring Vincent Herring]: Soul Jazz (2024, Smoke Sessions): Mainstream "supergroup," alto saxophonist gets featured spotlight but Jeremy Pelt (trumpet) steals as much spotlight. Also with Wayne Escoffery (tenor sax), Paul Bollenback (guitar), David Kikoski (piano), Essiet Essiet (bass), and Otis Brown III (drums). They swing a little, swagger too. B+(*) [sp]

Gregory Tardy: In His Timing (2023, WJ3): One of many mainstream tenor saxophonist to emerge in the 1990s, starting out on Impulse!, but mostly recording on SteepleChase since then. But he plays clarinet here, paired with violin (Regina Carter), backed by piano-bass-drums. Sometimes the mix pays dividends, sometimes not so much. B+(*) [bc]

Alan Walker: A Little Too Late (2024, Aunt Mimi's): Singer-songwriter, started in a group I've never heard of, the Brilliant Mistakes (three albums 1998-2008), second solo album. Plays piano, some pop craft, some strings. B+(*) [cd]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Louis Armstrong: Louis in London (1968 [2024], Verve): A previously unreleased BBC radio shot from July 2, 1968, billed as his "last great performance," three years before his death in 1971. He had been in decline for several years, often unable to play trumpet, but his vocals remained endearing, with a couple songs turning into big pop hits. He's credited with trumpet here, which seems good enough, his voice even better, as he runs through thirteen songs, most signature hits, a proper career summary. A- [sp]

Derek Bailey/Sabu Toyozumi: Breath Awareness (1987 [2024], NoBusiness): British guitarist (1932-2005), a major figure in the avant-garde (albeit one that I've only lightly sampled, and never really gotten the hang of), in an improv duo with the Japanese drummer. Scratchy, abstract, requires close listening, sometimes rewards it. B+(***) [cd]

Karen Borca Trio Quartet & Quintet: Good News Blues: Live at the Vision Festival 1998 & 2005 (1998-2005 [2024], No Business): One of the few bassoon players in any branch of jazz, especially in free jazz, she led groups so rarely that this is her first collection as leader, but Discogs credits her with 30 albums, many with her husband, Jimmy Lyons, also Cecil Taylor, William Parker, Joel Futterman, Alan Silva, Bill Dixon. The early set here has Parker and Rob Brown (alto sax). Brown returns for the late set, with Reggie Workman, and is stellar throughout. A- [cd]

Peter Brötzmann/Toshinori Kondo/Sabu Toyozumi: Complete Link (2016 [2024], NoBusiness): Tenor sax/tarogato, trumpet/electronics, drums. Within our ten-year window for "new releases," with both of the principals recently departed, this feels more like an archival find. They had a fairly long run together in the quartet, with William Parker and Hamid Drake, named for their first album, Die Like a Dog. I always found their records a bit too abrasive, but here I'm not only not bothered, I'm feeling a bit nostalgic. A- [cd]

Nat King Cole: Live at the Blue Note Chicago (1953 [2024], Iconic): Pianist and singer (1917-65), had his first r&b hits in 1942, cracked the pop top ten in 1944 with "Straighten Up and Fly Right," hit number one in 1946 with "For Sentimental Reasons," followed by "Nature Boy," "Mona Lisa," and "Too Young" -- all in these live sets, a quartet with guitar (John Collins), bass (Charlie Harris), and drums (Lee Young). B+(**) [sp]

The Jazzanians: We Have Waited Too Long (1988 [2024], Ubuntu Music): In 1984, Dave Brubeck's son Darius organized a jazz program at the University of Natal, in South Africa. A few years later, he organized this "first multiracial student jazz ensemble from South Africa," and took them on tour, and into the studio. Best known player now is probably Zim Ngqawana (alto sax/flute). They kick off with a very infectious township jive groove. They're not all that delightful. B+(**) [sp]

Charles Mingus: Incarnations (1960 [2024], Candid): The bassist recorded two sessions for Nat Hentoff's label, which immediately led to the albums Presents Charles Mingus and Mingus. In 1985, Mosaic collected those albums and outtakes for The Complete Candid Recordings of Charles Mingus, In 1990, Candid took some of those for Mysterious Blues. This albums grabs five more takes (one previously unissued). B+(**) [sp]

Louis Moholo-Moholo: Louis Moholo-Moholo's Viva-La-Black (1988 [2024], Ogun): South African drummer, moved to Europe in 1964, emerged as a prominent free jazz drummer in the 1970s. Leads a sextet here, with Sean Bergin (tenor/alto sax), Steve Williamson (tenor/soprano sax), Claude Deppa (trumpet/flugelhorn), Roberto Bellatalla (bass), and Thebe Lipere (percussion). B+(**) [bc]

Septet Matchi-Oul: Terremoto (1971 [2024], Souffle Continu): Label dedicated to "Treasures of the French Underground," this one-shot group led by Chilean-French pianist Manuel Villarroel qualifies nicely. No other names I immediately recognize, but some further research may be in order. B+(***) [sp]

Sun Ra & His Arkestra: Pink Elephants on Parade (1985-90 [2024], Modern Harmonic): A "small sample" of songs from Walt Disney movies, eight from two dates in 1988-89, 5 more from 5 different venues, the first 9 tracks previously unreleased. Vocals on most tracks, none slick or particularly funny, but amused? Sure. B+(***) [sp]

John Wright Trio: South Side Soul (1960 [2024], Craft): Pianist (1934-2017), born in Kentucky but moved to Chicago when he was two. First album, with bass (Wendell Roberts) and drums (Walter McCants). [sp]

Old music:

Albert Beger: The Primitive (1995, NMC): Israeli tenor saxophonist, plays some flute, first album, quartet with piano (John Bostock), bass guitar (Gabi Maier), and drums (Asaf Sirkis). B+(**) [sp]

Albert Beger Quartet: The Art of the Moment (2000, Third Ear Music): Curious lack of information on this, label name appears on some streaming sites (NMC seems more likely), quartet with guitar, bass, and drums (no idea who). Impressive saxophonist, rhythm section has some spunk, flute I could do without. Need to work on that discography. B+(*) [sp]

Welf Dorr: Funk Monk 2002 (2002 [2020], self-released): Alto saxophonist, from Germany, based in New York, led the band Funk Monk from 1996-2009, various lineups, released a Live at the Knitting Factory in 1999 but that seems to be all. Dorr salvaged this tape from Izzy Bar in July 2002, and claims all compositions, so no Monk tribute here: more horns (Antonio Dangerfield on trumpet, Melvin Smith on tenor sax, trombone on two tracks), backed by a bubbling array of keys, guitar, bass, and drums. B+(*) [sp]

Welf Dorr: Flowers for Albert (2005 [202], self-released): The saxophone/flute player/composer has laid claim to this tape, although his name appears last on the cover, after Kenny Wolleson (drums), Jonathan Finlayson (trumpet), Hock Temesgen (bass), and Shoko Nagai (piano). Title comes from David Murray's tribute to Ayler, but Dorr's preferred Albert is Einstein, seeing this as the centennial of his three breakthrough papers on physics. B+(**) [sp]

Welf Dorr Unit: Blood (2014 [2018], Creative Sources): Brooklyn group, leader plays alto sax and bass clarinet, backed by guitar (Dave Ross), bass (Dmitry Ishenko), and drums (Joe Hertenstein). Guitar runs a bit heavy. B+(*) [bc]

Welf Dorr/Dmitry Ishenko/Joe Hertenstein: Pandemic House Sessions (2020 [2021], self-released): Previous Unit reduced to a trio, recorded at the drummer's apartment. Losing the guitar gives the saxophonist a lot more breathing room. B+(***) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Greg Copeland: Empire State (Franklin & Highland, EP) [09-06]
  • Ize Trio: The Global Suites (self-released) [08-02]
  • Frank Paul Schubert/Michel Pilz/Stefan Scheib/Klaus Kugel: Live at FreeJazz Saar 2019 (Nemu) [05-01]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

prev -- next