Blog Entries [0 - 9]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
Joăo 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 Nińo & 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:
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.
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.
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:
Mondoweiss:
Seraj Assi: [07-21]
Israeli soldiers flaunt war crimes on social media. Why aren't they
held accountable? "In video after video, soldiers document their
atrocities, marking a new era of impunity."
Julia Conley: [07-22]
UNICEF reports Israel is killing kids at shocking rates amid West
Bank assault: "Since Israel began its bombardment nearly 10
months ago, 143 Palestinian children have been killed in the West
Bank."
Awdah Hathaleen: [07-22]
In Umm al-Khair, the occupation is damning us to multigenerational
trauma: "I saw the first bulldozers arrive in my village 17
years ago. Now, after the most brutal weeks in our history, my son
will carry similarly painful memories."
Shir Hver: [07-19]
The end of Israel's economy: "As Israel's genocidal war against
Gaza continues unabated, the Israeli economy is facing a catastrophe.
The physical destruction in Israel from the war has been minimal,
but one thing has been destroyed: its future."
Edo Konrad: [07-20]
Israeli settlers believe their moment has come. "Never have
settlers had this kind of influence over Israeli politics, and
Netanyahu is afraid of them bringing down the government, which
gives them enormous influence and power to keep the war going."
Ibtisam Mahdi: [07-18]
Searching for Gaza's missing children: "Buried under rubble,
lost in the chaos, decomposed beyond recognition: the desperate
struggle to find thousands amid Israel's ongoing war."
Maziar Motamedi: [07-21]
Everything to know about Israeli and Houthi attacks amid war on
Gaza: "The Yemeni group remains undeterred in its support for
Palestine despite the massive Israeli attack on a key port."
Qassam Muaddi: [07-16]
Israel's legalization of settlements in the northern West Bank,
explained: "Israel is launching a political and military
assault on the West Bank. Its legalization of settlements in
the north is a crucial part of the story."
Mouin Rabbani: [07-21]
Polio and the destruction of Gaza's health infrastructure:
"Polio had been eradicated in the Gaza Strip but was detected this
past week. While it is unclear how it has suddenly reappeared it is
beyond doubt how it's spreading: Israel's systematic destruction of
Gaza's health infrastructure."
America's Israel (and Israel's America):
Israel vs. world opinion:
Arash Azizi:
The left's self-defeating Israel obsession: "Taking an extreme
position, then demanding total orthodoxy, does no favors for democratic
socialism in America." I'm out of "free articles" at The Atlantic,
so I can only imagine what this person is complaining about and/or
purports to believe in and/or thinks the alternatives are.
Ghousoon Bisharat: [07-23]
'Israel always sold the occupation as legal. The ICJ now terrifies
them': "Palestinian lawyer Diana Buttu unpacks the ICJ opinion
on Israel's military regime, and the lessons of turning international
law into action."
Mark Braverman: [07-21]
Palestinian Christians challenge the World Council of Churches on
Gaza: "Palestinian Christians are criticizing a World Council
of Churches statement for ignoring the context of the October 7
attacks and refusing to call out the unfolding Gaza genocide."
Jonathan Cook:
Emilio Dabed: [07-16]
By failing to stop the Gaza genocide, the ICJ is working exactly
as intended: "The international legal order was built to
administer colonial violence, not to end wars -- and that poses
serious questions for the Palestinian struggle."
Richard Falk: [07-24]
Why the world must stand behind ICJ decision on Israeli occupation:
"While this was only an 'advisory opinion,' it carries significant
weight through the level of judicial consensus on such a politically
polarising topic."
Masha Gessen: [07-20]
What we know about the weaponization of sexual violence on October
7th: "Rape is a shocking and sadly predictable feature of war.
But the nature of the crime makes it difficult to document and,
consequently, to prosecute."
Hanno Hauenstein:
Gideon Lelvy: Getting rid of Netanyahu is not enough: An
interview with "one of the most articulate critics of Israeli
war and apartheid." Asked whether there was any discussion in
Israel about a recent massacre in Gaza:
I can guarantee you, if it wouldn't have been two hundred killed
in Nuseirat but two thousand, it would still be justified by most
of Israel. To them, Israel has the right to do whatever it wants
after October 7. And it's not up to the world to put up limits for
us. That's the mindset. Obviously, there are those who see things
differently, but they are a minority and quite scared to raise
their voices. Most Israelis would justify any aggression against
Palestinians right now, on any scale.
Jake Johnson: [07-15]
World 'cannot remain silent in the face of this endless massacre,'
says Lula: "The Israeli government continues to sabotage the
peace process and the cease-fire in the Middle East," said the
Brazilian president after a deadly weekend of bombings."
David Kattenburg: [07-19]
In a historic ruling, ICJ declares Israeli occupation unlawful,
calls for settlements to be evacuated, and for Palestinian
reparations: "The International Court of Justice declared
Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is
unlawful, the settlements must be evacuated, and Palestinians
must be compensated and allowed to return to their lands."
Yoav Litvin: [07-19]
Israel: where genocide meets real estate.
Harold Meyerson: [07-22]
A modest suggestion for an American Jewish response to Bibi: excommunicate
him. "At the Republicans' behest, Netanyahu will speak to Congress
on Wednesday. What better time to figuratively cast him out?"
Ralph Nader: [07-15]
The Gaza genocide deepens: the reckoning begins for the
perpetrators.
Dan Owen: [07-24]
How Israel plans to whitewash its war crimes in Gaza: "The Israeli
army uses the veneer of internal accountability to fend off external
criticism. But its record reveals how few perpetrators are punished."
Richard E Rubenstein: [07-19]
Zionism: the end of an illusion.
Raja Shehadeh: [07-23]
The world's highest court has confirmed what we Palestinians always
knew: Israel's settlements are illegal.
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.
Intelligencer Staff:
Jonathan Alter: [07-19]
Good news for Democrats: Trump's bad speech wrecked the Republican
convention.
Zack Beauchamp: [07-15]
How the Republican convention and Project 2025 work together.
Ben Burgis: [07-19]
So much for a newly reborn Republican Party.
David Freedlander:
Mel Gurtov: [07-22]
Gathering of the clan: The Trump criminal enterprise at the RNC.
Antonia Hitchens:
- [07-16]
Trump, unity, and MAGA miracles at the R.N.C. "The former
President's campaign has always been inflected with a bit of
martyrdom. When he walked onto the convention floor on Monday
night, his right ear bandaged, it was the most profound and
unexpected culmination of all the messianic talk."
- [07-19]
The spectacle of Donald Trump's R.N.C.: "An inside look at the
Republican Party's weeklong celebration of the former President."
Ben Jacobs: [07-17]
It was losers night at the RNC: "One by one, Trump's former rivals
kissed the ring." Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, etc.
Fred Kaplan:
Branko Marcetic:
Amanda Marcotte: [07-17]
MAGA energy takes over the RNC: Republicans are riled up over Donald
Trump's shooting: "Republicans at the convention aren't upset
over Donald Trump's shooting -- they're giddy."
Harold Meyerson: American Prospect writer attending
the RNC:
[07-15]
This week's Republican challenge: "How can their convention,
and nominee, call for both calming de-escalation and furious
retribution?"
[07-16]
Republican make-believe: playing nice and loving workers: "That
was the implausible message of their convention's opening night."
Republican elites are so used to the gullibility of their base, they
assume they can just say anything, and no one will bat an eye.
[07-17]
The RNC, night two: the party as cult.
[07-18]
Would J.D. Vance join a UAW picket line outside a Tesla factory?
Quotes Vance: "We're done catering to Wall Street. We'll commit to
the working man!" Laughs.
[07-19]
A party of precarious manhood, led by a blithering idiot: "Trump's
acceptance speech was a mishmash of self-love, protestations of
toughness, and prefabricated lies." Opening line: "The problem with
Joe Biden, sometimes, is that you can't hear him. The problem with
Donald Trump is that you can." Trump's speech reminded Meyerson of
an article he wrote back in June:
[06-10]
How the Republicans became the party of precarious manhood:
"On Donald Trump's genius at exploiting working-class male
displacement and anxiety."
Rick Perlstein: [07-24]
Seeds of a conservative crack-up: "My conversation with them
[a group of progressive anti-abortion activists protesting the
RNC with signs like 'GOP murders babies'] was the only interesting
thing I absorbed at the Republican convention last week."
Chris Walker: [07-16]
Hundreds march against GOP in Milwaukee during first day of RNC.
Benjamin Wallace-Wells: [07-18]
The rise of the new right at the Republican National Convention:
"In Milwaukee, Donald Trump's choice of J.D. Vance as Vice-President
was seen as a breakthrough for the young conservative movement, which
blames elite institutions for the destruction of the American working
class." Not that they care one whit about the working class, but
they claim whatever they can, knowing that it gets under the skin
of Democrats, who at least feel guilty for their own betrayals.
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:
Perry Bacon Jr: [07-23]
The give groups of Democrats that ended Biden's candidacy: "How
the party decided."
- Opponents of Biden's Israel-Gaza policies: They may not have
had any power over the decision, but they were the first to smell
smoke, and to demonstrate Biden's weakness.
- Six middle-aged white guys: Biden-friendly pundits who sensed
that Biden could lose. I can think of many more than six, but
Bacon cites Ezra Klein, Nate Silver, Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, Dan
Pfeiffer, and Tommy Vietor (the "Pod Save America" guys).
- Donors: No names provided here, which is the way they like it.
- A weird coalition on Capitol Hill: The first to stick their
necks out were Lloyd Doggett and Peter Welch, their numbers
eventually swelling to an almost random
38 Democrats (out of 263).
- The big four: Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and
Barack Obama.
Bacon also wrote on Harris:
Ed Kilgore: [07-24]
No, the Biden-Harris switch is not a 'coup'.
Natasha Lennard:
Biden is no hero for stepping aside: Unfortunate when people
say he is, but rubbing dirt into his wounds won't help much either.
Sometimes you have to humor people in power to get them to do the
right things, especially when the right thing is giving up some of
their power. History can always be rewritten later.
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."
Heather Digby Parton: [07-22]
Joe Biden's brilliant exit: Democrats get a boost, Republicans left
bewildered.
Sean Rameswaram/Bryan Walsh: [07-23]
"What was not a race yesterday is a race today": David Axelrod on
Biden dropping out: "What a fresh face might mean for the
November election." An interview.
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.
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]
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
- Fay Victor, Herbie Nichols SUNG: Life Is Funny That Way (Tao Forms)
- Emmeluth's Amoeba, Nonsense (Moserobie)
- Luke Stewart Silt Trio, Unknown Rivers (Pi)
- Ballister, Smash and Grab (Aerophonic)
- Dave Douglas, Gifts (Greenleaf Music)
- The Core, Roots (Moserobie)
- James Brandon Lewis Quartet, Transfiguration (Intakt)
- Roby Glod-Christian Ramond-Klaus Kugel, No Toxic (Nemu)
- Ivo Perelman Quartet, Water Music (RogueArt)
- Mike Monford, The Cloth I'm Cut From (self-released)
RARA AVIS (REISSUES/ARCHIVAL)
- Sonny Rollins, Freedom Weaver: The 1959 European Tour Recordings (Resonance)
- Mal Waldron & Steve Lacy, The Mighty Warriors: Live in Antwerp (1995, Elemental Music)
- Alice Coltrane, The Carnegie Hall Concert (1971, Impulse!)
- Karen Borca Trio Quartet & Quintet, Good News Blues: Live at the Vision Festival 1998 & 2005 (NoBusiness)
- 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 Irčne 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:
IRČNE 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:
Irčne 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.
Tuesday, July 16, 2024
Speaking of Which
I'm starting this introduction on Tuesday, already two days late,
ignoring for now the new news pouring in, especially from the RNC.
Due to my
Mid-Year Jazz Critics
Poll project, I wasn't able to start until Saturday, at which
point I started with the long introduction to the
Biden section. After that, I scrounged up
a few quick links to seemingly important stories. The alleged Trump
shooting -- I'm not denying it, but I'm not fully buying it either --
had just happened, so I had to spin off a section on that. Monday
the Cannon ruling on the Trump documents case came down, so I had
to note that. If I find out that Hamas and Netanyahu agreed to a
cease fire deal -- I've heard that, but as I'm writing this I haven't
seen any confirmation -- I'll note that too. (But thus far I've been
smart to ignore past rumors of impending agreement.)
A couple days ago, still with Biden very much on my mind, I thought
I'd begin this introduction with a spur-of-the-moment tweet I
posted:
Unsolicited advice to the ruling class: can someone point out to Biden
that being president and running are two different full-time jobs. He
should pick one, like the one we need someone to focus on and do well,
right now. He could set a model we should add to the Constitution.
Looking it up now, I see that it only has 97 views, with 0 replies,
forwards, or likes. It seems like views have been steadily declining,
although the number of followers (640) is about double from a long
plateau about a year ago.
One thing that stimulated my thought was when I saw several folks
pushing a constitutional amendment to impose a maximum age limit on
presidents. (Search doesn't reveal a lot of examples, but
here's one.) I have no time to argue this here, but I've often
worried about the accumulation of arbitrary power in the presidency --
especially war-making power, but there are other issues here -- and
with in the development of a political personality cult (Reagan is
the obvious example, with Trump even more so, but they at least
remained aligned with their party, while Clinton and Obama used
their office to direct their party to their own personal fortunes,
a shift that worked to the detriment of other Democrats).
Banning self-succession (second consecutive terms) wouldn't
fix all of the problems with the presidency, but it would help,
especially in terms of democracy. I won't go into details here,
but there should also be limits on nepotism (spouses, children,
possibly more), and major campaign finance reforms. Whether you
keep the two-term total limit is optional -- eliminating it may
get rid of the often stupid "lame duck" argument. But I also
suspect that people will have little appetite for returning a
non-incumbent ex-president.
One more point: if presidents can't run again, maybe they'll
actually put their political instincts aside and settle into
actually doing their jobs. Trump is the obvious worst-case
example: the first thing he did after inauguration in 2017 was
to file as a candidate for 2020, and he returned to holding
campaign rallies a month or two later. Given how temperamental
his judgment was, we are probably lucky that he turned out to
be so oblivious to actually doing the job, but that's hardly
something we can count on saving us again. Even more competent
presidents were repeatedly distracted by political duties --
ones they were, as a requirement for selection, more interested
in, if not necessarily better at.
At this point, the essential skill sets of campaigners and
administrators have diverged so radically that it's almost
inconceivable that you could find one person for both jobs.
I could imagine a constitutional change where whoever wins the
presidency has to appoint someone else (or maybe a troika) to
run the executive government, while being personally limited
to symbolic public service, like the King of England, or the
President of Israel. But the amendment I proposed above should
be a much easier sell, especially given the mess we're in now.
Fortunately, we don't actually need the amendment this year.
All we need is for Biden to drop out. As I explain below, there
are lots of good reasons for him to do so. This is one more,
and if he grasped it, would be a principled one.
About 10 PM Tuesday, time to call it quits for this week. I may
pick up a few adds while I'm working on the similarly delayed Music
Week, but I expect to be extremely busy on deadline day for the
Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll (up to 78 ballots as I write this). No
doubt I'll have to do a lot of cross-checking next week to keep
from repeating stories. But the big ones, rest assured, will
return, pretty much as they are here, so what's below should
give you a leg up on everyone else.
Top story threads:
Israel:
Mondoweiss:
Ellen Cantarow: [07-14]
A cancer on the West Bank: "How the Israeli extreme right has
achieved victory." Essential history, starting with Gush Emunim
and the Alon Plan. If you don't know this stuff, you should.
Tareq S Hajjaj: [07-14]
Testimonies from the Mawasi massacre: 90 people buried in the
sand: "The Israeli army committed another massacre against
displaced Palestinians in tent encampments, this time in the
coastal Mawasi area, which Israel had designated as a 'safe
zone.'"
Haggai Matar: [07-04]
A flawed peace conference offers a radical proposal: hope:
"In a context of fear, hatred, and violence, an Israeli-Palestinian
gathering that seemed detached from reality actually represented
something revolutionary."
Qassam Muaddi: [07-11]
Why the West Bank is on the verge of economic collapse: "The
West Bank's economic crisis and the expansion of Israel's settlements
are connected."
Mahmoud Mushtaha: [07-10]
Israel ordered thousands to 'safe' areas in Gaza City -- them bombed
them: "After fleeing west at the Israeli army's instruction,
Palestinians quickly found themselves encircled and under fire
from tanks, drones, and snipers."
Orly Noy: [07-04]
Only an anti-fascist front can save us from the abyss: "Israeli
society will emerge from this war more violent, nationalist, and
militaristic than ever. The work of curbing its worse impulses
must start now."
Abed Abou Shhadeh: [07-15]
For Palestinian parents, every day of this war provokes existential
anxiety: "In the annihilation of Gaza, we see a vision of our
future as Palestinians inside Israel. So do we cling to our land,
or ensure our children's safety and leave?"
Oren Ziv:
America's Israel (and Israel's America):
Israel vs. world opinion:
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz: [07-12]
We must understand Israel as a settler-colonial state: I'd go a
bit deeper and say we can only understand Israel if we start
from acknowledging that it is primarily a settler-colonial state.
I'm not saying this because I think "settler-colonial state" means
we should automatically condemn Israel, and especially not to argue
that the only solution is expulsion ("go back where you came from"
just won't do here). But identifying it as such puts Israel into a
conceptual framework that really helps explain the options and
choices that Israeli political leaders made -- many of which do
indeed deserve approbation -- as well as providing a framework to
see some way of ending the conflict on terms that most people can
find agreeable. I would add that among settler-colonial states,
Israel is exceptionally frustrated, which is why it has turned
into such a cauldron of interminable violence.
Marcy Newman: [07-13]
The reluctant memoirist exposes the academy: "At a time when
Palestine activism and free expression at U.S. universities are
under attack, Steven Salaita's new memoir disabuses us of the
notion that these universities are anything other than hedge
funds with a campus."
James North: [07-10]
Israel's leading paper says its own army deliberately killed Israelis
on October 7. But in the US media: silence: "Israel ordered
the 'Hannibal Directive' on October 7 by ordering the killing of
captive Israeli soldiers and civilians. But the U.S. media continues
to hide the truth."
Alice Rothchild: [07-14]
The destruction of healthcare in Gaza and the scientific assessment
of settler colonial violence: "The Jewish Voice for Peace Health
Advisory Council held a distinguished panel of experts that addressed
the settler colonial determinants of health in light of the Gaza
genocide." Following up on these documents:
Philip Weiss: [07-14]
Weekly Briefing: The 'NYT' justifies Israeli slaughter of civilians
as necessary tactic: "The New York Times says Israel has been
'forced' to massacre Palestinian civilians because Hamas militants
hide in bedrooms. The U.S. used such justifications for massacres
in Vietnam."
Trump:
Well, this happened:
[Vox]: [07-14]
Who shot Trump? What we know about the assassination attempt.
[PS: This piece has been updated after I wrote the following, as
more information was released, such as the identities of the
people shot, including the alleged shooter.]
"This is what happened at the Butler rally, as we understand it
right now." As I understand it, shots were fired during a Trump
rally. Trump dropped to the ground. When he appeared again, there
was blood on his face. Secret Service surrounded him, and moved
him off the platform. The people around him jerked when he did,
but afterwards mostly looked confused. He tweeted later that he
had been shot, nicked in the ear. (From his head angle at the
time of the shot, it must have come from the far side -- not from
the crowd, or from the gallery behind him.) Reports are that two
people wound up dead -- one the alleged shooter, and another person,
still unidentified, and two more people were injured. It's not
clear where those people, including the shooter, were, or what the
timing of were. One report says the shots came from an "AR-type"
gun.
I'll link to more pieces as I collect them. But knowing only
what is in here (and having watched the video provided), my first
reaction is that a real assassination attempt like this would be
very hard to pull off, but would be very easy to fake (assuming
you could imagine that anyone involved would be willing to do so,
which with this particular crew isn't inconceivable; still, the
risk of faking it and then getting exposed seems like it should
be pretty extreme). No need to jump to that conclusion, but I'm
pretty sure the "grassy knoll" squad is going to jump all over
this story. More Vox pieces are collected in:
Donald Trump targeted in assassination attempt.
Zack Beauchamp:
Constance Grady: [07-15]
The pure media savvy of Trump's first pump photo, explained by an
expert: "It's his brand now." The interview goes into the making
of other iconic photos, as well as Trump's history of seizing on
moments like this.
Jeet Heer:
[07-13]
In the wake of the Trump shooting, we need clarity -- and caution:
"The best way to fend off conspiracy theories and instability is by
emphasizing the need for solid facts."
[07-14]
Biden condemns political violence without whitewashing Trump:
"The president deftly avoids the trap of surrendering his critique
of MAGA lawlessness."
Murtza Hussain:
Will this make Trump more popular? "Assassination attempts
targeting populist leaders have had a track record of boosting
their popularity."
Sarah Jones: [07-15]
God's strongman.
Ed Kilgore: [07-15]
Trump assassination attempt makes 2024 election more bonkers than
ever: "But will it cinch a victory for him?" Evidently,
"many Republicans are
already saying the bullets that nearly killed Donald Trump have
clinched his return to the White House."
Natasha Lennard:
The only kind of "political violence" all U.S. politicians oppose.
Eric Levitz:
[07-14]
Heated rhetoric is dangerous, but honest disagreement is necessary
for democracy: "Critics are blaming Democratic rhetoric for
Trump's shooting. Here's what they're missing." Subheds: "Biden's
most heated rhetoric about Trump is defensible"; "heated rhetoric
is an inextricable feature of democratic life." Maybe he figures
it's too soon, but sooner or later someone will recall that the
only candidate who's ever called for "2nd amendment people" to
take matters into their own hands is one Donald J. Trump.
[07-14]
Yes, it's still fair to call Trump a threat to democracy: "The
attempt on his life shouldn't cow his critics." Looks like a new
title for the same article.
Stephen Prager: [07-16]
'Political violence' is all around us: "Condemning 'political
violence' rings hollow coming from politicians who are highly
selective in the violence they deplore. We should oppose it
consistently."
Aja Romano: [07-15]
The Trump assassination attempt was a window into America's fractured
reality. I'm not sure whether the subhed is a conclusion or just
a premise: "The shooting wasn't staged, but conspiratorial thinking
has become widespread in our paranoid age." You know, the latter
truism doesn't prove "the shooting wasn't staged." It just suggests
that we shouldn't jump to that conclusion.
Helen Santoro/Lucy Dean Stockton/David Sirota/Joel
Warner:
Pennsylvania GOP fought a ban on the gun used in Trump shooting.
Timothy Messer-Kruse: [07-15]
The myth of the magic bullet: He doesn't weigh in on the Trump
shooting, but takes on the more general idea, that a single bullet
can change history for the better. I rather doubt his assertion
that "there would still be a MAGA movement" without Trump, because
no matter how much fuel of "white resentment" had accumulated, it
still took a spark to set it off, and it's hard to find a leader
with Trump's particular mix of ego and ignorance. But he is right
when he says, "Trump is not a threat to democracy as much as he
is a symbol of its deepening absence."
On Monday, Trump announced his pick for vice president: JD Vance:
Zack Beauchamp: [07-15]
What J.D. Vance really believes: "The dark worldview of Trump's
choice for vice president, explained."
Vance has said that, had he been vice president in 2020, he would
have carried out Trump's scheme for the vice president to overturn
the election results. He has fundraised for January 6 rioters. He
once called on the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation
into a Washington Post columnist who penned a critical piece about
Trump. After last week's assassination attempt on Trump, he attempted
to whitewash his radicalism by blaming the shooting on Democrats'
rhetoric about democracy without an iota of evidence.
This worldview translates into a very aggressive agenda for a
second Trump presidency. In a podcast interview, Vance said that
Trump should "fire every single mid-level bureaucrat" in the US
government and "replace them with our people." If the courts attempt
to stop this, Vance says, Trump should simply ignore the law.
"You stand before the country, like Andrew Jackson did, and say
the chief justice has made his ruling, now let him enforce it," he
declares.
Aaron Blake: [07-15]
The risk of J.D. Vance: "Trump went with the MAGA pick. But the
2022 election suggests that might not be the right electoral one."
Jonathan Chait: [07-15]
J.D. Vance joins ticket with man he once called 'America's Hitler':
"Apparently he meant it as a compliment."
Ben Jacobs: [07-15]
J.D. Vance on his MAGA conversion: "Trump's man in Ohio once called
him 'America's Hitler,' but there's an explanation."
Sarah Jones: [07-15]
Hillbilly shapeshifter: "Re-reading J.D. Vance's memoir." This
came out earlier this year, but gets an update for the moment.
Ed Kilgore: [07-15]
J.D. Vance as VP means Trump picks MAGA over 'unity'.
What does "unity" even mean? Trump has complete control. He doesn't
need to compromise with anyone. One might ask why he would pick a
double-crossing weasel, but Trump probably figure he's on top of
that game. Maybe Kilgore is just trying to plug the Intelligencer
liveblog:
So much for 'national unity': RNC live updates. Republicans
don't need "unity": they believe they're the only ones who count,
so they already are "unity" -- now if they can just get rid of
everyone else, they'll be set (and America will be great again,
like it was when the other people didn't count).
Daniel Larison: [07-15]
What will Vance do for Trump's foreign policy? "The Ohio senator's
ideology is hard to nail down as he has vacillated between restraint
and interventionism."
Steve M: [07-15]
J.D. Vance probably hates you more than Trump does: "It is clear
that Vance is an angry, nasty person whose contempt for the people
he doesn't like is bone deep." Also:
Now that Trump has chosen Vance, I expect Democrats to focus on the
mean tweets Vance posted about Trump before he became a Trump fan.
I don't see the point -- politicians (and non-politicians) change
their minds about people all the time. Kamala Harris said harsh
things about Joe Biden during the 2020 campaign. George H.W. Bush
attacked Ronald Reagan's economic ideas in the 1980 campaign. I
think it's more important for voters to know how much contempt
Vance has for everyone who disagrees with him or does things he
doesn't like. I have kids, so he hates me. Maybe he hates you too.
Veronica Riccobene/Helen Santoro/Joel Warner:
J.D. Vance wants police to track people who have abortions.
Ross Rosenfeld:
The scary message Trump sent by choosing J.D. Vance: "The Ohio
senator is a sycophant who will never challenge or question his
boss -- not even to defend American democracy."
Of course, the Trump news doesn't end there.
Sasha Abramsky: [07-14]
A brief history of Trump and violence: "But that can't be allowed
to erase the long, ugly history of Trump's dalliance with violence."
David Atkins: [07-08]
Pay attention to Trump's every cruel and crazy syllable: "All eyes
are on President Biden's words, but Trump is getting meaner and
increasingly bonkers each day."
Let's look at just a few recent examples.
- Trump wants to make poor migrants fight each other for sport.
- Trump wants to ban electric cars because someone in an electric
boat might get eaten by a shark.
- Donald Trump wants to ban all vaccine mandates in schools,
which would include polio, measlesl, etc.
- Trump wants to end meaningful elections in the United States.
- Trump thinks the end of Roe v Wade was "amazing" and brags
that he was "able to kill Roe v. Wade.
Elizabeth Austin: [07-13]
Trump's Democrats-support-infanticide trope is an infuriating lie:
"Republicans like the soon-to-be GOP presidential nominee are mocking
every woman who got that horrible call from the obstetrician and made
the tragic decision to end a hopeless pregnancy."
Christopher Fettweis: [05-15]
Trump's big idea: Deploy assassination teams to Mexico: "His
plan to kill drug kingpins to solve the American opioid crisis
will backfire dramatically."
Chris Lehman: [07 -11]
Donald Trump's new strategy: act normal: "With the opposition in
disarray, Trump and his campaign have begun exhibiting unusual restraint
in hopes of expanding his support."
Clarence Lusane: [07-12]
Who thinks Donald Trump is racist? "Other racists, that's who!"
Nicole Narea: [07-15]
A right-wing judge just threw out a case against Trump in a brazen
abuse of power: "The classified documents case against Trump
hits another major setback before the 2024 election." Why?
In her ruling, Cannon argued that because Smith had not been appointed
a special counsel by the president and confirmed by the Senate, his
appointment violated the Constitution's Appointments Clause. . . .
Cannon's ruling, which relies on a stringent reading of the
Constitution and represents a brazen break with precedent, has
come under
heavy criticism from
legal scholars. Under her ruling, the appointment of prior
special counsels would have also come into question, from Archibald
Cox, who investigated the Watergate scandal that led to President
Richard Nixon's resignation, to Robert Mueller, who investigated
Russian interference in the 2016 election.
I'm sure there will be more on this next week. Well, for now,
this one is worth quoting at length:
Steve M.: [07-15]
The death of America is steady rot:
We think we'll lose democracy and the rule of law suddenly if Donald
Trump becomes president again. We think the edifice will be destroyed
like the Twin Towers on 9/11: the planes hit the buildings, and without
hours they collapsed in on themselves.
But our system is like a house that's rotting room by room. The
foundation has cracks. There are termites. The roof leaks. One room
after another has become uninhabitable.
We've lost the federal courts. The would-be murderers of America
already have the federal bench they need to sustain the horrible
America they want. A second Trump presidency won't really worsen
the federal bench -- it will only fix it in place in its current
form for several more decades. I'm 65, and I'll never live to see
a federal bench that isn't an extremist Republican legislature in
robes.
Through gerrymandering, we lost democracy in many state legislatures
years ago. In states like North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Texas, liberals
and moderates add up to more than 45% of the electorate and have exactly
none of the legislative power, because of gerrymandering. This happened
long before Trump and there were no "Death of Democracy" front-page
headlines.
If Trump wins in November, he and the thugs of Project 2025 might
take a wrecking ball to what's left of the house. But already several
rooms are closed off. It's unsafe to live in them. And even if Trump
loses, or wins and doesn't follow through with the worst ideas his
backers have proposed, many rooms in the house will continue to rot.
A lot of this rot can be traced back to Reagan in the 1980s, when
a brief majority of Americans put sentiment and emotion over reason
and practicality, and ceded power to the people Kurt Anderson called
Evil Geniuses (subtitle: The Unmaking of America: A Recent
History), and for that matter to the conspiracies -- to use a
word we've systematically been trained to abjure -- of the 1970s
that many others have written about (off the top of my head: Rick
Perlstein, Jane Mayer, Max Blumenthal, Kim Phillips-Fein, Laura
Kalman, Nancy McLean, Jeff Madrick). For sure, part of the blame
lies with Democrats, like Carter and Clinton, who thought they
could beat the Republicans at their own game, and some to with
Democrats like Obama and Biden, who chose to play along rather
than rouse the people to defend their rights against relentless
Republican assault.
M's point is absolutely right. Bad choices often take years,
sometimes decades, to manifest themselves. To cite two examples
where the elapsed time was too short to cloud causality, the
distance from Reagan's deregulation of the S&L industry to
its collapse was 6-8 years. The distance from Clinton's repeal
of Carter-Glass and the deregulation of derivatives -- changes
mostly championed by Republicans like Phil Gramm, but Clinton
signed off on them -- was 8-10 years. Longer, more insidious
time frames are even more common. I recall George Brockway
tracing the financial madness circa 2000 back to an obscure
banking law Republicans passed after their fluke congressional
win in 1946 -- the same one that gave us Taft-Hartley, which
had little effect on unionized auto, aircraft, steel, etc.,
workers through the 1960s but led to their collapse from the
1980s on. Similarly, there are blunders from the early Cold
War that still haunt us (like the overthrow of Iran in 1953).
We've been systematically starved of democracy for decades
now: ever since campaigns became media circuses, increasingly
in thrall to the sponsor class. Maybe now that the strangulation
has become so obvious -- the only choice we've been allowed is
between the two least popular, and quite arguably the two least
competent, politicians in America -- we'll finally realize our
need to struggle to breathe free. Or maybe we'll just fucking
die. After all, we're about 90% buried already.
. . . And other Republicans:
Sasha Abramsky: [07-02]
Will Arizona be MAGA's last stand? "Trump needs the state's votes
to win. But after its highest court revived an 1864 law that bans
abortions, all bets are off."
Hassan Ali Kanu: [07-11]
No, Trump and GOP have not 'softened' on abortion, women's rights:
"The language change in their platforms is nakedly dishonest bait and
switch."
Sarah Jones: [07-14]
The authoritarian plot: "At the National Conservatism conference,
Republicans mix with racists ranting about 'post-white America.'"
Steve M: I have a couple more of his posts elsewhere,
but let's go to town here:
[07-13]
First thoughts on the shooting (updated): Starts with his own
prediction tweet: "Every rank-and-file Republican voter believes
this was an assassination attempt ordered by President Biden.
Trump will soon start pouring gasoline on the flames by stating
this as if it's fact." Update shows it's happening even ahead of
Trump's provocation. He does have them well trained.
[07-13]
Project 2025: the gaslighting is well underway.
[07-13]
Fear the all-powerful left! "The fever dreams of the propaganda-addled
crazies at the Heritage Foundation are hilarious."
[07-12]
Are Biden's poll numbers impervious to bad news, like Trump's?
I think the upshot here is that while people may not know what (or
whom) to believe, they've become so wary of being lied to that they
reject any news, probably from any source, leaving them impervious
to change. If you're a journalist/pundit, you may think it's your
job to adjust to new facts, but if you're not, it's just fucking
noise, almost all of which can be discounted.
[07-11]
New York Times editorial: Trump is bad -- but the Republican
Party is awesome! That editorial was titled
Trump is not fit to lead.
Not a single Democrat is cited in this editorial. I understand that
that's the point -- the ed board members, if you asked them about
this, would say, "We're making the point that even Trump's fellow
Republicans know he's unfit" (though no Republican in good standing
dares to say that). But this is also a sign that the Times
ed board agrees with the Republican Party's decades-long campaign
to "other" Democrats. Our political culture accepts the GOP's assertion
that Democrats aren't really Americans.
[07-10]
Dear Democrats: You know people can hear you, right? (updated):
It's been thirteen days since the June 27 debate. On each of those
thirteen days, the top news story in America -- not just in the
monomaniacal New York Times, but everywhere -- has been
"Christ, That Joe Biden Is Really, Really Old. He Can't Possibly
Win. He Has to Step Aside. Has He Done It Yet?" Other stories,
including stories that could have been very damaging to Donald
Trump, were fully or partly buried. And still Democrats can't
muscle Biden out, persuade him to leave the race, or stop talking
about it and get behind him. . . .
I think Democrats believe it's okay for this to play out in
public for two weeks -- two weeks of bad headlines for the man
who now seems certain to be the nominee -- because of a fundamental
misunderstanding of politics that hurts them in other areas as well.
They think this is fine because they think voters pay attention to
politics only in the last couple of months before an election.
That's the reason most Democrats don't bother with messaging unless
it's election season, while Republicans engage in messaging every
day of every year.
I'm not personally super bothered by the protracted process, but
clearly this has given Trump and the Republicans a whole month of
big PR wins, from the June 27 debate all the way through the end
of the RNC, especially as, in response to the shooting incident,
Democrats have wisely decided to pull their ads, and keep their
powder dry. But if the election was next week, this would have
been a total disaster for the Democracy. (Maybe not for the small-d
concept, but that's what they called the Party back in Jackson's
day, and that's what Will Rogers meant when he said he wasn't a
member of an organized political party: he was a democrat.) But
at some point soon-ish, they really have to get the act together
and turn this mess around. I don't see how they can do that without
first jettisoning Biden, who is the indelible personification of
a much greater crisis in democratic faith.
[07-09]
The press doesn't have a "bias toward coherence" -- it has a bias
toward Republicans.
Shawn Musgrave:
Trump's camp says it has nothing to do with Project 2025 manifesto --
aside from writing it.
Timothy Noah:
The GOP platform perfectly reflects the lunacy of Trump's party:
"I read it so you don't have to: It's an unconditional surrender to
the cult of Trump, and its plan to reduce inflation is laughable."
Rick Perlstein: [07-10]
Project 2025 . . . and 1921, and 1973, and 1981: "Terrifying
blueprints for the next Republican presidency are a quadrennial
tradition." Perlstein points out that aside from all the truly
evil stuff you've possibly read about elsewhere, there is also a
lot of confusion and in-fighting going on. For example:
The section about Russia in the State Department chapter -- the
author is an old hand of the High Reaganite wing of the Republican
foreign-policy guild; a "globalist," if you will -- emphasizes that
the Russia-Ukraine conflict "starkly divides conservatives," with
one faction arguing for the "presence of NATO and U.S. troops if
necessary," while the other "denies that U.S. Ukrainian support is
in the national security interest of America at all."
This misunderstanding is important. The silence, so far,
on those parts, indicts us. These are great, big, blinking red
"LOOK AT ME" advertisements of vulnerabilities within the conservative
coalition. Wedge issues. Opportunities to split Republicans at their
most vulnerable joints, much as when Richard Nixon cynically expanded
affirmative action requirements for federal building projects, in
order to seed resentment between blue-collar building trades Democrats
and Black Democrats.
And yes, there is plenty of blunt insanity, too. But, bottom line,
this is a complicated document. "Conservatives in Disarray" is precisely
the opposite message from that conveyed by all the coverage of Project
2025. But it is an important component of this complexity, and why this
text should be picked apart, not panicked over, and studied both for
the catastrophes it portends and the potential it provides.
Andrew Prokop: [07-13]
Project 2025: The myths and the facts: "The sweeping conservative
plan for Trump's second term is very real. Here's what it actually
says."
Prem Thakker:
GOP platform doesn't mention the word "climate" once -- even after
hottest year on record.
Biden
Evidently Biden's age was already an issue in 2008, when Barack
Obama picked him for Vice President. The thinking was that his age
would balance off Obama's youth, that the position would cap off
an already long and distinguished political career, and that he'd
be too old to mount a serious run in 2016, leaving the field open
for Hillary Clinton.
But when Clinton lost to Donald Trump -- let
that sink in for a moment, folks -- Biden convinced himself that
he could have done better, and set out to prove it in 2020. And
he was a flop, his age dulling the charisma he never really had
in the first place, but with Bernie Sanders a year older age
wasn't so much an issue, and with Sanders winning, Biden became
the only credible option to stop him, and the donor wing of the
Democratic Party were desperate to do that.
After derailing Sanders, defeating Trump should have been the
easy part, but somehow Biden managed to make even that look hard
fraught. He won, but not decisively enough to lead Congress, or
to squelch Trump's big lie about a rigged/stolen election. Trump
has, if anything, loomed larger in American politics than Biden,
even as president, could do. While that is testimony to several
alarming tendencies in public opinion -- and media that both
panders to and cashes in on controversy -- one cannot help but
suspect that Biden's age is part of the problem.
At any rate, it's the part that people focus on once they
realize that there is a problem that it could plausibly explain.
They do that because it's tangible, something they have lots of
experience with or at least observing. It's also something you
can base expectations on, because it's inevitably progressive:
if age seems to be a problem now, you can only expect it to get
worse. Many Democrats, especially one who have closely bound
their careers to Biden, have worked hard to hide evidence and
deflect discussion of Biden's age -- even from Biden himself.
But once you see it, as most people did in his June 27 debate
with Trump, it's hard to revert to denialism. It's like the
zit you never noticed, then found you can't avert your eyes
from. Pretty soon you wind up with the Emperor's New Clothes.
As the following links will show, Democrats are divided: Biden
and his closest allies still think that if they hold firm, he can
ride the story cycle out, and by November refocus the campaign on
beating back the immense threat of a Trump win; many others are
skeptical and/or worried sick; a few actually see that replacing
Biden with a younger, more dynamic, and hopefully much sharper
candidate -- Harris seems to fill that bill, and is well-placed
to step in, but there could be dozens of good options -- opens up
an opportunity to not just eke out a win in November but deliver
a crushing blow to Trump and his crony fascists.
As I've probably made clear over the last couple weeks, I'm
skeptical, but also in the latter camp. I'm not really capable
of the sort of despair that sees Biden, even as decrepit as he
obviously is, losing to Trump -- despair in the future tense,
as anticipation of a horrible turn of events, something very
different from the sickening feeling when such events happen
(as I remember all too well from November 2016). That part is
just faith, still intact even if waiting to be shattered.
But my skepticism takes many forms. The one I'm most certain
of is that if Biden remains in the race, he will commit a fair
number of age-related gaffes and blunders, maybe including what
wouldn't be his first fall, and that every time he does, his age
will return as the paramount media obsession, shifting attention
from the real and present threat of Trump. I don't know how many
votes that will cost Biden, but it is a risk, and also a major
opportunity cost. We need Democrats to win not just to stop
Trump and shore up the somewhat liberal wing of the militarist
oligarchy that Biden aligns with, but to actually address real
problems, helping an overwhelming majority of Americans through
very troubling times.
Another form of skepticism is suggested by my rather sour turn
of phrase in that last line. I gravitated toward the new left in
the late 1960s, and since then I've been as acutely critical of
the Democratic Party as I've been of the Republicans, even as I've
most often voted for Democrats, figuring them to be not just lesser
evils but occasionally good for modest reforms. Either is reason
enough to vote Democratic. (It's not like your vote is good for
much else.) But if you're on the left (or anywhere else excluded
from access to power), you might also consider voting a tactical
choice: you're going to spend the next four years in opposition
anyway, but which issues would you rather protest against? Biden,
or any other Democrat with a chance, will leave you plenty to
argue against.
One thing I can say about age is that it mellows you out. My
critical analysis is as radical (in the sense I originally got
from a 1966 book titled
The New
Radicals) as ever, but my appetite for conflict has really
dimmed, and I'm willing to appreciate almost any tad of ameliorative
reform. I chalk much of my personal change up to aging, and I suspect
similar things happen to most people, including politicians like
Biden. As I've noticed, Biden is the only president in my lifetime
who turned out better than I expected (well, until Gaza, which is
hard to excuse). Part of that is that he came in with really low
expectations. Part of it may be that he's old enough to remember
the pre-Carter, pre-Reagan, pre-Clinton Democrats -- even though
he seemed totally simpatico with them, you know how old people
lose recent memories before they lose formative ones? There's no
one else like him in the Democratic Party these days. (Sanders
is old enough, but never was that kind of Democrat. He was much
better, which is why he remains so much sharper.) I do worry that
whoever replaces Biden will be just another neoliberal shill. But
even where Biden's heart is in the right place -- and, let's face
it, it isn't always -- he's lost his ability to persuade, to lead,
and to listen.
So my considered view is that we need to move him out, and start
working on viable future. Even if Biden sticks and wins -- and I'll
vote for him, despite thinking he really belongs in a Hague Court --
he's only going to get older, more decrepit, less credible, more
embarrassing, and less effective as he struggles to hang on past
his 86th birthday. And if he dies, resigns, or has to be removed,
his replacement will enter with a much reduced mandate. Dump him
now, elect his replacement, elect a Congress that's willing to do
things, and the next four years will start looking up.
I guess that's more of an editorial than an introduction. I
wrote it before collecting the following links:
Intelligencer: [07-09]
Biden resistance appears to be waning in Congress: For a brief
period, this publication seemed convinced that Biden is persevering
in his fight to stay atop the Democratic Party ticket.
Sasha Abramsky: [07-10]
An open letter to the president of the United States: "There are
worse things in life than a comfortable retirement."
Michael Arria: [07-09]
Biden was already a vulnerable candidate because of the genocide:
"Biden was already plummeting in the polls before his disastrous
presidential debate with Trump. The reason was his ongoing complicity
in the Gaza genocide and the Uncommitted movement."
David Atkins: [07-11]
I'm a DNC member and a public opinion professional. It's highly unlikely
Biden can win: "Only one person can build on the administration's
accomplishments, have unfettered access to funds and ballot lines,
and do so without wasting precious time. Her name is Kamala Harris."
Another long-time, major Biden apologist breaks ranks.
Rachel Bade/Eugene Daniels/Ryan Lizza: [07-11]
Playbook: What Obama and Pelosi are doing about Biden. Report
here is that George Clooney showed his op-ed to Obama before he
ran it, and did not receive any objection. "Obama's team declined
to comment." Pelosi seems to be maneuvering behind the scenes, but
"out of respect for Biden and national security writ large" thought
he should hang on through the NATO summit. Now (my thinking here),
with the shooting, it would make sense to wait until after the RNC
shuts down.
Joseph Contreras: [07-06]
What Joe Biden could learn from Nelson Mandela about knowing when
to quit: "Unlike the beleaguered U.S. president, the South
African leader did not want to be an 81-year-old head of state
and served only one term."
Keren Landman: [07-11]
The controversy over Biden and Parkin's disease, explained.
Eric Levitz:
Andrew Prokop:
[07-09]
Is it undemocratic to replace Biden on the ticket? "Biden says
the primary voters picked him. Is there more to democracy than that?"
What kind of democracy was that? Practically nobody ran against Biden
in 2024 because the campaign finance system lets donors pick who can
run, and they didn't dare cross Biden -- especially after Democrats
canceled Iowa and New Hampshire, which historically have been wide
open and have a history of upsets, and which Biden lost badly in
2020, in favor of running South Carolina first, the sourc of Biden's
breakthrough win in 2020.
[07-11]
What Biden's news conference did, and didn't, clear up: "The
presser went fine. But the Democratic defections continued."
[07-14]
Will Trump's shooting change everything? Or surprisingly little?
"Two theories on the political impact of the Trump assassination
attempt." The Trump campaign will try to spin this in to a big deal,
blaming it all on the left and championing Trump as a life-risking
fighter for true Americans, who want nothing more than to make their
beleaguered nation great again. But it doesn't change the issues,
or stakes, one iota.
[07-15]
Did Trump's shooting save Biden's nomination? "Democratic defections
have slowed, but Biden isn't out of the woods yet." Perhaps I should
re-read this more carefully, but on first scan, absolutely nothing
in this piece makes any sense to me.
Kaleigh Rogers: [07-12]
Americans were worried about Biden's age long before the debate.
Background from the poll-watchers at 538, who also produced:
Nathaniel Rakich: [07-10]
What the Democrats doubting Biden have in common: "They're more
moderate, while his backers are progressive and racially diverse."
Tommy Barone: [07-11]
4 reasons to beware of post-debate polling takes: "Biden's lost
some ground, but it's hard to say much more."
Luke Savage: [07-12]
The Biden problem has been years in the making: "As concerns
mount over Biden, the Democratic Party reminds us this isn't a
democracy."
Bill Scher:
[07-05]
I've defended Biden for years. Now, I'm asking him to withdraw:
"After waiting too long to reassure the public of his mental fitness,
the president is sinking in the polls with little hope for recovery.
But he can resign with grace and make history." Scher has long struck
me as the most diehard Biden apologist in the Washington punditocracy,
and indeed he was one of the few to have reserved hope after the
debate (see:
A wasted opportunity for Biden (but still time for redemption)).
So this appears as a significant retreat. And he's followed with:
[07-09]
How Kamala can win (without mini-primary madness).
[07-12]
Wilson didn't resign. The world suffered. Biden need not repeat that
mistake: "Wilson hid an incapacitating stroke from the public
and fatally compromised his mission to establish a functional League
of Nations. Once again, global peace and democracy precariously rely
on a president reluctant to face a personal health crisis." Well,
that's another whole can of worms, and while it's always fun to
argue about Wilson, his case is really not relevant here. I will
say that Wilson was a very complex but tragically flawed character,
often invoked in arguments that reduce him to caricature. My own
argument is that his failure to sell Americans on the League of
Nations -- which was evident before his stroke took him out of
action -- had no real bearing on the coming of WWII, but his
failures at Versailles did (as Britain and France cast aside his
anti-imperialism and insisted on punitive reparations over his
better sense).
Jeffrey St. Clair:
[07-12]
Running on empty: Very good coverage on Hurricane Beryl here,
but this is mostly on Biden, starting with a
Chris Hayes quote: "Biden is a decent man who has done nothing
wrong. He has not got caught in a scandal -- he's just aging." To
which St. Clair responds: "The real scandal is that liberals don't
see arming a genocide as a scandal." I'm inclined to compartmentalize
and see opposing Netanyahu's genocide in Gaza and opposing Trump in
America as both critically important but separable matters, and I'm
even willing to cut Biden some slack, as he is a potential solution
to both -- although in the latter he's mostly proven hapless, in the
former, which is something he could do something about on his own,
he's drifted into criminal negligence. But clearly Hayes misspoke,
and he, at least, should have known better. We've seen many attempts
to use flattery to tempt Biden to quit (e.g.,
George Clooney,
Thomas Friedman,
Paul Krugman,
David Remnick,
Matthew Yglesias), but it hasn't worked, and it's hard to see
why it would. This seems more like the time for brutal honesty.
If you must, sugar-coat it as tough love, but save the huzzahs
for after he does "the right thing."
[07-15]
Big Boy Biden in his own words: He starts by quoting some of
the praised heaped on Biden for his press conference performance,
like Andrew Bates: "To answer the question on everyone's minds:
No, Joe Biden does not have a doctorate in foreign affairs. He's
just that fucking good." That leaves St. Clair wondering:
After hearing these encomia, I had to check myself. This is Joe
Biden they're talking about, right? The same Joe Biden who voted
for the Iraq War, the most disastrous foreign policy debacle in
US history? The same Joe Biden who backed the overthrow of Qaddafi,
turning Libya into an anarchic war zone dominated by slave trading
gangs? The same Joe Biden who provoked and now refuses to seek an
end to a bloody, stalemated war in Ukraine? The same Joe Biden who
has continued Trump's Cuban embargo and tariffs on China? The same
Biden who has spent the last 3.5 years pandering to the bone-sawing
Saudi regime he called a "pariah" state during his 2020 campaign?
The same Biden who refused to renegotiate a nuclear agreement with
Iran? The same Biden who has armed a genocide in Gaza that may end
up claiming over 200,000 Palestinian lives? The same Biden who could
barely string together two complete sentences a couple of weeks ago?
Adding, "An unlikely transformation, IMHO." So then he reads the
White House transcript, and quotes it liberally, although his best
line is in his introduction: "Biden's answers reminded me of some
of Samuel Beckett's later works exploring the thought patterns of
a decaying mind."
Alexander Stille:
We learned everything we needed to know about Biden in 1988: "His
stubborn refusal to heed wise advice, and bottomless belief in his own
greatness, were on display in his first campaign for president."
Michael Tomasky: [07-12]
Democrats: "He was better than the debate" is not remotely good
enough: "In Trump world, they're thinking landslide. Democrats
need to act and talk Biden into stepping aside, and soon."
p>Cenk Uygur: [07-11]
Biden will not be the nominee: "The Young Turks host has long
predicted Biden's campaign would implode. He explains why it wasn't
obvious to everyone, and predicts what will happen next." Nathan
J Robinson interviews him.
And other Democrats:
Legal matters and other crimes:
Climate and environment:
Economic matters:
Ukraine War and Russia:
America's empire and the world:
Bob Dreyfuss: [07-09]
A surprise win by an Iranian reformist. Masoud Pezeshkian,
regarded as a moderate, won Iran's election to become president
after Ebrahim Raisi's recent death.
Also on Iran:
Anatol Lieven: [07-08]
This week, NATO III celebrates itself: "As thousands descend on
Washington for an anniversary summit, we posit that the alliance is
broken and sleepwalking into war." Also on NATO:
Other stories:
Zack Beauchamp: [07-10]
What the world can learn from Indian liberalism: "The intellectual
Pratap Bhanu Mehta explains how liberalism grew out of 3,000 years of
Indian history."
Roger Kerson: [07-09]
You think this year's presidential conventions will be crazy? 1924's
fights over the Ku Klux Klan were wilder.
Katie Miles: [07-08]
"She usually won." Remembering Jane McAlevey, 1964-2024.
Also:
Initial count: 146 links, 9355 words.
Updated count [07-16]: 193 links, 9436 words.
Local tags (these can be linked to directly):
Biden.
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Tuesday, July 9, 2024
Music Week
July archive
(in progress).
Music: Current count 42624 [42580] rated (+42), 20 [29] unrated (-9).
Some updates, although at this point [07-12] I might as well start
working on next week's posts. I added a fair amount to extras I
already added to the latest
Speaking of Which: most tweets on Biden's probable withdrawal,
plus a couple similar pieces including the
George Clooney op-ed. I also added links to the Michael Tatum
and Robert Christgau Consumer Guides, which are probably of more
interest here:
Michael Tatum: [07-09]
A downloader's diary (53): Much more than capsule reviews,
major takes on Beyoncé, Nia Archives, Zawose Queens, Carly Pearce,
Fox Green, and much more. Pearce and Fox Green also appear here:
Robert Christgau: [07-10]
Consumer Guide: July, 2024: Also a rare jazz album, Jason Moran's
From the Dancehall to the Battlefield, which was runner-up in
The Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll: 2023, despite being a
self-release with little publicity.
I have a bit more information on the Mid-Year Jazz Critics Poll,
but that probably deserves a separate post, which I'm not up to at
the moment. The most pressing matter is that response has been light,
and I suspect that a bit part of that is due to email problems. As
frequent readers may recall, I've been plagued by them for months
and possibly years. I tried coming up with workaround strategies,
one of which has been completely ineffective: which was to ask
people to forward invites, and suggest a willingness to accept
unsolicited invites. The only thing I got there was an offer by
a long-time virtual friend, who is not really a credentialed
critic but whose opinion I value highly, to submit a list.
In a
moment of weakness (or possible insanity), I offered to publish
his list, and more like it if anyone bothers to submit them.
So if you can imagine drawing up a credible list of up to 10
2024 jazz albums and up to 5 2024 archival jazz albums, take
a look at the
Non-Critic Ballot Invitation, and follow instructions.
Those ballots won't figure into official totals, and counting
them isn't a priority for me, but I will eventually publish
all I receive, and I wouldn't be surprised if, as lists go,
your batch winds up being as credible as the ones submitted
by the pros. I will be surprised if they wind up being
representative of jazz fandom, because I'm doing virtually
nothing to promote this, and if you can only read about it
here, you're in a very small minority (and I'll be lucky to
get ten ballots).
The links below to the
Poll Website are still valid, and now point to somewhat more
substantial information. On last update, I had 25 ballots. I'm
resending the invitations -- a slow and painstaking process --
hoping to avoid spam traps and get some more responses. I will
say that the data I have, though sparse, is really terrific stuff.
It's a cliché in compiling these lists to say "this is a really
great year," but when all is said and done, you'll see for yourself.
Delayed until Tuesday again, because
Speaking of Which took all of Monday, itself being pushed out by
the seemingly futile notion that I could add a few
Afterthoughts to the previous week's massive
Speaking of Which.
Seems like I could wind up delaying this post a second day,
as it's already late as I'm writing this. Most of Tuesday got
chewed up writing two long comments relating to the Biden
nomination: one on a
Matthew Yglesias post, the other an expansion of my
Afterthoughts comment. None of this even mentions the seemingly
important (if true) Ben Jacobs: [07-09]
How the Democratic movement to dump Biden went bust.
Or Nia Prater: [07-09]
Why is the Squad backing Biden so forcefully? As Yglesias
explained in his piece, the calculation for Democratic politicians
is different than the one for journalists and pundits. New York
Magazine, which published a number of pieces extremely critical of
Biden (probably all op. cit. through my links above) has gotten so
into circling the wagons, they've gone into live blog mode:
Biden resistance appears to be waning in Congress. On the other
hand, Eric Levitz: [07-09] is back with another piece:
The arguments for Biden 2024 keep getting worse.
Definitely no Afterthoughts this week, and I'm going to be hard
pressed to do a Speaking of Which by Sunday or Monday. Most pressing
thing after getting this up will be to follow up on the
Mid-Year Jazz Critics
Poll. Deadline remains Sunday, July 14. I've received 18 ballots
so far, referencing a total of 177 albums. About 50% of those albums
were not previously in my
tracking file, so I've been using
them for prospecting (three of the five A- albums this week came
from ballots; the other two are promos I received, with no votes
so far).
Probably the most important thing I need to do is to compare the
Jazzpoll mailing list, which is where I sent the invites, to the
more authoritative list I made last year of people I actually sent
invites to, especially the ones I voted. At some point I stopped
automatically adding names to the Jazzpoll list, so chances are
that a couple dozen people who should have been invited weren't.
I'm also worried about invites being diverted into spam folders --
I know of at least two such cases, both with gmail. If I had the
time and energy, I would follow up, but it's a lot of work. I also
need to go back and review some couple emails I received after last
year's poll -- a couple offers of help, at least one person who
asked to be invited (and should be).
To make up for these shortcomings in the invitation process, I
asked people to inform and possibly invite their colleagues. Thus
far I haven't received any takers, or for that matter inquiries.
The only evidence I have is that some spam has started getting
caught there. Not a lot, and none of it's getting through, but
it's one more thing to deal with.
At this moment, the
website is a bit
behind my local copy, but I will refresh it a couple times this week.
I need to edit several documentation files, and change the methodology
notes in the totals files. The main things of possible public interest
are the
invitation,
the list of
critics
who have voted, and the list of
new
releases and
rara
avis that have received votes. The actual results won't be
public until ArtsFuse publishes them.
I've had very little time for updating my
metacritic file, but I
have added the mid-year lists I've been noting in the Speaking of
Which music section, so there's been a bit of movement. File still
needs a lot of work. I did, by the way, start counting all of the
metal magazines at AOTY (but I've yet to go back and fill in the
ones I skipped earlier). I wish their coverage of jazz, hip-hop,
electronica, and country was as deep as their interest in metal,
but it isn't. I haven't gotten around to sources like All About
Jazz, Saving Country Music, and Hip Hop Golden Age, which would
help remedy those deficits. No time, and not much energy these
days. Also, I can barely see, so if I don't post this right away,
it won't make it tonight.
PS: Facebook blocked me, so I may give that a rest.
New records reviewed this week:
BbyMutha: Sleep Paralysis (2024, True Panther):
Rapper Brittnee Moore, from Chattanooga, second album, Bandcamp
page attributes it to "BIGMUTHA," but every other source goes
as I have it, sometimes no-caps.
B+(**) [sp]
Beings: There Is a Garden (2024, No Quarter):
New York-based quartet of Zoh Amba (tenor sax, mostly), Steve Gunn
(guitar), Shahzad Ismaily (bass, synth), and Jim White (drums).
I never thought of Gunn as a jazz musician, and he doesn't have
to be one when filling in behind Amba's sax or piano (even more
indebted to Charles Gayle than her sax), but when she sings, he
presents a Velvet Underground vibe so she can be Moe Tucker. No
attempt at fusion here. Just multiplicities.
A- [sp]
Chris Byars: Boptics (2023 [2024], SteepleChase):
Tenor saxophonist, what you might call a retro-bebopper, probably
the most talented musician to first appear on Luke Kaven's early
2000s Smalls label, which also produced exceptional records by
two more musicians in this sextet: Zaid Nasser (alto sax) and Ari
Roland (bass). They're joined here by Stefano Doglioni (bass
clarinet), John Mosca (trombone), and Keith Balla (drums).
B+(**) [sp]
Kim Cass: Levs (2023 [2024], Pi): Bassist, second
album, composed everything here, mostly for pianist Matt Mitchell,
who he's supported in the past, and is striking (as usual) here.
Also with Tyshawn Sorey (drums), and (except for 3-4 tracks) flute
(Laura Cocks) and euphonium (Adam Dotson).
B+(***) [cd]
Ernesto Cervini's Turboprop: A Canadian Songbook
(2022 [2024], Three Pines): Canadian drummer, based in Toronto,
half-dozen albums since his 2015 Turboprop introduced his
group name. Sextet with two saxophonists (Tara Davidson and Joel
Frahm), trombone (William Carn), piano (Adrean Farrugia), and
bass (Dan Loomis). Songs are sentimental favorites in his neck
of the woods, but they travel well.
B+(***) [bc]
Coco Chatru Quartet: Future (2024, Trygger Music):
Swedish group, named for "a legendary Swedish adventurer," label
for bassist Hĺkan Trygger, who wrote four (of eight) pieces, with
two each by Daniel Kĺse (drums) and Linus Kĺse (alto sax), zero
by Charlie Malmberg (baritone sax). Slippery postbop, somewhat
understated.
B+(***) [lp]
Alfredo Colón: Blood Burden (2023 [2024], Out
of Your Head): Alto saxophonist, based in Brooklyn, first album,
quartet with Lex Korten (piano/keybs), Steve Williams (bass),
and Connor Parks (drums), original pieces plus a Son House
blues. This develops impressively, in the "spiritual jazz"
vein pioneered by Coltrane, Sanders, and Ayler, alongside more
recent efforts by saxophonists like Nat Birchall.
A- [cd]
GloRilla: Ehhthang Ehhthang (2024, Cocaine Muzik
Group/Interscope): Rapper Gloria Hallelujah Woods, from Memphis,
two albums, this one's considered her second mixtape, crunk (I've
read). Lot of b&n here (as in "ain't no b in me, n"). If you
can roll with that, this should rock you.
B+(***) [sp]
Conrad Herwig: The Latin Side of McCoy Tyner
(2024, Savant): Trombonist, born in Oklahoma, studied at UNT,
joined Clark Terry's 1980s band, played with Joe Henderson,
Toshiko Akiyoshi, Joe Lovano, Mingus Big Band; first leader
album in 1987, joined Eddie Palmieri in 1994, and recorded
his initial The Latin Side of John Coltrane in 1996,
since followed by Shorter, Hancock, Henderson, Silver, Mingus,
and now Tyner. This one has Alex Norris (trumpet), Craig
Handy (tenor/baritone sax), Bill O'Connell (piano), with
the usual percussion excitement, and a special guest slot
for Palmieri.
B+(**) [sp]
Janel & Anthony: New Moon in the Evil Age
(2024, Cuneiform): Janel Leppin (cello) and Anthony Pirog (guitar),
self-released an album together in 2006, another for Cuneiform
in 2012. They've since gone on to establish separate careers,
but reunite here for what is effectively two albums: the first
a ten-track suite of darkly engaging duet instrumentals, the
second a singer-songwriter set with Leppin doing most of the
singing -- jazz-influenced, no doubt, but not something one
would note in a blindfold test. I find the songs a tad more
appealing, but probably for the music, as I can't say much
about the lyrics.
B+(**) [cdr]
Mathias Hřjgaard Jensen: Is as Is (2022 [2024],
Fresh Sound New Talent): Danish bassist, lives in Brooklyn,
probably his first album as leader (Discogs has three side
credits since 2019, his website has 13), all his pieces,
quartet with David Mirarchi (alto sax), Jacob Sacks (piano),
and Steven Crammer (drums). This is very nice: subtle and
intricate postbop that sneaks up on you.
A- [cd]
Malcolm Jiyane Tree-O: True Story (2020-21
[2024], New Soil/Mushroom Hour): South African trombonist,
second group album.
B+(**) [sp]
Alex Kautz: Where We Begin (2024, Sunnyside):
Brazilian drummer, based in New York, married to Mexican singer
Magos Herrera (featured on two songs here), with John Ellis (tenor
sax/clarinet), Chico Pinheiro (guitar), Helio Alves (piano), and
Joe Martin (bass).
B+(*) [cd]
Cassie Kinoshi's SEED.: Gratitude (2023 [2024],
International Anthem): British alto saxophonist, plays in the
Afrobeat group Kokoroko, leads the large SEED Ensemble (first
album in 2019, nominated for Mercury Prize, was upper case then
but lower case now), which is a skeletal big band plus string
quartet, flute, tuba, and turntables. Title piece runs 21:56,
is packaged with a slightly smaller group on a 5:42 piece (so
27:38 total).
B+(*) [sp]
Charlie Kohlhase's Explorer's Club: A Second Life
(2022 [2024], Mandorla Music): Saxophonist (alto, tenor, baritone),
based in Boston, Discogs credits him on 48 albums since 1985 (many
with Either/Orchestra) but Wikipedia hasn't noticed yet, third
group album, an octet with tenor sax (Seth Meicht), trumpet (Dan
Rosenthal), trombone (Jeb Bishop), tuba (Josiah Reibstein), guitar
(Eric Hofbauer), bass, and drums. Originals plus covers from Elmo
Hope, Ornette Coleman, John Tchicai, and Roswell Rudd. The bottom
horns provide a lot of lift.
A- [sp]
Janel Leppin: Ensemble Volcanic Ash: To March Is to
Love (2023 [2024], Cuneiform): Cellist, released the
album Ensemble Volcanic Ash in 2022, same basic group
and concept here but I'm annoyed by the typography, so this
is my solution. The music can also annoy, but also can turn
remarkable, even living up to this hype: "progressive chamber
jazz with the steely avant-garde that descends from Julius
Hemphill's 1972 LP Dogon A.D." Hemphill's secret was
cellist Abdul Wadud, whose name appears in the opening "Ode."
Sextet with Brian Settles (tenor sax), Sarah Hughes (alto sax),
Anthony Pirog (guitar), Luke Stewart (bass), and Larry Ferguson
(drums).
B+(***) [cdr]
Frank London/The Elders: Spirit Stronger Than Blood
(2023 [2024], ESP-Disk): Trumpet player, has extensive experience
in klezmer music (Klezmatics, Hasidic New Wave, Klezmer Brass
Allstars, Klezmer Conservatory Band) as well as straight jazz --
here often evoking Ellington and Mingus, with tributes to Lester
Bowie and Ron Miles.
B+(***) [cd]
Megan Thee Stallion: Megan (2024, Hot Girl):
Rapper Megan Pete, fourth album (plus several EPs) since 2019,
I usually like her raunch and roll, but runs long here, for
mixed results.
B+(***) [sp]
Che Noir: The Color Chocolate, Volume 1 (2024,
Poetic Movement, EP): Rapper Marche Lashawn, from Buffalo,
Discogs lists as Che'Noir, cover looks more like Chč Noir.
EP is four songs, 10:58, but Discogs has more cuts, and
Wikipedia has nothing, which is odd given that Discogs lists
seven songs and six singles/EPs. Even at this length, this
feels pretty substantial.
B+(**) [sp]
Clarence Penn: Behind the Voice (2024, Origin):
Drummer, has several albums, one original here plus a batch of
soul & rock standards from the 1970s-80s, roughly Stevie
Wonder to Prince, with sides of Peter Gabriel and Don Henley,
employing five guest singers, with Kurt Elling the one you've
heard of (but may not want to hear).
B+(*) [cd]
Ken Peplowski: Unheard Bird (2024, Arbors):
Supposedly another chapter of "Bird with Strings": a first
recording of arrangements commissioned for Charlie Parker.
The leader, playing clarinet and tenor sax, is not a very
obvious choice for this project, but if the idea is simply
to make Bird cornier, who is? Peplowski leads a very capable
quintet with Terell Stafford (trumpet), Glenn Zaleski (piano),
Peter Washington ( bass), and Willie Jones III (drums), while
Loren Schoenberg conducts an orchestra of strings, harp, and
oboe.
B- [sp]
Ken Peplowski: Live at Mezzrow [Smalls Live Living Masters
Series] (2023 [2024], Cellar Music): This is more like what
he's done so consistently since 1989: tenor sax and clarinet,
playing swing standards with the occasional bop reference (Monk,
Hank Jones), leading a rhythm section that's been doing just
that for decades: Ted Rosenthal (piano), Martin Wind (bass),
Willie Jones III (drums).
B+(***) [sp]
Carla Santana/José Lencastre/Maria do Mar/Gonçalo Almeida:
Defiant Ilussion (2023 [2024], A New Wave of Jazz):
Electronics, alto/tenor sax, violin, bass quartet, recorded in
Portugal.
B+(***) [bc]
Dirk Serries/Rodrigo Amado/Andrew Lisle: The Invisible
(2021 [2024], Klanggalerie): Belgian guitarist, Portuguese tenor
saxophonist, English drummer, recorded in Belgium, three pieces
(56:44). Amado is superb when he gets out front.
B+(***) [bc]
Matthew Shipp: The Data (2021 [2024], RogueArt,
2CD): Pianist, brilliant, many albums since the late 1980s,
probably has a dozen solos by now, with this one of the better
ones, if you're at all so inclined.
B+(***) [cdr]
TV Smith: Handwriting (2024, JKP/Easy Action):
T for Timothy, was singer-songwriter in British punk band the
Adverts, released two 1977-78 albums, best remembered for the
single "Gary Gilmore's Eyes," but the song I always think of
is "One Chord Wonders." He formed another band, then went solo
in 1983, and has recorded pretty regularly since 1992 -- way
off my radar. Older now, which means slower, and anger ripened
into bitterness, and therefore gravitas.
B+(***) [sp]
Anthony Stanco: Stanco's Time (2023 [2024], OA2):
Trumpet player, second album, side credits back to 2011, half
originals, half jazz standards from Ellington and early boppers
(Parker, Monk, Dameron, Davis), half with "Time" in the title.
With Randy Napoleon (guitar), Xavier Davis (piano), bass, drums,
and on three cuts, Walter Blanding (tenor sax).
B+(**) [cd]
TiaCorine: Almost There (2024, South Scope/Interscope,
EP): Rapper from North Carolina, merged her first two names together,
omitting Thompson Shultz, mother is Shoshone, father has roots in
Japan and Africa. She released an EP in 2020, an album in 2022, back
here with eight songs, 16:38. Title is about right.
B+(**) [sp]
Ryan Truesdell: Synthesis: The String Quartet Sessions
(2022-23 [2024], ArtistShare, 3CD): Composer/arranger/conductor,
started as Maria Schneider's assistant, made his name with "Newly
Discovered Works of Gil Evans," has conducted "The Music of Bob
Brookmeyer." Here he's composed a bit and arranged or at least
currated a lot of new compositions for string quartet, with a
few strategic guest spots.
B+(**) [cdr]
Steve Turre: Sanyas (2023 [2024], Smoke Sessions):
Trombonist, also plays conch shells, couple dozen albums since
1987, quite a bit of side work (Discogs lists 224 albums he played
trombone on). Live sextet here with Nicholas Payton (trumpet),
Ron Blake (tenor sax), Isaiah Thompson (piano), Buster Williams
(bass), and Lenny White (drums). Starts with title track, which
Turre wrote for Woody Shaw's The Moontrane (1974), evoking
the classic trombone-augmented hard bop sextets of the 1960s.
Ends with a very nice "These Foolish Things."
B+(***) [sp]
Lisa Ullén: Heirloom (2023 [2024], Fönstret):
Swedish pianist, born in Seoul, South Korea, over a dozen
albums under her own name since 2006, more side-credits.
First solo album, each side with a variation on the same
three-part suite.
B+(**) [bc]
Jack Walrath: Live at Smalls (2023 [2024],
Cellar Music): Trumpet player, started out with Mingus in the
mid-1970s, debut album 1979, had an impressive run in the 1990s,
has five albums on SteepleChase since 2008 -- quite a bit of
work I should catch up on. Quintet here with Abraham Burton
(tenor sax), George Burton (piano), Boris Kozlov (bass), and
Donald Edwards (drums), revisiting his songbook and adding to
the legacy ("A Bite of Tunisia," "Mood for Muhal," etc.).
B+(***) [sp]
Neil Young & Crazy Horse: Fu##in' Up (2023
[2024], Reprise): Live album, from Tivoli in Toronto, reprising
their 1990 album Ragged Glory, a pretty solid A- at the
time, dropping one song ("Mother Earth"), renaming most of the
rest (title song becomes "Heart of Steel"), length up 1:50. Hard
to see this as necessary, but sounds good and gets better.
B+(***) [r]
Denny Zeitlin: Panoply (2012-23 [2024], Sunnyside):
Pianist, 86 now, has recorded since 1964, while pursuing a parallel
career in psychiatry. This offers a good survey of his range, from
solo pieces (2012) to a trio (2019) with Buster Williams and Matt
Wilson, plus home recordings in a duo with George Marsh (drums).
B+(**) [sp]
Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:
Christer Bothén Featuring Bolon Bata: Trancedance [40th
Anniversary Edition] (1984 [2024], Black Truffle):
Swedish tenor sax/bass clarinet player, first albums were
with Don Cherry, this was the first he led, Bolon Bata the
band name, went on to a second album in 1988. Before this
he lived and studied in Mali and Morocco, also playing doson
n'goni and guimbri here, the large groups featuring other
African instruments, and various vocals.
A- [bc]
Johnny Griffin Quartet: Live in Valencia 92 [The Jordi
Suńol Archives 3] (1992 [2024], Storyville): Tenor saxophonist
(1928-2008), distinguished himself with Thelonious Monk in the 1950s,
had a major career in the 1960s, recorded consistently during the
1970s and 1980s (on widely scattered labels), enjoyed something of
a comeback in the 1990s. Live set from Spain -- part of a series
of archives that started with albums by Phil Woods and Mulgrew
Miller -- with Hervé Sellin (piano), Reggie Johnson (bass), and
Doug Sides (drums). Opens fast, closes gently.
B+(***) [sp]
Shelly Manne & His Men: Jazz From the Pacific
Northwest (1958-66 [2024], Reel to Real): Drummer
(1920-84), started in swing bands, quickly adapted to bebop
and majored in cool jazz; played with Stan Kenton, André
Previn, and Ornette Coleman; led small groups, his 1959
Black Hawk sets with Richie Kamuca and Victor Feldman are
especially esteemed. Two LPs here, the first from Monterey
in 1958 with Stu Williamson (trumpet), Herb Geller (alto
sax), Russ Freeman (piano), and Monty Budwig (bass); the
second from Seattle in 1966 has Conte Candoli (trumpet),
Frank Strozier (flute/alto sax), Hampton Hawes (piano),
Budwig, and Ruth Price (vocals).
B+(**) [sp]
Brother Jack McDuff: Ain't No Sunshine: Live in Seattle
(1972 [2024], Reel to Real): Organ player (1926-2001), recorded
20-plus albums for Prestige 1960-66, establishing himself as one
of the main soul jazz talents of the period, recording much less
prolifically thereafter (for Atlantic, Blue Note, Cadet, and after
1992 for Concord). This is previously unreleased, a couple of nice
sets with sax (Leo Johnson or Dave Young) and sometimes trumpet
(unknown), as well as guitar and drums.
B+(*) [sp]
Shelly Manne & His Men: Jazz From the Pacific
Northwest (1958-66 [2024], Reel to Real): Drummer
(1920-84), started in swing bands, quickly adapted to bebop
and majored in cool jazz; played with Stan Kenton, André
Previn, and Ornette Coleman; led small groups, his 1959
Black Hawk sets with Richie Kamuca and Victor Feldman are
especially esteemed. Two LPs here, the first from Monterey
in 1958 with Stu Williamson (trumpet), Herb Geller (alto
sax), Russ Freeman (piano), and Monty Budwig (bass); the
second from Seattle in 1966 has Conte Candoli (trumpet),
Frank Strozier (flute/alto sax), Hampton Hawes (piano),
Budwig, and Ruth Price (vocals).
B+(**) [sp]
Kalaparusha Maurice McIntyre: Live From Studio Rivbea:
July 12, 1975 [Rivbea Live! Series, Volume 1] (1975 [2024],
No Business): Tenor saxophonist (1936-2013), born in Arkansas,
grew up in Chicago (AACM, two albums on Delmark), and on to New
York, where he played in the streets, subways, and lofts, first
recording as Kalaparusha in 1970, with an uptick in activity
around 1998. The label has done a terrific job of releasing
archival tapes by Sam Rivers, who was the central figure in
New York's "loft scene, so it's nice to see them building out.
B+(***) [cd]
Sun Ra: Excelsior Mill (1984 [2024], Sundazed/Modern
Harmonic): Solo organ performance, described here as "like a cross
between a demonically riffing '50s horror movie villain and a
futuristic congregation leader delivering the interplanetary
gospel," and indeed this instrument often evokes church and/or
horror movies. I'm not particularly fond of either.
B [sp]
Old music:
Christer Bothén Trio: Triolos (2003-04 [2006],
LJ): Leader plays bass clarinet, ngoni, guimbri; trio with David
Stackenäs (guitar) and Peter Söderberg (theorbo, lute, guitar,
low budget electronics). Rather abstract, more interesting than
compelling.
B+(**) [sp]
Ernesto Cervini: Joy (2021 [2022], Three Pines):
Toronto-based drummer, composer, several albums, also a tireless
publicist for his fellow Canadian musicians (many, including
guest vocalists, featured here), credits this as "inspired by
Louise Penny's Gamache series of books and the qualities of
goodness, decency, courage, and love that permeate them."
B+(**) [sp]
Maurice McIntyre: Humility in the Light of the Creator
(1969, Delmark): Tenor saxophonist, first album, two suites
("Ensemble Love" and "Ensemble Fate"), the first dominated
by George Hines' incantatory vocal, the latter picks up piano
(Amina Claudine Myers) and more horns (Leo Smith on trumpet,
John Stubblefield on soprano sax).
B+(**) [sp]
Kalaparusha Maurice McIntyre: Forces and Feelings
(1970 [1972], Delmark): Second album, cover has "Kalaparusha" in
large type on top line, title (smaller, because it's longer) on
second line, then "Maurice McIntyre" (smaller still) as third line,
while the back cover credits tenor sax, clarinet, flute, and bells
to "Kalaparusha Ahra Difda." Backed by guitar (Sarnie Garrett),
bass (Fred Hopkins), and drums (Wesley Tyus), with vocals by Rita
Omolokun.
B+(**) [sp]
Kalaparusha Maurice McIntyre Quartet: Peace and Blessings
(1979, Black Saint): Italian label, became a major outlet for
American "loft scene" veterans (especially David Murray). This
was recorded in Milan, with Longineau Parsons on trumpet (both
also playing related instruments), Leonard Jones (bass), and
King L. Mock (drums).
B+(**) [sp]
Jack Walrath Quintet: In Europe (1982 [1983],
SteepleChase): Trumpet player, played with Mingus in the 1970s
(and later in various Mingus big bands), early in his career
as a leader, with a relatively unknown group (Anthony Cox, on
bass, is the only one I recognize), for a set in Copenhagen,
playing four of his pieces.
B+(*) [sp]
Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:
- Robby Ameen: Live at the Poster Museum (Origin) [07-26]
- BassDrumBone: Afternoon (Auricle) [06-24]
- Mai-Liis: Kaleidoscope (OA2) [07-26]
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Monday, July 8, 2024
Speaking of Which
Posting this a day late, only partly because I tried slipping
in the
Afterthoughts post. Late Monday night, and I'm dead tired, pretty
sure I didn't complete my rounds, but at this point if I fail to post
I'll just waste another day. Expect Music Week on Tuesday, plus some
late additions here (and maybe on the Sunday-dated but Monday-posted
Afterthoughts as well). On the other hand, my
mid-year jazz
critics poll needs some work too, and should probably be
considered a more urgent priority.
Nice to see elections leaning left in UK, France, and Iran.
That should probably be a bigger story.
A few more extras below, but the big one is the comment on
Matthew Yglesias, reiterating the
case that Democrats need to replace Biden. That's also the
subject of a long addition to last week's
Afterthoughts.
In Tuesday's
Music Week,
written after this post but before I'm adding this section, I mentioned
a couple Biden-related pieces that appeared after closing this:
None of this even mentions the seemingly
important (if true) Ben Jacobs: [07-09]
How the Democratic movement to dump Biden went bust.
Or Nia Prater: [07-09]
Why is the Squad backing Biden so forcefully? As Yglesias
explained in his piece, the calculation for Democratic politicians
is different than the one for journalists and pundits. New York
Magazine, which published a number of pieces extremely critical of
Biden (probably all op. cit. through my links above) has gotten so
into circling the wagons, they've gone into live blog mode:
Biden resistance appears to be waning in Congress. On the other
hand, Eric Levitz: [07-09] is back with another piece:
The arguments for Biden 2024 keep getting worse.
I'll probably return to those next week, but they relate to recent
chatter below.
Late adds from ex-twitter:
Zachary D Carter: [07-09]
Ths issue is Biden's age, and he gets older every day. It's not a
scandal you can wait out until another media cycle. It will be a
dominant campaign issue every day of the week until November.
[This was in response to:]
Clara Jeffery: [07-09]
What happens when the next press conference or interview goes awry.
Or the barrage of battering polls keeps growing? Or swing district
Dems openly panic?
There is no "put it behind us" moment that the Biden camp hopes
for/hopes to persuade Dems there is.
Eric Levitz: [07-09]
Running Biden at this point means taking on his liabilities AND
Harris's without enjoying any of the benefits of putting her at
the top of the ticket (e.g. having a nominee who is much younger
and more eloquent than the GOP's). [This was in response to:]
Aaron Rupar: [07-08]
[Reply to a 4:19 clip of "Jon Stewart reacts to Joe Biden's defiance
over calls to step aside" -- worth watching, less for the plan,
which isn't how it's going to work, than but the jokes, which hit
their targets, thus demonstrating that they are real.]
Stewart ignores that:
- There was a whole ass Democratic primary election
- Kamala Harris is the VP and the only Biden alternative that
makes sense
- A thunderdome convention would do anything but "unify" the party
I'm glad he had a chance to vent though
[The primary was a sham, where nobody but Biden had a chance,
because no one else had the money to run. Replacement could
be anyone the money people agree on, but Harris is the easy
pick. And the Party will unify behind virtually anyone, as
Biden has already proved. Stewart ends with a clip where
Biden is asked if any other Democrats could beat Trump, and
his reply is "about fifty of them."]
Ian Millhiser: [09-10] If you're concerned that the press
is paying too much attention to Joe Biden's age, and not enough
to Donald Trump's unfitness for the job of president, I know one
very simple thing that Biden could do that would take his age off
the table in the November election.
Zachary D Carter: [07-12]
Every Biden appearance from now until November will be an evaluation
of his acuity. Even if he does ok, he's trapped in a losing issue for
the campaign, the same way talking about abortion hurts Trump
regardless of where he positions himself. Hard to see how he flips the
polls.
Rick Perlstein: [07-12]
So many of his statements end with him trailing off, exasperated, with
something like "never mind"--these placeholders he sticks in when his
brain can't summon up further thought. I'm not even suggesting
something clinical. I can only say it comes off SOUNDING
incapacitated.
Nathan J Robinson
tweeted: "Wild to me that people like Matt Yglesias and the
Pod Save America guys are now more publicly critical of Biden than
the Squad." Jacob Shell pointed out, as Yglesias did in his post:
"It's professionally cheap for a pundit and professional expensive
for a politician." But it's not just that: Biden's replacement is
going to be hand-picked by a cabal of moneyed insiders, then forced
on a convention of delegates pre-selected for their loyalty. That
person, who may well be Harris, will re-energize the party, but
also will consolidate centrist control, and by winning (especially
if winning decisively) will make it harder for the left to compete
in 2028. The Squad represent very safe Democratic seats. If Biden
wins, he will owe them, and if he loses, they will survive and be
better positioned to rescue the Party moving forward. I'm not saying
they're putting cynical self-interest ahead of the Party any more
than any other politician -- if you're in a swing district, dumping
Biden may simply be a matter of survival. But not everyone's in the
same boat, with the same options. And they do have one point that
is absolutely correct: we need to fight Trump, not among ourselves.
If I thought the Biden thing would blow over, I'd happily join them.
But I really don't see it blowing over, so the only realistic option
is for Biden to drop out, and let someone who's up to the task take
over.
By the way, a lot of really dumb comments attached to Robinson's
tweet, especially by people trying to factor Israel in (e.g., "The
Squad can't risk Kamala becoming president because of her husband's
ties to Israel"). Lots could be said about this, but I'll leave it
at this shows a remarkable ability to compartmentalize issues and
political choices, especially given how centrist Dems collaborated
with AIPAC to exterminate the Squad.
Initial count: 139 links, 7096 words.
Updated count [07-11]: 163 links, 9377 words. -->
Local tags (these can be linked to directly):
on music.
Top story threads:
Israel:
Mondoweiss:
Sam Biddle:
Israel opposes rebuilding Gaza's internet access because terrorists
could go online: Worse than that, they could report news.
Tareq S Hajjaj: [07-03]
Israel's starvation policy in Gaza is forcing people to eat tree
leaves: "The state of hunger in Gaza has not ended. Its long-term
health effects are starting to show."
Jewish Voice for Peace: [07-01]
Emergency statement on the health and human rights crisis in the
West Bank: "Alongside the catastrophe in Gaza, another crisis
is unfolding in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, where the Israeli
military has launched land incursions, conducted airstrikes,
restricted access to resources, and targeted health infrastructure."
Jake Johnson: [07-07]
Israel bombs yet another UN school in Gaza as it enters month 10
of genocide: "The strike killed 16 and injured 75, including
children. Israel has destroyed or damaged 80 percent of Gaza's
schools."
Hasan Khatib: [07-03]
Why Gazans' extreme hunger could leave its mark on subsequent
generations.
Qassam Muaddi: [07-05]
Why there is no uprising in the West Bank -- yet: "The West Bank
remains unusually calm as Israel carries out its genocide in Gaza.
But while Israeli repression has dissuaded an uprising in the streets,
the tectonic plates underneath continue to shift."
Haneen Odetallah: [07-03]
The philosophy of Hamas in the writings of Yahya Sinwar: "The
concepts of self-sacrifice, asceticism, and security awareness were
crucial to Yahya Sinwar's philosophy of resistance. The revolt that
culminated with October 7 was the direct application of his political
thought." Like Theodor Herzl, Sinwar wrote a novel which can be read
for philosophical depth and/or political strategy, but probably can't
support the weight of either. If the comparison seems to trivialize
Sinwar, that's probably my intention.
America's Israel (and Israel's America):
Pape's article title (and for that matter his book titles) suggest
he has a very naive, very addled concept of winning. Granted, I'm
starting from the default position that nobody can ever win at war,
and that anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves, most
likely by failing to recognize most of the costs one will eventually
have to pay. Pape may well agree with much of this -- he certainly
understands that Israel's collective punishment of Gaza is raising
more opposition, and more desperate opposition, than they're able
to kill off. It's not just that the violence could -- and sooner or
later probably will -- rebound against Israel. It's just peculiar
to think of either Israel's immediate offensive gains or its likely
eventual denouement as winning for everyone.
And especially for Hamas, which I'm inclined to believe -- admittedly
with little evidence to back me up -- is no longer a real force, just
a spectre conjured up by Israel as an excuse to continue genocide. I'm
not saying that when Israel sends troops into some enclave in Gaza,
they're not going to get fire returned. Just not much, and not from
a coherent military or political force. Admittedly, I don't have much
data to go on, so Pape might be helpful in that regard. On the other
hand, how can he know much more than what Israel tells him? And why
should he or we believe any of that?
Brett Wilkins: [07-04]
Senior Israeli lawmaker suggests nuclear attack on Iran:
Avigdor Liberman, the guy who's not in Netanyahu's coalition
because it isn't far-right enough for him. (Actually, it's
probably just because he hates Netanyahu. While he has no
other redeeming qualities, who can't sympathize with him on
that?) Still, he's basically saying that the problem with
Israel is that the government isn't stark-raving bonkers
enough.
Sharon Zhang: [06-28]
Biden releasing part of bombs shipment to Israel that was paused
over Rafah raid: "The administration appears to have totally
thrown away its 'red line' on Rafah, two months after the
invasion."
Israel vs. world opinion:
Mohammad Jehad Ahmad: [07-07]
Silenced at school: NYC public schools chancellor suppresses
Palestinian voices: "New York City Public Schools has been
suppressing Palestinian narratives and activism. NYC Educators
for Palestine has attempted to meet with Chancellor David Banks
for months, but he keeps dodging our meeting."
Akbar Shahid Ahmed: [07-02]
12 Biden administration reseignees blast 'intransigent' Gaza policy:
"Joe Biden 'has prioritized politics over just and fair policymaking'
on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, former government officials argued
in their first joint statement since quitting."
Michael Arria: [07-04]
The Shift: School's out, but attacks on student protesters
continue.
Muhannad Ayyash: [07-06]
A hollow Palestinian state: "Spain, Ireland, and Norway recently
made headlines for recognizing the State of Palestine. But the only
effective policy for any state recognizing Palestine is also the
diplomatic and economic isolation of the Israeli state. There is no
other way." I would phrase this somewhat differently. There is no
legitimate and/or sovereign Palestinian state to recognize, so it's
an empty gesture -- admittedly, one that disrespects Israel, and
may be worth doing just for that, but is insufficient to effect
any change in Israel, which after all is the only place change
can meaningfully occur.
Helena Cobban:
Ayça Çubukçu: [05-01]
Many speak for Palestine: "The solidarity movement doesn't hav e
a single leader -- and doesn't need one."
Joseph Levine: [07-06]
If you support Israel in the middle of a genocide, you're an awful
person. I don't agree with this, but that's because I recognize
that many basically good people subscribe to bad political opinions,
mostly because they are misinformed and/or habitually focus on the
wrong things (which makes them easily misled). I might even go so
far as to say that there are no bad people: only people who believe
bad things, often for bad reasons (like to dominate and demean other
people). But it's almost always a mistake to reify bad politics into
bad people -- only making sense when the politics totally consumes
the person. This article led me to an older one worth noting:
Randa Abdel-Fattah: [2023-12-27]
On Zionist feelings: "The feelings and fragility of Zionists
are used as a rhetorical shield to deflect from the reality of
Palestinian genocide. I refuse to provide reassurances to placate
and soothe Zionist political anxieties." I'm more indulgent of
Zionist feelings than most critics of Israel, and I have my
reasons, but I also understand this viewpoint. Starts with a
quote from Edward Said: "Since when does a militarily occupied
people have the responsibility for a peace movement?" Since the
more instinctive war movement has repeatedly failed against a
massively more powerful oppressor? Fighting back, understandable
and even inevitable, reduces you to their level, not that they
don't respond by sinking even lower. A peace movement, on the
other hand, gains moral high ground, and challenges them to do
better. Admittedly, Israel has never taken that challenge. All
they do is designed to provoke violence, because that's the
level they want to fight on. And, to circle back around, those
who want that don't just have bad politics but are fairly seen
as bad people.
Mitchell Plitnick: [07-05]
Liberal Zionists answer the Gaza genocide by appealing for
'nuance': "Liberal Zionists are trying to rehabilitate Israel's
image among young U.S. Jews after the Gaza genocide by appealing
for 'nuance' and sending them to indoctrination camps. But these
attempts ring more hollow than ever." Hard to scan for something
as elusive as "nuance" in an article like this. As near as I can
tell, the subjects here (Liberal Zionists in America) insist on
being taken as fundamentally decent liberals, while excusing their
distinctly illiberal views of anyone critical of Israel, mostly
by treating "Arab nationalism" and "Islamic fundamentalism" every
bit as rigidly as their opponents generalize about Zionism and
Colonialism. Of course, they're right that their thought can be
more nuanced than others appreciate, but the same is true for
the others, who they reject with blanket generalizations -- like
the syllogism that: Hamas is evil and can only be stopped with
death; Hamas is an intrinsic tendency for Palestinians; therefore
we will only be safe when all Palestinians are killed. That, in
a nutshell, is current Israeli policy. Adding "nuance" may help
obscure the issue, but won't change it.
Plitnick, along with Marc Lamont Hill, is co-author of the book
Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics
(2022), which goes deep into why many good people on the left
in America have a blind spot for Israel. I don't know whether
this addresses the second group of people, those who started with
left/liberal sympathies but snapped hard to the right, often
triggered by some crisis over Israel. The neocons, who rose to
power under Clinton and GW Bush, provide some prime examples,
but there are many more.
Richard Rubenstein: [07-02]
Israel in Gaza: The Jewish break with Zionism: or, "Zionism
as ethnic chauvinism."
Barnett R Rubin: [01-04]
False Messiahs: "How Zionism's dreams of liberation became
entangled with colonialism."
Philip Weiss: [07-07]
Weekly Briefing: Normalizing genocide. The article itself briefly
cites lots of other articles I've already cited. "Genocide" is such
a hard, definitive term, so the idea is to break it up into smaller,
softer, more ambiguous acts, spread out over time to lessen the shock,
an aid to denial for those so inclined. But making it all seem normal
is going to be a tall order. This article elicited a comment worth
noting:
The psychology of denial is important to understand: Jews tend to
identify with Israel the way people identify with their families,
says Joseph Levine. Well, many, many people eventually come to the
realization that their father was an abusive drunk, their mother
was manic-depressive and their siblings bullied them but they stuck
around because admitting to themselves the real situation is just
too painful -- I think that's the situation we're dealing with re
Israel.
Omar Zahzah: [07-07]
Why Big Tech's control of social media cannot stop anti-colonial
resistance.
Election notes:
Joe Biden (post-debate):
Sasha Abramsky: [07-03]
Running Biden against Trump is just plain irresponsible: "If
American democracy is on the line, as Democrats have rightly
insisted, why nominate someone who has trouble keeping up with
his opponent." Or how about this: why nominate someone who is
living proof that democracy is already lost?
Zachary D Carter: [06-10]
Inflation is not destroying Joe Biden; "But something is!"
Pre-debate piece I've been meaning to mention, but re-read it given
what you know now.
Jonathan Chait:
[07-06]
Biden's norm-shattering response to the post-debate crisis: "The
problems are ethical, not just political." Chait cites two examples
that while "not illegal" he finds ethically troubling: bringing
convicted felon son Hunter in as one of his close family advisers
(a circling of the family wagons that reminds Chait of Trump), and
Biden's unwillingness to submit to cognitive screening. The thing
is, you not only have to consider the literal merits, but how they
will be spun, in a political media environment that quite frankly
is not inclined to favor Biden.
[07-08]
The Democrats who care more about their careers than beating Trump:
"Biden bets his party doesn't have the guts to confront him." As long
as you're talking politicians, that's probably a good bet, at least
at first. But the people who decide who runs and who cannot are the
big donors, and they'll still have careers either way. Politicians
may be waiting for their signal. When they do, expect all the tails
to wag.
George Clooney: [07-10]
I love Joe Biden. But we need a new nominee. This matters,
both as personal observation from someone who has access very
few of us can match, and as the author is not a "low cost"
pundit but a high value donor -- one of the people I often
claim are actually pulling the strings. Also see the
letters, at least the first one (another close witness).
The third (terrified Harris will lose) and the fourth (he's
just an actor, so who cares?) not so much.
Nate Cohn: [07-03]
The debate hurt Biden, but the real shift has been happening for
years. There's also this interview with Cohn:
Matthew Cooper: [07-05]
If Biden quits the race, he should resign the presidency: "Being
a lame duck for seven months would be far worse for him -- and us --
than leaving office and propelling Vice President Harris to the Oval
Office." Sorry, but this is really stupid. Running for president and
being president are two very different things, and really demand
different skill sets (not that there's any way we can fix that).
Running for president demands that be able to engage with public
and press, being articulate and decisive in difficult circumstances,
every day between now and November. You'll need to convince voters
that you will serve them, and will be able to continue to serve,
clearly and coherently, for another four years. Nobody believes
that Biden can or even should do that. That's a tall order, maybe
even an impossible one, for anyone. Even in his prime, Biden never
had those skills. He only got elected thanks to a series of fluke
circumstances: first as the least objectionable compromise to stop
Sanders from winning the Democratic nomination, and then as the
only alternative to Trump. And while it may have seemed plausible
that he could repeat given similar circumstances -- above all, a
rematch with Trump -- some critical elements have changed beyond
repair (like Biden having to own his own record, battered as he's
been by four years of relentless Republican villification, with
his own skills clearly diminished in his 80s).
On the other hand, what's so hard about finishing his term?
As president, he needs to attend a few meetings, ask questions,
sign orders he has staff to prepare, do the occasional meet and
greet. He doesn't have to give speeches or press conferences.
He doesn't have to fly overseas. If, as reported, his sweet
spot is 10-to-4, why can't that be his work day? And if he ever
does have to answer that 3AM call to start WWIII -- you may
recall that as Hillary Clinton's "commander-in-chief test" --
just wake him up and brief him. That's a situation smarter
people would never allow to happen, but if he did, how much
worse could he be than Clinton or any of his predecessors?
As for being called a "lame duck," that's something that
stupid people (or opportunists trying to dupe stupid people)
are going to do anyway. Ignore them. (Actually, the 22nd
Amendment should have banned consecutive terms. They didn't
think of that because there was a long tradition of major
presidents serving two -- and until FDR only two -- terms,
and because in 1947-51 presidential election campaigns only
took up a couple months, as opposed to the billionaire-funded
multi-year marathons of late. They also had no idea all the
crap journalists would spread about "lame ducks.")
Let's assume that Biden has to withdraw from the nomination.
As far as the country is concerned, there should be no problem
with him finishing out the term he was elected to. But if he
did so, Kamala Harris would become president. As she is most
likely his replacement as nominee, would becoming president
help or hurt her candidacy? I don't see how it would help. It
would give her a bigger plane to campaign from, and offer a
few nice photo-ops (world leaders and such, look presidential).
But it would put a lot of demands on time she needs to campaign.
And it would saddle her more closely with Biden's legacy, which
despite some real accomplishments remains pretty unpopular. I
also suspect that a Biden resignation wouldn't spin well: it
will be taken as a disgrace, affirming all the charges against
Biden, and tainting his legacy -- a legacy that Harris will
need to burnish in order to win.
Chas Danner:
Arthur Delaney: [07-05]
Reps. Seth Moulton, Mike Quigley latest Democrats to call on Joe Biden
to quit race: "The dam hasn't broken, but there's a steady drip
of statements from Democrats skeptical of Biden being the Democratic
nominee."
Ed Kilgore: [07-08]
Was Biden's debate worse than Access Hollywood? I suppose what
he's trying to say is that candidates can win despite embarrassing
incidents along the way. I don't know or care which was worse, but
I can think of several reasons why this will cause Biden more
trouble: Access Hollywood may have impugned Trump's character,
but he didn't have much to lose in the first place; also it's
an old story, not present, so something Trump might have matured
out of (as opposed to something that only gets worse with age);
and while most of us might prefer to have a president who's not
an asshole, some people actually regard that as a plus. On the
other hand, debating is supposed to be a core competency for
presidential aspirants, and is suggestive of how a person might
handle an unexpected crisis, as is almost certain to happen.
Also, the debate was an explicit opportunity for Biden to show
that years of suppositions and innuendos about Biden's mental
agility, tied to his age, were wrong. Biden's performance would
seem to have confirmed them -- with his ever-increasing age by
far the most obvious cause. Perhaps worse still, this implied
that Biden's past denials were also false, casting considerable
doubt on his reliability and truthfulness.
Trump recovered because the the DNC mail dumps changed the
fickle media's story line, then came Comey's announcement that
he was re-opening the Clinton email investigation, which itself
might have faded had the Stormy Daniels story not been bought
off. But henceforth, every time Biden debates, he will be haunted
by this performance, and every time he doesn't debate, that too
works against him. Either way, Biden is trapped. If he doesn't
drop out, this is going to be very painful to watch.
Ezra Klein: [06-30]
This isn't all Joe Biden's fault.
Paul Krugman: [07-08]
Please, Mr. President, do the right thing.
Chris Lehman:
Eric Levitz:
[07-05]
In an ABC interview, Biden charts a course for Dems' worst-case
scenario: "The president appeared too frail to defeat Trump and
too delusional to drop out."
No interview or stump speech can erase these revelations. The news
media will not stop scrutinizing the copious evidence of Biden's
senescence. The Trump campaign will not forget that it now possesses
a treasure trove of humiliating clips of Biden's brain freezes and
devastating quotes from the president's allies. Given this climate
and the candidate's limitations, it is not plausible that Biden can
surge in the polls between now and November. . . .
The Biden who spoke with ABC News Friday night was enfeebled,
ineloquent, egotistical, and intransigent. He was a man who appeared
both ready and willing to lead his party into the wilderness. Asked
how he would feel if he stayed in the race and Trump were elected,
Biden replied, "I'll feel as long as I gave it my all and I did the
goodest job as I know I can do, that's what this is about."
Wasn't that how Hillary Clinton felt after losing? I've never
forgiven her for losing to Trump, and probably never will. Biden
will be even worse, because doubts about him are so widely and
deeply expressed, so far in advance of the actual vote.
[07-07]
Biden is leading Democrats toward their worst-case scenario:
Appears to be a slight edit of the previous article.
Daniel Marans: [07-06]
Voters had issues with Biden's age long before the debate. That's
why Democrats are worried.
Nicole Narea: [07-03]
Forget four more years. Is Biden fit to serve now? Was he ever
fit? What does that mean? Let's take care of the nomination first:
that's the position that needs to be filled, with someone who can
handle the immediate requirements and very probably continue to do
so four years out. After that, if he can finish his term with
dignity, shouldn't we show him that much respect? He'd certainly
be under a lot less pressure and stress if he wasn't also running
for a second term.
Olivia Nuzzi: [07-04]
The conspiracy of silence to protect Joe Biden: "The president's
mental decline was like a dark family secret for many elite
supporters."
Evan Osnos: [07-06]
Did Joe Biden's ABC interview stanch the bleeding or prolong it?
Tyler Pager: [06-30]
Biden aides plotted debate strategy for months. Then it all collapsed.
"The Biden team gambled on an early debate and prepared intensively at
Camp David, but advisers could not prevent the candidate's stumbles
onstage." Pager also reported on:
Nia Prater: [07-08]
Read Biden's I'm-not-going-anywhere letter to House Democrats.
Following up:
Andrew Prokop: [07-03]
Leaks about Joe Biden are coming fast and furious: "The recent
reports about the president's age and health, explained."
David Schultz: [07-03]
Biden's abysmal debate.
Nate Silver:
Norman Solomon: [07-02]
Who you gonna believe, Biden loyalists or your own eyes and ears?
Brian Stelter: [07-03]
Did the media botch the Biden age story? "Asleep at the wheel?
Complicit in a cover-up? The real story is far more complicated --
and more interesting." Or "Sorry, Ted Cruz, there are more than two
options."
Michael Tomasky:
Benjamin Wallace-Wells: [07-08]
Joe Biden is fighting back -- but not against Trump, really:
Then what the hell is he good for?
Joan Walsh:
Biden did not save his presidency on ABC: "An uneven interview
with George Stephanapoulos was too little, too late -- and maybe a
bit too churlish."
Matthew Yglesias: [07-08]
I was wrong about Biden: I followed Yglesias closely for many
years, but after he won that "neoliberal shill of the year" contest
(I think it was 2019), quit Vox, started buckraking at Substack,
and wrote that opportunisticaly Friedmanesque book (One Billion
Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger), about the only time
I read him these days is when he gets one of his Bloomberg columns
syndicated (and they're rarely much good). He's a smart guy who
knows a lot, but he's also a calculating bastard who's especially
adept at spotting trends and triangulating them with an eye toward
profit. So it's no surprise that he (unlike his Vox-cofounder Ezra
Klein, another smart triangulator) bought the Biden second term
plan hook, line and sinker, or that Biden's debate performance,
for once in his life he's eating crow. Or maybe twice: he started
out as a big Iraq war booster.
But enough with shooting the messanger. Let's try reading the
message. It's long, methodologically sound, meticulously thought
out, and damning. For instance, consider some facts:
Biden isn't doing press conferences. He's using teleprompters at
fundraisers. The joint appearances with Bill Clinton or Barack Obama
look like efforts to keep attention off the candidate. It's not just
that he's avoiding hostile interviews or refusing to sit with the
New York Times, he isn't even doing friendly-but-substantive shows
with journalists like Ezra Klein or Chris Hayes. It was a while ago
now that I talked to him, and though it went well, I haven't heard
recent rumors of many other off-the-record columnist chats. The
seemingly inexplicable decision to skip the Super Bowl interview
is perfectly explicable once you see the duck. In a re-election year,
a president needs to do two different full-time jobs simultaneously,
and Biden was really struggling with that. Apparently foreign
governments were sitting on some anecdotes that have now leaked,
which I wouldn't have thought possible.
But the biggest data point that I blew off was a recent and
totally unambiguous one.
Five days before the debate, someone who'd seen Biden recently
at a fundraiser told me that he looked and sounded dramatically
worse than the previous times they'd seen him -- as recently as
six months ago -- and that they were now convinced Biden wouldn't
be able to make it through a second term. I blew that warning off
and assumed things would be fine at the debate.
That goes a bit beyond the facts I wanted to show, but you can
see where he's going. The next paragraph begins: "Now that Biden
apologists like me are discredited in the eyes of the public,"
then segues into a good point we needn't dwell on here. The next
section is more important: "The media climate is going to get
worse." He offers some details, but if you at all understand how
the media works, you can imagine the rest, and then best double
it for what you're too decent to even imagine the media doing.
[Insert shark metaphor here.]
Yglesias moves on to a "What comes next?" section, where he
reminds us what a calculating bastard he is:
Columnists calling on Biden to step down provide, in my view,
are a small boost to Trump's election odds and a minuscule
increase in the odds that Biden actually steps aside. I think
we have to say it anyway, because this is journalism and we
owe a duty of truth to our audience. But in narrow cost-benefit
terms, the public criticism of Biden has negative expected value.
Elected officials have a different set of responsibilities.
I've seen some people express frustration that Barack Obama came
out with such a strong statement of support for Biden. But Obama
slagging Biden in public would have been a boon to Trump and
accomplished nothing. Same for Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries
and Nancy Pelosi and everyone else who matters. These are politicians,
and they do not share journalists' obligations of candor.
But what they do in private does matter, and I hope they do the
right thing.
The main thing I would add to this is that the election isn't
until November (or, with early voting, mid-October?), so even if
it takes until the Convention to replace Biden, there will still
be plenty of time to unite behind the nominee and the ticket
before anything real happens. Until then, it's just hot air (or
maybe just tepid). The media cares, because they want you to
think that every moment, every minute shift and sway, portends
great importance, but that's just their business model. There
are good reasons to replace Biden sooner rather than later --
it's painful to watch Biden and his cadres squirm, and we would
be much happer spending the time exposing and deprecating Trump
and the Republicans -- but it's a process, and that takes time.
(I'm not even bothered by it not being a very democratic one,
although it does mean that the elites who control this process
will be held responsible should they fail.)
Let me close here by quoting a reader comment:
So long as Biden remains the nominee, we're going to keep getting
hammered on age and mental decline.
As soon as Harris is the nominee, we can hammer Trump on age
and mental decline.
I'd rather play the second game.
Indeed, as long as Biden is the nominee, this is going to be one
long, miserable election, where we're stuck playing defense, on
grounds that aren't really defensible. Sure, we still might eek
out a win, but best case is it's going to be close, which means
that the administration will be hobbled for four more years, its
leadership decrepit, while getting blamed for disasters that have
been brewing for decades. On the other hand, replace Biden, and
you reverse the tide, and go on the offense: throw the whole
anti-Biden handbook (not just age and imbecility, but cronyism
and corruption, egotism, vanity, the whole ball of wax) back at
Trump, and go after all the Republican toadies fawning all over
him. Wouldn't you rather kick some ass? We have time, but we
won't have it forever.
Trump:
Margaret Hartmann: [07-08]
What the Jeffrey Epstein documents reveal about Donald Trump.
Jeet Heer: [07-05]
Why aren't we talking about Trump's fascism? "Joe Biden has
created a distraction from the existential question that should
define this election." I don't see this as a problem. Some people
understand what fascism means, especially historically. Most of
them are fascinated enough to debate the fine points, but all of
them already have weighed Trump out on the F-scale, so there's
no real need to engage them on the issue. (Most are opposed,
even ones who dismiss the charge on technical grounds, and none
are likely to view Trump more negatively if you make them better
understand the case that Trump is a fascist.) A second group of
people only understand that aside from a couple of known and long
gone historical examples, "fascist" is a slur, mostly used by
people on the left to attack people not on the left. To convince
people that Trump is a fascist and therefore bad, you first have
to teach them what fascism is and why it is bad, which is a lot
of excess work, and will probably wind up making them think that
you are a Marxist (which if you actually know this stuff, you
probably are). There are lots of more straightforward ways to
argue that Trump is bad than that he specifically is a fascist,
so for those people the effort ranges from inefficient to
counterproductive. Then there are the people who will accept
your analysis and embrace it, deciding that fascist Trump is
even cooler than regular Trump.
Heer's article is a good example of why we shouldn't bother
talking about Trump and fascism. Heer is part of that first
group, so he not only likes to talk about fascism, he sees
fascism as the prism that illuminates Trump's myriad evils.
However, once he introduces the terminology, we forget what
the article was meant to about -- that Biden's incompetence
has become a distraction from the real issue, which is the
very real disaster if Trump is elected -- and fixate on the
single word (which as I just said, is either understood but
redundant, or misunderstood and therefore irrelevant, so in
either case ineffective). So Heer's article doesn't expose
Biden's distraction but merely adds to it.
Nicholas Liu: [07-08]
Trump runs from Project 2025, claims not to know what it's about:
"The former president is trying to distance himself from a plan
drafted by his own former aides."
Shawn Musgrave:
Trump camp says it has nothing to do with Project 2025 manifesto --
aside from writing it.
Marc A Thiessen:
How Trump can make NATO great again. No time to read this, but
the fusion of author (aka "Torture Boy"), concept, and title blew
my mind.
And other Republicans:
And other Democrats:
Sarah Jones: [07-03]
A socialist's case for Kamala Harris: I'd tread carefully here.
The decision on the Democratic ticket is going to be made by people
who fear and hate socialists even more than Trump, and you don't
want them to turn on Harris just because she's one of the less bad
compromises available. She as much as admits this with her last
line: "But if I can't get what I want this year, I'd rather settle
for Harris."
Osita Nwanevu: [07-08]
Democrats don't just need a new candidate. They need a reckoning.
"Democrats will be impotent messengers on democracy as long as they
remain beholden to the feudal culture this crisis has exposed."
Right, but it isn't going to happen, certainly not this year. The
Democratic left didn't challenge Biden this year, basically for
three reasons: it's nearly impossible to reject an incumbent
president running for a second term; their relationships with
Biden were engaging enough that they saw him as a path for limited
but meaningful reform, which they valued more than just taking
losing stands on principle; and they are more afraid of Trump
and the Republicans than ever. Conversely, Biden is running not
because he's uniquely qualified to beat Trump, but because he
was uniquely positioned to prevent an open Democratic primary
that could have nominated a Democrat who might be more committed
to the voters than to the donors. But now that cast is set. Even
if the convention is thrown open, the people voting there are
almost all beholden to Biden. So while Biden will not survive
as the nominee, he and his big donors will pick his successor,
and when they do, every Democrat who doesn't want to risk Trump
will line up, bow, and cheer. The reckoning will have to wait,
probably until crisis forces it.
Prem Thakker:
Every Democrat other than Joe Biden is unburdened by what has been:
"As voters look for another option, alternative Democratic leaders poll
similarly or even better than Biden -- even without name recognition."
Legal matters and other crimes:
Climate and environment:
Economic matters:
Ukraine War and Russia:
America's empire and the world:
Hekmat Aboukhater: [07-04]
That's militainment! Big Hollywood succumbs to the Pentagon borg:
"Experts explain how 2,500 films and shows have been weaponized to
promote war." About a documentary film,
Theaters
of War, created by (among others) Roger Stahl, author of
Militainment, Inc.: War, Media and Popular Culture (2009).
Heather Ashby: [06-20]
How the 'war on terror' made the US Institute for Peace a sideshow:
"Forty years ago, Congress thought it was a good idea to fund peacemaking,
but it was no match for War Inc." One item on Marianne Williamson's
presidential platform was to establish a Department of Peace. Turns
out the US already had one, but nobody ever heard of it, probably
because it didn't do anything.
Zack Beauchamp: [07-08]
The real lesson for America in the French and British elections:
"The European elections tell us little about Biden's chances -- but
a lot about his choices."
Julia Cagé/Thomas Piketty: [07-03]
France's 'hard left' has been demonised -- but its agenda is realistic,
not radical: "The New Popular Front will improve ordinary people's
lives -- and it's an effective, economically sound alternative to the
far right." More on France:
Juan Cole: [07-02]
Another American war in the Middle East?: "Turning the Red Sea
redder."
William Hartung: [07-03]
Silicon Valley USA: Are these 'patriots' mere harbingers of doom?
"Young, hot upstarts want to shorten the kill chain with AI
weapons."
Ellen Ioanes: [07-05]
What the Labour Party's big win in the UK will actually mean:
"The UK is getting a new government. What is it promising to do?"
Michael Klare: [07-04]
Early signs of the failure of American global power? "The
Anglo-Saxonization of American foreign policy and its perverse
consequences."
Alex Little: [07-03]
Washington should resist the urge to meddle in Moldova.
Other stories:
Margot Roosevelt: [07-07]
Jane F. McAlevey, who empowered workers across the globe, dies at
59: "An organizer and author, she believed that a union was only
as strong as its members and trained thousands "to take over their
unions and change them."
Books
Jedediah Britton-Purdy: [07-02]
The Creed: "How did Americans come to worship the Constitution?"
Review of
Aziz Rana, The Constitutional Bind: How Americans Came to Idolize
a Document That Fails Them.
Aziz Rana: [05-30]
Democracy was a decolonial project: "For generations of American
radicals, the path to liberation required a new constitution, not
forced removal." I ran across this essay slightly after finding the
book review. While there is a common point, this goes in a different
direction.
Leah Hunt-Hendrix/Astra Taylor: [07-02]
For a solidarity state: "The state structures society. It can make
us more prone to care for one another."
Sean Illing: [07-07]
How the 1990s broke politics: "Inside the GOP's transition from
the party of Reagan to the party of Trump." Interview with John
Ganz, author of
When the Clock Broke: Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked
Up in the Early 1990s.
Osita Nwanevu: [03-11]
The divided president: "Who's in charge in the Biden White House?"
This is a bit dated, a review of
Franklin Foer, The Last Politician: Inside Joe Biden's White House
and the Struggle for America's Future. I bought the book at
the time, figuring it might shed some light on some things (mostly
involving foreign policy) that I didn't adequately understand), but
never got around to it, and I'm in no hurry these days.
Marshall Steinbaum:
X thread: "There's a little book I recommend to anyone who's
trying to get a handle on what's going on in American politics this
week." The book is
Nancy McLean, Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical
Right's Stealth Plan for America. The book is mostly about economist
James Buchanan, and how his and similar careers have been sponsored by
right-wing networks, especially that of the Kochs. I read the book when
it came out, and thought it was pretty good.
Buchanan's early ties to the anti-desegregation movement were
especially striking -- how easily we forget how reflexively racist
many people were in the 1950s -- and the Koch funding was something
I was rather familiar with. (I even received some myself, back when
I typeset reprints of a couple Koch-sponsored reprints of Murray
Rothbard books.) I'm less clear on Buchanan's economic theories,
which seemed rather trivial. Maybe "stealth plan" was a bit of an
oversell: much of it was public, and some of it barely qualified
as a plan -- throwing money at something could just as well be seen
as another of those "irritable mental gestures" Lionel Trilling saw
in most "conservative thought." Still, this kicked up a flurry of
protest over McLean's book, including some from people I generally
respect (e.g., Rick Perlstein), so I took some notes:
Nick Paumgarten: [07-01]
Alan Braufman's loft-jazz séance.
Michael Tatum: [07-09]
A downloader's diary (53): Much more than capsule reviews,
major takes on Beyoncé, Nia Archives, Zawose Queens, Carly Pearce,
Fox Green, and much more. Pearce and Fox Green also appear here:
Midyear Lists:
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Sunday, July 7, 2024
Speaking of Which: Afterthoughts
Back during my careerist, apolitical middle ages, I read a
number of business/management books (also, more often, popular
science, and sometimes science fiction -- those were the good
ol' days), and one point that stuck with me was the observation
that in and coming out of meetings, there are two kinds of people:
those who give you their reactions immediately, and those who
need a day or two to process and come up with better reactions.
I quickly recognized that I'm one of the latter.
I'm pretty sure the book was Robert Townsend's Further Up
the Organization, which I probably got more from than I did
from The Communist Manifesto and Minima Moralia
combined, although from Walter Benjamin's Illuminations
and John Berger's Ways of Seeing would be close. Some
major things I got from Townsend are the value of employee
ownership, and a deep loathing for nepotism -- points that
have repeatedly been reinforced by real-world experience.
There's also a quote about the Ottoman Empire that I'd have
to look up to do justice, but the gist is that when you lose
your reputation for justice, you lose everything. That quote
comes as close as anything to explaining why I spend so much
time harping on how important it is that Israel and America
have so thoroughly disgraced themselves in Gaza (and, sure,
not just in Gaza).
Anyhow, before my digression, I just wanted to introduce
this concept, which may or may not become a regular feature --
depends on how much free time I have, which if this week is
any example is likely to be not much. It's been taking me so
much time to round up my weekly
Speaking of Which compendiums, often of late requiring
an extra day (or two?), that I wind up just throwing them
out, with no more than a quick, minimal spell check. Then I
have to pivot for
Music Week, which is mostly a matter of collecting bits I
had written more leisurely (or carelessly) during the week,
and that usually breaks the mood until Friday or so when I
get going on the next Speaking of Which. Lately, Music Week
day has given me a chance to fix the typos my wife always
finds, and add a few items that slipped my net, but I never
have the time and perspective I need to refine, clarify,
and polish what I wrote in such haste.
That led me to the idea of doing a midweek "Afterthoughts"
post, where I look back through the previous week's roundup
with somewhat refreshed eyes, pick out a few salient items
that I think could use more (by which I think I mean deeper)
commentary. I could then add anchors and links to go back
and forth between Speaking of Which and Afterthoughts. As I
reread, I'll probably catch and fix a few mistakes, perhaps
editing some particularly awkward passages. While Afterthoughts
will offer the occasional link, I imagine that I'll add new
ones I to the old file, or save them for the following week.
That will entail keeping multiple files open (and raises
the question of whether I should make the work-in-progress
file visible).
Another digression (maybe I should invent some markup for
these?): I have on occasion done that, and I'm usually rather
pleased with what I find there. That gets me to imagining that
someone could pull out a book's worth of particularly notable
nuggets, but the only people who have given them a look so far
have thrown up their hands in dismay (my wife and her publisher
friends). When I do it myself, I'm tempted to edit, rarely for
points but the writing can always be sharpened up. I've collected
most of my post-2000 writings into
book files, but they are pretty massive (the four political
volumes up to 2020 total 2.86 million words; not collected there
yet, Speaking of Which, since June 2021, would add another 800
thousand words).
Anyhow, that's the concept. Unfortunately, I wasted 2-3 days
after coming up with the idea without actually doing the work.
But I left a placeholder for this post when I opened the next
Speaking of Which draft file, so I feel obliged to post something
here. (It works this way for technical and historical reasons I
won't bore you with, possibly because doing so might expose my
inept design.) But as this is being written on Sunday, all I can
hope for is make a quick pass and post tonight, with everything
else delayed a day (or, perhaps like last week, more).
Zack Beauchamp: Sometimes I think I should write up an
annotated list of books on Israel, but the number that
I have read quickly becomes mind-boggling -- especially
when you start thinking about the various angles and tangents.
But this one cuts to the heart of the matter: not so much as to
what happened -- which tends to be a long list of indictments --
as to what was going through Israeli when they acted as they
did.
One imagines there could be a similar reading list for how
Palestinians think, but they've had so few viable options that
it really wouldn't tell us much. As Americans, we've been brought
up to think that we have a large degree of freedom within which
we can deliberately live our lives. Even here, much of that is
illusion (or delusion), but Palestinians have never had any
meaningful degree of political freedom: not under the Ottomans,
or the British, or the Egyptian/Jordanian occupations of Gaza
and the West Bank from 1948-67, or under Israel (in or out of
the Green Line, with or without the gang rule of Fatah/Hamas),
or for exiles in Lebanon, Syria, the Gulf, etc.
I dug out Ben Cramer's book a few weeks ago. I wanted to
find a story I remembered him using -- one about teaching a
dog to speak -- but so far it's escaped me. On the other hand,
I have reread many passages, and I'm always struck by how
easily he gets to unobvious but essential points. One of
those is that of all the world's many problems, this conflict
should be one of the easiest to solve -- pace
Christgau, who throws up his hands in despair after declaring
it "the cruelest and most gruesome international conflict of
my adulthood." I pick my around that line, but Ben Cramer
simply offers an answer: just start by showing Palestinians
some respect, and see how they adjust. I have little doubt
that they will, but that's because I'm aware that there are
many more strands of thought among Palestinians beyond the
only ones Israelis recognize: those who fight (like Hamas),
and those who surrender (like Fatah, not that even they have
so little self-respect that they can satisfy Israel).
I've read quite a bit on Israel over the years: enough that
I can pull up a historical reference for almost any situation,
so quickly that I frequently circle back instead of offering
immediate reactions to atrocities that no understanding of
historical context can excuse. But mostly I'm writing on the
basis of models I've formed and refined over many years, that
give me insight into things people say and do, and how they are
perceived and reacted to. I suppose this started fifty years
ago, when I was first smitten with philosophy, and through it
psychology and sociology (and economics?).
It's been a long time since I ever attempted to articulate it,
but I have been thinking more about stories and models lately:
most people understand things through stories -- or so we're told
by political and advertising consultants, who one suspects prefer
them because they see them as ways to manipulate, and as such to
compensate their clients and earn their premium. And, if you're
interested in practical politics, that's often a game you have
to play. Models are harder to sell, because they simply give you
insight into how things actually work, and most importantly, that
many of the things selfish people would pay for -- like riches,
power, status, glamor, fame, notoriety -- come with hidden costs
that make them worth much less than you'd like to think.
But read on. The models will come to you.
About last Thursday's debate: I collected a huge number of links,
as most center-to-left pundits took the matter seriously and had
an opinion to air (and often not just an axe to grind). I didn't
bother much with right pundits, as what could they possibly say
worth taking seriously? So while I started the post with a general
idea of what was going on, and how it might play out, I was fine
with letting this play out. And it did, pretty definitively.
Biden is toast. He's lost all credibility as a candidate, and
if the Democrat clique around him somehow manage to keep him
as their candidate, they will lose all credibility and, as soon
as possible, control of the party. Even if he sticks and wins,
which given his opposition isn't impossible, he and they will
get no credit for the feat. All they will get is condemnation
for the risk they're running by sticking with a candidate who
has clearly lost the faith and trust of his own voters.
That it isn't official yet is probably because the insiders
haven't yet agreed on a succession plan. There's been very
little reporting on this so far, because it's not the sort of
thing inside power brokers dare brag about. But it's pretty
obvious if you understand how things work. And what's happened
is pretty simple. . . .
PS: Insert my model of US political parties here, then
explain how the powers in the Democratic Party have used Biden
as a prophylactic against the left. An open political process
stood a chance of tilting the nomination toward someone on the
left -- probably not Sanders, due to age, but someone would
have moved in that direction. On the other hand, it would be
very difficult for anyone to challenge an incumbent president,
so running Biden essentially shut down the primary process,
Now, even if Biden sensibly withdraws, the convention will be
controlled by Biden's backers, ensuring that they will come up
with a candidate favorable to their business interests. I wrote
a version of this for tomorrow's post: e.g., the comments on
Cooper and
Yglesias.
I've been thinking along these lines for quite some time now.
To reiterate:
Both parties basically do two things: raise money, and compete
for votes. Aside from unions, which faded significantly after 1980,
that meant they had to appeal to the rich, and then take those
resources and somehow fashion promises that would appeal to enough
other people to win elections. Donors mostly want the same thing,
which is to make more money, so both parties have to be credibly
pro-business, but parties can appeal to different voters, and try
to differentiate themselves accordingly (without offending their
donors).
The main differentiation between the two parties is over the
issue of whether can and should take an active role in helping people
(which, for the donors, includes businesses) or shouldn't even try,
but rather should restrict itself to protecting property and repressing
people's baser instincts and subversive ideas. You already know which
parties match up with which descriptions. They both have problems
reconciling donors and voters, and those problems are most acutely
felt by party insiders.
Parties are not like firms, where owners have clear control
direct from the top, through a board and hired management. Nor are
they democratic, like a union (although they could be, and that's
something Democrats should consider). They're more like co-ops,
which in theory belong to everyone but in practice are dominated
by a few people who worm their way into positions where they control
access to resources and information. They're often referred to as
elites, but cadres would be a more appropriate term (I could also
go with professional political operatives, to put a somewhat finer
point on it). Cadres may seem like elites, but that's mostly
because they wind up being operatives of the real elites: the
donors. But while they are usually aligned with elite donors,
like the managerial class, they have bureaucratic interests of
their own, like self-preservation.
The cadres struggle to balance the conflicting demands of
donors and voters, leading to different strategies.
Republicans flagrantly appeal to rich, then try to line up
voters who will defer to the rich and overlook their own economic
interests, expecting little or nothing from government. Democrats
take a different tack, trying to woo voters with promises of better
services, but they also have to find and keep donors willing to go
along with their programs. Both strategies are dysfunctional, but
that could fill up a book.
One problem of special relevance here is that in their
relentless supplication to donors, Republicans are corrupt in
principle, while Democrats are corrupt in practice. Somehow the
latter seems to bother people more than the former. Probably
because to Democratic voters, corruption seems like betrayal,
leading them to distrust their leaders. Republicans also see
Democratic corruption as betrayal, because it benefits others,
but accept their own corruption as serving their party and its
ideals.
In the 1970s, unions were declining, and business started
pumping huge amount of cash into politics. That led to the Reagan
1980s, which in turn led to a desperate realignment within the
Democratic Party, where success was often linked to becoming
even more pro-business than the Republicans. That shift was led
by Clinton, backed by middling Democrats like Biden, and picked
up by Obama. Not only were they pro-business, they turned the
Party into a platform for their own personal agendas, with no
regard for developing bottom-up party strength. (Both Clinton
and Obama came in with legislative majorities, then suffered
massive mid-term losses, rebounding to win unproductive second
terms without Democratic Congresses. The sole exception was in
2006, when Howard Dean -- who coined the term "democratic wing
of the Democratic Party" -- built a party that won Congress,
only to see Obama cashier him and lose everything.)
Obama picked Biden as VP as a peace offering to Hillary
Clinton, who was thus assured that she could run for president
after Obama, without having to fight off his VP. She got her
clear lane, raised massive money, and still lost, to one of
the worst Republicans imaginable. She barely survived Bernie
Sanders' challenge in the primaries, mostly by slim margins in
states with strong Democratic machines. In 2020, after Sanders
won the first two primaries, with Bloomberg so panicked by a
possible Sanders win that he spent nearly a billion dollars
on his own hapless candidacy, the Party cadres rallied all of
their support behind Biden, and eeked out a win, mostly through
terror of a second Trump term.
Biden hadn't come remotely close in his previous presidential
campaigns, was already considered too old to run in 2016, and
was neither inspiring nor graceful in 2020, but managed a loudly
disputed win in 2020. He had no business running for a second
term, but Trump was running, and the rematch appealed to him.
Moreover, as an incumbent, his renomination would be a lock, it
would keep his donors happy, and for Party cadres, it would
preclude another challenge from the left -- one that risked
reorienting the Party from its donors to the people. Besides,
the left wasn't all that unhappy with Biden (although Gaza
risked becoming a sore point), so as long as he seemed capable,
pretty much everyone was willing to go along. But mostly it was
cadre fear of open primaries that drove his candidacy. The
Democratic Party pledged to save democracy in 2024, but dared
not indulge in it.
I don't know who insisted on the debate, but it offered
a sanity check as to Biden's competency. Most likely his donors
wanted to see him in action, to reassure themselves he could do
the job. In any case, he failed abysmally. The good news is that
he could still be replaced. The bad news is that he's left the
Party in control of cadres committed to him, because they have
no other option. Hence the current stall, denial, misdirection,
and dissembling, which assumes Democrats are even more gullible
than Republicans (a tall order, given that they're still backing
Trump). The worse news is that many Democrats are so terrified
they're willing to stick with a plan that has repeatedly failed
rather than risk change.
I don't mind advising patience, but the notion that Biden will
still be the nominee in September, much less in November, is too
horrible to contemplate. The measuer of this is not whether you
would still vote for Biden over Trump in November. Of course you
would, as would anyone who recognizes Trump for even a fraction
of what he is. The question is how do you want to beat Trump?
You want to beat him not just on how bad he is, but on how much
better you are.
You need a candidate who can stand up to him,
who can argue back, who can hit him so hard and so fast that
he's the one who looks like a doddering, senescent idiot. And,
let's face it, that candidate isn't Joe Biden. If we could get
a fair vote on it, I'm pretty sure most Democrats would agree,
and come up with someone better. But thanks to Biden and the
cadres, only they get to decide this year. If they get it
wrong, they will lose all credibility, and we'll have to
rebuild the Democratic Party from scratch, as a union of
voters. Meanwhile, we'll suffer for their hubris. And next
time, we'll understand much better what we're fighting for.
Changes I made to the file:
- Tareq S Hajjaj: missing link.
- Hoda Osman: botched link tag.
- Moved Prem Thakker under Blaise Malley's "craziest 'pro-Israel'
budget amendments."
- Zack Beauchamp: bold-faced book authors.
- Andrew Prokop: typo.
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Wednesday, July 3, 2024
Music Week
July archive
(in progress).
Music: Current count 42580 [42549] rated (+31), 29 [22] unrated (+7).
Nominally a day late (ok, two days), but last
Music Week
was two days late, so this is still a short week. I started off most
days with old r&b in the CD player -- especially
Scratchin': The Wild Jimmy Spruill Story, which combined a
few minor hits with some major studio work, leading me to
tweet up two singles
(Bobby Lewis,
Tossin' and Turnin', and Bobby Long,
The Pleasure Is All Mine). Beyond that, what I got to was pretty
haphazard, with a fair amount of old music left over from the William
Parker research.
My piece was published by ArtsFuse, here:
Celebrating bassist William Parker's lifetime of achievement.
You can also find my
2003 CG, with its updated
discography, and my
notes file, which
includes my full set of reviews of albums Parker. The former could
still use some cleanup, especially to separate out the albums that
Parker didn't play on -- the CG was originally focused on Matthew
Shipp and the Thirsty Ear Blue Series he curated, until I started
noticing how many more albums Parker played on and how central
they were to the whole circle. The latter needs even more work,
as most of it was cut-and-pasted from my
book files (which are now several
years out of date), with others copied with HTML markup (where
they still have bold credits and letter grades). If I didn't
fear getting sucked into a huge time sink, I'd go fix those,
but for now I can only offer excuses.
Besides, I have a much more urgent website project to work on.
I've decided to use my Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll contacts to
run a Mid-Year straw poll. I explain this on the
website (which
still needs a good deal of work) and in the
invite
letter (which went out to approx. 200 critics on June 30).
I'm asking for lists of up to 10 new releases (which can include
newly discovered 2023 releases) and/or up to 5 "rara avis" (old
music, recorded 10+ years ago, or reissues). Deadline is July
14, and ArtsFuse will publish the results, probably later that
week.
The Poll is a quickie experiment. I've simplified the rules to
make it easier on voters (and hopefully on he who counts), and I've
saved myself a lot of work by only sending out one batch of invites
without trying to vet new voters. The problem with the "one batch"
approach is that I'm using a server and software that has been known
to run afoul of some spam traps. I especially fear that people with
gmail addresses may have their invites diverted or discarded. But
it's impossible to test and verify these things. I made an effort
to research this problem before, to little avail, and I will make
another one soon, but in the meantime, please read the following,
and follow up if anything seems to apply to you:
If you've ever voted before, or for that matter received an
invite before, and haven't received an invite, please check your
spam filter. If you find one, take steps to get your mail provider
to recognize that the mail isn't spam. If you can't find one, assume
you're eligible and use
this one.
Follow the instructions, and vote. Let me know if you want to be
added to my list (jazzpoll [at] hullworks.net). Not everyone who
has voted is on the list (various reasons, including sloth on my
part), but I can add you. The advantage of being on the list is
that I'll send you updates and further requests.
If you haven't received an invite, but think you should be
qualified, look up the invite, follow instructions, and send me
your lists. You need to have some real expertise in jazz (my first
approximation would be listening to 200+ jazz records per year,
but that's easy for me to say because I listen to 700+), have some
verifiable credentials (you write about some of them, which can
be on your own blog or mainstream or niche publications, and/or
you broadcast about them, which obviously includes radio but I
suppose could extend to podcasts), and construct lists that are
focused on jazz (the occasional outlier or, as DownBeat likes to
call them, "beyond"; by the way, "smooth jazz" is not jazz, at
least for purposes of establishing credibility, although it may
be acceptable as "beyond"). If this checks out, I will very likely
accept your ballot, and you'll be on the inside track for future
invites.
Check with your friends: make sure they got their invites,
and let people you think should be voting know that they can vote,
and how. They can always
hit me up with questions, but
we don't have a lot of time, so it's best to move fast.
I suppose it wouldn't hurt to publicize this wider, although
bear in mind that I still see this as a forum of critics -- even
though I recognize that there are lots of fans that have become
pretty expert themselves, especially given how easy it's become
to check out new music on streaming platforms.
Also, one key point to emphasize is that this isn't a big deal.
I'm not asking you to exercise Solomonic (or Christgauvian) judgment
over the jazz universe. Your list doesn't have to find the absolute
best records (whatever that might mean). Nor does it have to be
ranked. (Although blessed are the rankers, for they get slightly
more points weighting for their efforts.) Nor does it even have
to be a full list. Just jot down a few albums that you would like
to recommend to other people. That's mostly how these lists will
be used.
Given the late date, the short deadline, my various shortcuts,
and the fact that we've never done this before, I'm not expecting
much, but even if we just get 50 voters (as opposed to the 159 in
2023), I think
the lists will be interesting and informative.
I started to track mid-year lists when they started appearing
just before June 1 -- see my
metacritic file, which
is running behind at the moment, as the last couple weeks haven't
allowed much opportunity to work on it -- and they both give me
a broad sense of what's out there and a useful roster of prospects
to check out. This also ties into my
tracking file, which has a
jazz selector (currently
listing 400 jazz albums, of which I have 332; this list will
expand as I receive your lists: from past experience, about 30%
of the albums that show up in ballots are ones I hadn't previously
tracked; there's also a
no grade variant,
for those who don't want to see my grades).
The website
started off as a clone of last year's, with minor hacks. As I do
more work to it this week, it should become a more useful source
of information about the Poll and its progress. For instance, I
need to revise things like the FAQ and the Admin Guide. I also
hope to get some work done on the older parts of the website,
especially to fill in information that predates my involvement
(in administration; I've voted every year, from the founding).
I hope to make the website the best source for information about
the Poll. But if you wish to follow, check my Music Week posts, and
follow me on
twitter (or "X" if you prefer; I haven't jumped ship yet, although
at this point it's rare for one of my tweets to be viewed by as much
as a third of my nominal followers, so the returns seem pretty slim).
Some other website work: I've done an update to
Carola Dibbell's website, as
her novel,
The
Only Ones is being reprinted, and she has an event later
in July. I haven't done my database update to
Robert Christgau's website
yet, but have all of the CG reviews in my private copy. I still have
to do some cross-referencing work, but should update the website in
a couple days.
I have a question about Michael Brecker that I need to research
a bit. Would be nice to have a couple more to gang it up with.
We've gone through more email tsuris, as Cox has dumped all of
their email customers (or at least us) onto Yahoo. It appears to be
stable now, but Yahoo has a pretty poor reputation, so we'll see.
I did post another
food pic on Facebook, if you into that sort of thing: Indian
chicken, potatoes, cabbage, eggplant, raita, and paratha.
I posted a massive
Speaking
of Which late Monday night (290 links is probably a record; 11720
words isn't, but is quite a lot). I've added a few more things today,
and will probably add some more before I get this posted. I'm inclined
to hold off on further complaints about the horrible Supreme Court,
but would like to capture as much of the initial reaction to the
Trump-Biden debate as may be useful. I'm grateful that I didn't
bother with anything written in advance of the debate.
This particular post got delayed an extra day as I got stuck
writing a long comment on
Robert Christgau's Xgau Sez. And while I got that done by 5PM,
the delay occasioned one last round of "addl" tags.
New records reviewed this week:
Arooj Aftab: Night Reign (2024, Verve): Pakistani
singer-songwriter, born in Saudi Arabia, returned to Lahore when
she was 10, on to US at 19, studied at Berklee, based in New York,
fifth album, got some notice in 2023 whens he shared billing on
Love in Exile with Vijay Iyer and Shahzad Ismally.
B+(***) [sp]
Alan Braufman: Infinite Love Infinite Tears (2024,
Valley of Search): Saxophonist, had a few years in New York in the
mid-1970s working around the lofts with Cooper-Moore and William
Parker, then did something else until retirement age, when he
reissued his one album (actually quite good) and some archival
tapes, and started working on a new one. This follows up on the
promise of 2020's The Fire Still Burns, with James Brandon
Lewis (tenor sax), Patricia Brennan (vibes), Ken Filiano (bass),
Chad Taylor (drums), and Michael Wimberly (percussion).
B+(***) [r]
Ani DiFranco: Unprecedented Sh!t (2024, Righteous
Babe): Folkie singer-songwriter, had a lot of edge when she emerged
in 1990. This one doesn't particularly grab me, but probably deserves
another listen. [PS: It does, as her critique is sharp as ever, but
the music still doesn't grab me.]
B+(*) [sp]
Dayramir González: V.I.D.A. [Verdad, Independencia, Diversidad
Y Amor] (2024, self-released): Cuban pianist, based in New
York, has a 2008 album with Habana Entrance, not sure what else.
B [sp]
Morgan Guerin: Tales of the Facade (2024, Candid):
Self-described "prolific multi-instrumentalist and visionary composer,"
born "right outside New Orleans," studied at New School and Berklee,
based in New York, side-credits since 2019, appears to have three
previous albums, plays sax and related, keyboards, electric bass,
and drums, but I can't find any credits here, and I'm thrown by all
the vocals.
B+(*) [sp]
Goran Kajfeš Tropiques: Tell Us (2024,
We Jazz): Swedish trumpet player, quite a few albums since his
2000 debut, quartet with Alex Zethson (keyboards), Johan Berthling
(bass), and Johan Holmegard (drums), third group album. Has a wide,
panoramic feel.
B+(***) [sp]
Bill Laurance/The Untold Orchestra: Bloom (2022
[2024], ACT Music): British pianist, member of Snarky Puppy at
least 2006-20, own albums since 2012, his keyboards leading an
orchestra, conducted by Rory Storm, of 18 strings. Reflects his
roots in classical music, and probably impressive as such, but
quite enjoyable, too.
B+(**) [sp]
Les Savy Fav: Oui, LSF (2024, Frenchkiss): Art
punk band from Rhode Island, released five albums 1997-2010,
return for another 14 years later. Still a potent combination
of hooks and volume. Last song is triumphant: "We were there
when the world got great/ We helped to make it that way."
B+(**) [sp]
Grégoire Maret/Romain Collin: Ennio (2024, ACT Music):
Swiss harmonica player, eponymous debut 2012, second album with the
French pianist, backed by guitar-bass-drums, with flute (Alexandra
Sopp) and heavyweight vocal guests Gregory Porter and Cassandra Wilson.
B+(*) [sp]
Zara McFarlane: Sweet Whispers: Celebrating Sarah Vaughan
(2024, Universal): British jazz/soul singer, fifth album, standards.
I don't have a good feel for how representative they are, or even
much of an idea how Vaughan sung them: I was so surprised by "Inner
City Blues" I stopped the record to compare Vaughan's 1972 version.
Vaughan's voice is unrivaled for stature and precision, but I rather
like McFalane's softer, sweeter tone, and the loose swing of her
arrangements.
B+(**) [sp]
Ngwaka Son Systčme: Iboto Ngenge (2024, Eck Echo):
Spinoff from Kinshasa (Congo) group Kokoko, emphasis on electrobeats.
Six songs, 28:22.
B+(**) [sp]
Normani: Dopamine (2024, RCA): R&B singer from
Atlanta, last name Hamilton, formerly of the vocal group Fifth
Harmony (3 albums, 2015-17), first solo album.
B+(**) [r]
Carly Pearce: Hummingbird (2024, Big Machine):
Country singer-songwriter from Kentucky, fourth album since 2017,
found herself in her age-marking 29: Written in Stone.
This sounds pretty good -- even the Levi's jingle.
B+(***) [sp]
Dave Rempis/Tashi Dorji Duo: Gnash (2024, Aerophonic):
Rempis plays his full range of saxophones (soprano/alto/tenor/baritone),
with his usual fierce resolve, with Dorji pushing (and occasionally
rivaling) on guitar. I'm impressed, as always, but doubt the harsh
tone (or maybe the specific harmonics, or the lack of a drummer) will
make this an album I return to.
B+(***) [cd]
Sisso & Maiko: Singeli Ya Maajabu (2024,
Nyege Nyege Tapes): Tanzanian DJ Mohamed Hamza Ally, "figurehead"
of the Sisso Records label, with one of his producer/keyboardists,
for a volume of high velocity, klang-and-squiggle-filled dance
beats.
B+(*) [sp]
Jason Stein/Marilyn Crispell/Damon Smith/Adam Shead: Spi-raling
Horn (2023 [2024], Balance Point Acoustics): Bass clarinet
player, has gotten steadily better since his 2007 debut, adds a
stellar pianist to his recent bass-drums trio.
A- [sp]
Thollem: Worlds in a Life, Two (2024, ESP-Disk):
Pianist, goes by first name, last name is McDonas, nominally a
solo album, but draws on samples from previous albums, so side
credits for William Parker (bass), Michael Wimberly (drums),
Pauline Oliveros (MIDI accordion), Terry Riley (vocals), Nels
Cline (guitar, effects, Mega mouth).
B+(**) [cd]
Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:
Alan Braufman: Live in New York City: February 8, 1975
(1975 [2022], Valley of Search): Saxophonist, aka Alan Michael or
Alan Michael Braufman, recorded a 1975 album, Valley of Search,
that he reissued to much acclaim in 2018, followed up by a new album,
The Fire Still Burns, and reissue of some early tapes, like
this one, a WBAI airshot with Cooper-Moore (piano), William Parker
(bass), John Clark (French horn), Jim Schapperowe (drums), and Ralph
Williams (percussion).
B+(***) [r]
DJ Notoya: Funk Tide: Tokyo Jazz-Funk From Electric Bird
1978-87 (1978-87 [2024], Wewantsounds/Electric Bird): Not
sure how much credit the presenter deserves here. The music is
closer to disco than to funk, and has minimal value as jazz.
B- [sp]
Charles Gayle/Milford Graves/William Parker: WEBO
(1991 [2024], Black Editions Archive): Tenor sax, drums, bass,
a major new find in the late drummer's archives, running just
over 2 hours (2-CD, 3-LP). Gayle (1939-2023) was like the truest
heir of Albert Ayler, pushed to extremes I found very difficult
to take when I first ran into him, so my grades are scattered,
and likely in need of revision -- e.g., I still have Repent
(1992) as a B, but at least get Touchin' on Trane at A-.
This is in the same ballpark, but perhaps better mixed to bring
out the truly amazing bass and percussion.
A- [sp]
Ron Miles: Old Main Chapel (2011 [2024], Blue Note):
Cornet player, from Denver, albums since 1987, signed with Blue Note
for a 2020 album, shortly before he died at 58 in 2022. This is a
live album, dating back to the trio he recorded Quiver with:
Bill Frisell (guitar), and Brian Blade (drums). A decade later, this
is a lovely memento.
B+(***) [sp]
Old music:
Collective 4tet: Orca (1996 [1997], Leo Lab):
Originally Heinz Geisser (drums), Mark Hennen (piano), William
Parker (bass), and Michael Moss (reeds), for two albums 1992-93,
before Moss was replaced by Jeff Hoyer (trombone), and they went
on to record six more albums for Leo 1996-2009. Free jazz with
chamber music intimacy. Several spots got me thinking this might
be great, only to slip back into their framework.
B+(***) [r]
Collective 4tet: Live at Crescent (1997 [1998],
Leo Lab): Live in Belfast, no idea why. Loses a bit of edge,
while retaining the complexity, which is not exactly how live
albums are expected to excel.
B+(**) [r]
Collective 4tet: Moving Along (2002 [2005], Leo):
Recorded the same day as Synopsis. Three long pieces, in
their zone, with trombone highlights.
B+(**) [r]
Collective 4tet: In Transition (2008 [2009], Leo):
One more album, the trombonist departed, replaced by Arthur Brooks
(trumpet/flugelhorn), who plays this close to the vest, as pianist
Mark Hennen takes a more pominent role.
B+(***) [sp]
Marco Eneidi Quintet: Final Disconnect Notice
(1994, Botticelli): Alto sax, second horn is Karen Borca's bassoon,
an excellent pairing, especially when they get dicey, backed by two
bassists (Wilber Morris and William Parker, who also plays some
cello) and drums (Jackson Krall).
B+(***) [yt]
Marco Eneidi/Glenn Spearman: Creative Music Orchestra:
American Jungle Suite (1995 [1997], Music & Arts):
Discogs gives title as Creative Music Orchestra, which
cover and spine confirm, while other sources cite the title of
the 69:05 piece the 21-piece big-band-plus-violins plays. Led
by the two saxophonists (alto/tenor), Eneidi does most of the
composing, arranging one piece from Cecil Talor, while Spearman
wrote the final movement (26:48). Some great potential here,
but could use a conductor.
B+(**) [sp]
Marco Eneidi/William Parker/Donald Robinson: Cherry Box
(1998 [2000], Eremite): Alto saxophonist (1956-2016), born in
Portland, as a child took lessons from Sonny Simmons, moved to
New York in 1981 to study with Jimmy Lyons, played with William
Parker, Bill Dixon, Cecil Taylor, and Glenn Spearman. Trio here
with bass and drums. Fierce leads, holding back only to let the
others show off their magic.
A- [sp]
Marco Eneidi/Vijay Anderson: Remnant Light (2004
[2018], Minus Zero): Alto sax and drums duo, a home-recorded tape
unearthed after the saxophonist's death in 2016.
B+(**) [bc]
Marco Eneidi Streamin' 4: Panta Rei (2013 [2015],
ForTune): Alto saxophonist, American, active in free jazz circles
since the early 1980s, picks up a like-minded group in Poland,
with Marek Pospieszalski (tenor sax), Ksawery Wojcinski (bass),
and Michal Trela (drums).
B+(*) [sp]
Heinz Geisser/Shiro Onuma: Duo: Live at Yokohama Little
John (2007 [2008], Leo): Swiss percussionist, member of
Collective 4tet, Discogs list 10 albums under his name (plus 37
side-credits), in a rare drums duo.
B+(*) [sp]
The Ivo Perelman Quartet: Sound Hierarchy (1996
[1997], Muisic & Arts): Brazilian tenor saxophonist, debut 1989,
had released four albums through 1995, three more in 1996, then nine
in 1997, of which this one looks most impressive on paper: Marilyn
Crispell (piano), William Parker (bass), Gerry Hemingway (drums).
Flexes some muscle, but not all that interesting.
B+(*) [sp]
Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:
- Derek Bailey/Sabu Toyozumi: Breath Awareness (1987, NoBusiness) [05-27]
- Albert Beger/Ziv Taubenfeld/Shay Hazan/Hamid Drake: Cosmic Waves (No Business) [05-27]
- Karen Borca Trio Quartet & Quintet: Good News Blues: Live at the Vision Festival 1998 & 2005 (No Business) [05-27]
- Peter Brötzmann/Toshinori Kondo/Sabu Toyozumi: Complete Link (NoBusiness) [05-27]
- Alfredo Colón: Blood Burden (Out of Your Head) [06-14]
- Nick Dunston: Colla Voce (Out of Your Head) [04-26]
- The Sofia Goodman Group: Receptive (Joyous) [07-26]
- Monika Herzig's Sheroes: All in Good Time (Zoho) [07-22]
- Hyeseon Hong Jazz Orchestra: Things Will Pass (Pacific Coast Jazz) [08-23]
- Kalaparusha Maurice McIntyre: Live From Studio Rivbea: July 12, 1975 [Rivbea Live! Series, Volume 1] (No Business) [05-27]
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Sunday, June 30, 2024
Speaking of Which
After missing last week, I knew I had a lot to catch up on here.
I also got interrupted several times. It took longer than expected
to wrap up my piece on bassist William Parker (see:
Celebrating bassist William Parker's lifetime of achievement).
I had two other internet projects that required significant amounts
of attention (one was an update to
Carola Dibbell's website,
announcing a new printing of her novel, The Only Ones; the
other was setting up a framework for a
Jazz Critics Mid-Year
Poll, which still needs more work). We also had trips to the
ER and various doctors (including a veterinarian). So no chance of
getting done on Sunday night. I'm not really done on Monday, either,
but I'm dead tired and more than a little disgusted, so this will
have to do for now.
That will, in turn, push Music Week back until Tuesday, which is
just as well.
Before I really got started, the debate happened -- I couldn't
be bothered to watch, my wife got disgusted and switched to a
Steve Martin movie -- and I haven't (yet, as of noon 06-28) read
any reviews, but I wanted to grab these tweets before they vanish:
Rick Perlstein: The main argument on the left was that he was
a bad president. That was incorrect.
Tim Price: The left is going to be in big trouble for being
right too early again.
Another scrap picked up on the fly from fleeting social media:
Greg Magarian: [06-27]
Democratic Party establishment, relentlessly, for eight months: "You
stupid kids need to stop criticizing Biden! If we get four more years
of Trump, it's all your fault!"
Democratic Party establishment, tomorrow morning, set your clock by
it: "You stupid kids need to fix this! If we get four more years of
Trump, it's all your fault!"
Because of course it's never their fault.
In a comment, Magarian added:
I don't know the best process for replacing Biden. There's no playbook
for this. The biggest question is whether the party should essentially
try to crown Harris, either by having Biden resign the presidency or
by having him stay and endorse her. But this is kind of the point of
my post: the onus here shouldn't be on Biden's critics. The party is
supposed to exist to win elections. They're royally screwing this one
up. I want to know what they're going to do.
Initial count: 290 links, 11720 words.
Updated count [07-03]: 320 links, 16021 words.
Local tags (these can be linked to directly):
on music,
Christgau.
Top story threads:
Israel:
Mondoweiss:
Mariana Abreu/Aďda Delpuech/Eloďse Layan/Yuval Abraham: [06-25]
How Israeli drone strikes are killing journalists in Gaza: "Survivor
testimonies and audiovisual analysis reveal a pattern of strikes by
Israeli UAVs on Palestinian journalists in recent months -- even when
they are clearly identifiable as press.
Shoug Al Adara: [06-20]
A settler shot my husband. Then Israel bulldozed my childhood home:
"Zakariyah has suffered immensely since being wounded by an Israeli
settler. Yet his attacker roams free, and demolitions continue to
devastate our communities in Masafer Yatta."
Ruwaida Kamal Amer: [06-13]
'How is it reasonable to kill over 200 for the sake of four?'
"Relentless bombing, hospitals overflowing, soldiers in aid trucks;
survivors recount the massacre in Nuseirat refugee camp during
Israel's hostage rescue."
Tareq S Hajjaj:
[06-21]
Gaza's hospitals are empty, and patients die in silence: "This
genocidal war brings with it the systematic destruction of all of
Gaza's health system. This has created a new category of people who
die from preventable illnesses due to a systematic lack of access
to medical care."
[06-28]
The second invasion of al-Shuja'iyya is a war of attrition:
"Israel has been forced into a war of attrition as the Palestinian
resistance has reconstituted itself across Gaza. The scale of the
horrors perpetrated by the Israeli army in these battles only emerges
through testimonies after the fighting ends."
Reem A Hamadaqa: [06-28]
Stories of survival and suffering: Inside Gaza's Al-Aqsa Hospital:
"Reem Hamadaqa spent 96 days in Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in central
Gaza recovering from an Israeli attack that killed the rest of her
family. Here are the stories of women and children she met while she
was there."
Shatha Hanaysha:
Arwa Mahdawi: [06-27]
Nearly 21,000 children are missing in Gaza. And there's no end to
this nightmare.
Ibrahim Mohammad: [06-18]
Children starving, parents helpless as famine consumes northern
Gaza: "With aid blocked and stores empty of basic goods, dozens
of Palestinian chjildren have been hospitalized with malnutrition
and acute anemia."
Qassam Muaddi: [06-27]
Israel's leaked plan for annexing the West Bank, explained:
"Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich's plan to annex the
West Bank would see over 60% of the territory becoming a part of
Israel. But Palestinian experts say it is 'already happening.'"
The 60% figure comes from the Oslo-era Area C, where the PA has
no authority at present, so most of that change would be nominal.
Israel has already set a model for this in their annexation of
greater Jerusalem, which took land but didn't extend citizenship
to the people who lived there. (They retained residency rights.
Smotrich would prefer to force them out, which may be what the
"plan" is really about.)
Nicole Narea: [06-24]
Israel isn't ending the war in Gaza -- just turning its attention to
Hezbollah: "The next phase of Israel's war in Gaza, explained."
I haven't put much thought into this, mostly because I consider it a
feint. Fighting against Hezbollah has several big advantages for
Netanyahu: for starters, they exist, hold territory, and have rockets
which pose a credible (if not very significant) threat to northern
Israel (as opposed to Hamas, which doesn't have much more than a PO
box in Damascus, and isn't any kind of threat); that keeps Israelis
fearful, which is the only thing keeping Netanyahu's government from
collapsing, and fuels the pogroms in the West Bank; it also gives the
Americans an excuse to keep the arms flowing, whereas in Gaza they're
just shooting fish in a barrel (to use a more colloquial term than
"genocide" -- the legal term which in theory requires the US to halt
arms shipments); for their own part, Hezbollah's intent is defending
Lebanon from Israeli aggression, not on attacking -- although they've
bought into the silly notion that their missiles help to deter Israeli
attacks, so Israel gets to push their buttons, elicit their kneejerk
response meant to restore credibility to their deterrence, post facto
justifying the Israeli attacks; because Hezbollah (and for that matter
Syria and Iran) don't want war, Israel has complete freedom to tune
the hostilities to a level that provides maximum propaganda value
with very little real risk.
Jonathan Ofir: [06-18]
The kibbutzniks blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza: "Complicity
in genocide is not confined tot he Israeli right. Members of the
liberal organization that spearheaded the anti-Netanyahu protests
last year are now blocking aid to Gaza."
James North: [06-25]
The mainstream media is setting the stage for an Israeli war on
Lebanon: "An unsourced article in the British Telegraph claiming
Hezbollah is storing weapons in Beirut's airport is the latest example
of the mainstream media setting the groundwork for an Israeli war on
Lebanon."
Hoda Osman/Firas Taweel/Farah Jallad:
Israel's war on Gaza is the deadliest conflict on record for
journalists.
Léa Peruchon: [06-26]
'The livestream was critical evidence': Tracing attacks on Gaza's
press buildings: "The Israeli army struck major media institutions
in Gaza despite assurances of safety, and appears to have deliberately
targeted camera that were broadcasting the military offensive."
Meron Rapoport: [06-24]
As Netanyahu abandons the hostages, Hamas may seek to extend the
war: Given the balance of forces, I don't see any point in
even suggesting that Hamas is even a conscious actor in this war.
As long as Israel vows to "finish" every one of them, of course
whatever's left of Hamas will fight back, because Israel isn't
giving them any other option. On the other hand, if Israel chose
to stop the war, would Hamas even have the wherewithal, even if
they still harbored the ambition, to "extend the war"?
Steven Simon: [06-28]
Will drafting ultra-Orthodox to fight upend Israel's gov't?
Baker Zoubi: [06-27]
'More horrific than Abu Ghraib': Lawyer recounts visit to Israeli
detention center: "At Sde Teiman, Khaled Mahajneh found a
detained journalist unrecognizable as he described the facility's
violent and inhumane conditions."
America's Israel (and Israel's America):
Spencer Ackerman:
Nargol Aran: [06-29]
In Tehran, Gaza rekindles the revolution: "For some in Iran,
the West's relentless punishment has weakened the revolutionary
fires of 1979. But for countless others, they are being rekindled
by the Palestinian resistance in Gaza." I doubt the first part of
that: revolutionary fires expire normally as past complaints fade
into history, and changes become normalized. But "the West's
relentless punishment" just adds more fuel, which boosts the
hardest revolutionaries, while offering them excuses for any
shortcomings. On the other hand, Israel's atrocities in Gaza
are certain to inflame anti-Israeli and anti-American sentiment
everywhere, but especially where people's own identities and
allegiances are most threatened. Iran has never been all that
committed to the Palestinians, but Israel's relentless efforts
to paint Iran as the mastermind of their enemy is bound to push
them more and more into opposition. This provocation is just one
of many ways Netanyahu is being very shortsighted and foolish.
Michael Arria:
James Carden: [06-24]
Trump cabinet hopeful wants the 'Israel model' for US China
polilcy: "Robert O'Brien just put forward a template, but
it's a proven failure." I've often noted that neocons suffer
from Israel Envy: the desire that the US should be able flex
its muscles on a global scale with the same impetuousness and
carelessness for consequences that Israel exercises in its
neighborhood. They bound their ambitions to a global ideology --
ironically called "neoliberalism," as its initial advocates
sought to entice rather than enforce compliance -- but the
new, Trumpian variant brings its self-interested motivations
closer to the Israeli model, or closer still to Alexander or
Britain, who sought empire for the sustenance of tribute.
These days, tribute is mostly collected through arms sales --
and as such is immediately shunted to private ledgers -- which
is why America demands that its allies be customers, and defines
its customers to be allies. Hence, O'Brien's plan is mostly
devoted to arms sales, advanced under the hoary slogan "peace
through strength," and advanced by magnifying recalcitrant hold
outs like Russia and China into existential threats.
Gregory Daddis: [06-25]
Stop listening to David Petraeus: "The self-promoting ex-general
continues to rewrite history, suggesting that Israel deploy an
Iraq-style 'surge' in Gaza.
Dave DeCamp: [06-30]
US has sent Israel 14,000 2,000-pound bombs since October 7.
Ben Freeman: [06-28]
Israel's covert info bots targeting America met with hypocritical
silence: "Will Tel Aviv get the same treatment as the Russians
and Chinese? Likely not." Based on a Guardian report:
Blaise Malley:
[06-27]
The craziest 'pro-Israel' budget amendments. For example:
[06-28]
Trump says Biden has 'become like a Palestinian' in debate exchange:
"In a presidential debate marked by incoherence and lies, Donald
Trump attacked Joe Biden, saying 'he's become like a Palestinian'
for supposedly withholding total support for Israel's genocidal
assault on Gaza." More on the debate below, but for here just
note that Trump's solution is more war and more cruelty, not
less, with no concern for the consequences. That he took this
position in the debate doesn't just show us his true feelings,
but that he thinks his pro-war, pro-genocide position is the one
that most resonates with American voters.
Mitchell Plitnick: [06-23]
Republicans demonstrate their terrifying Palestine policy:
"Two 'must pass' House of Representatives bills to fund the State
and Defense Departments show how dangerous Republican Party views
on Palestine are."
Israel vs. world opinion:
Democracy Now!
Zack Beauchamp: [06-21]
Why Israel acts the way it does: "Its catastrophic war policy is
driven by a national ideology of trauma." I've recognized as much for
a long time now. That's been clear as far back as Richard Ben Cramer's
2004 book
How Israel Lost, and had significantly worsened by
the time (2011) Max Blumenthal wrote
Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel. For further
details on how this psychology was deliberately engineered, see
Idith Zertal:
Israel's Holocaust and the Politics of Nationhood (2005),
and Norman G Finkelstein:
The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish
Suffering (2000; looks like there's a 2024 reprint). Of
course, many other books touch on these issues, especially Tom
Segev's histories,
The Seventh Million: Israelis and the Holocaust (2000) and
1967: Israel, the War, and the Year that Transformed the Middle
East (2006). Also, Rich Cohen, in
Israel Is Real: An Obsessive Quest to Understand the Jewish Nation and
Its History (2009) makes a very telling point about the exit
from
Yad Vashem, offering its panoramic view of Jerusalem.
By the way, in looking up my links, I ran across this old piece
on Segev's 1967:
David Margolick: [2007-07-15]
Peace for land: After praising the book as invaluable for its
coverage of the runup to the war, and complaining about being "way
too long" but still lacking in character insight, he notes:
By the time he gets to the Israeli occupation, which is what really
matters now, even the indefatigable Segev has run out of gas. Crucial
questions, like how the Six-Day War emboldened the messianic religious
right and Ariel Sharon to build settlements, are all but overlooked.
Nor is there anything about the electrifying effect the war had on
Jews throughout the world, particularly in the Soviet Union and the
United States. And there's no kind of summation or distillation at
the end, describing the Israeli character then and now -- something
that persevering readers deserve and that Segev, more than just about
anyone else, is eminently qualified to give.
The books I just mentioned address the psychology at least within
Israel, and touch on the rest, and there are other books that go into
more detail on every tangent -- especially the occupation, which has
gone through multiple stages of increasing brutality and carelessness.
The thing that most struck me about 1967 was the how much
terror Israel's political leaders instilled among their people, as
compared to how supremely confident the military elites were. When
the war so rapidly achieved its aims -- and make no mistake, it was
Israel which deliberately launched the war with just those aims in
mind, with the Arab states playing roles they had long been trained
for -- their "victory" came with an immense sense of relief and swell
of pride, which haunts us to this day. (Although, much like the US
triumph in WWII, it has never since been replicated, despite continuing
to animate the arrogance of invincibility.)
I imagine there is a good book on the reaction of American Jews to
1967, and the various reactions since -- if not, one is bound to be
written soon. Meanwhile, it's worth reading this (which includes an
excerpt from the Rich Cohen book above):
Reed Brody: [06-06]
Israel's legal reckoning and the historical shift in justice for
Palestinians.
Steve France:
The myth of Israeli democracy died in Gaza and Israel's hasbara will
never recover: Review of Saree Makdisi's recent book,
Tolerance Is a Wasteland: Palestine and the Culture of Denial.
"Israel today seems very far from finishing off the Palestinians
but appears to have finally destroyed any hope that it will evolve
toward honest history, or true democracy, diversity, or tolerance."
David Goldman: [06-20]
Wikipedia now labels the top Jewish civil rights group as an unreliable
source:
Wikipedia's editors declared that the Anti-Defamation League cannot
be trusted to give reliable information on the Israel-Palestine
conflict, and they overwhelmingly said the ADL is an unreliable
source on antisemitism. . . . That means that the ADL should
usually not be cited in Wikipedia articles on that topic except
for extraordinary circumstances. Other generally unreliable sources,
according to Wikipedia editors, include Russian state media, Fox
News' political coverage and Amazon reviews.
Michael Arria writes about this in his [06-20]
Shift piece, cited above. He also refers back to this old
article:
Yoav Litvin: [06-29]
Liberal Zionism and the woke facade of Israeli genocide: "Instead
of upholding a left-wing agenda and a critical lens, liberal Zionists
are a mouthpiece for Israel's occupation and genocide."
Mouna Madanat: [06-20]
'We're refusing to let ourselves live in comfortable complacency':
Scenes from the Cardiff encampment for Palestine.
Ayelet Waldman: [06-27]
My father and the withering of liberal Zionism: "Was my family's
dream of a Jewish socialist utopia all a lie?"
About last Thursday's debate:
When the Biden-Trump debates were announced, I jotted down
the following:
Ed Kilgore: [05-24]
Is Biden gambling everything on an early-debate bounce?
My read is that the June debate is meant to show Democrats that
he can still mount a credible campaign against Trump. If he can --
and a bounce would be nice but not necessary -- it will go a long
way to quelling pressure to drop out and open the convention. If
he can't, then sure, he'll have gambled and lost, and pressure
will build. But at least it will give him a reference point that
he has some actual control over -- unlike the polls, which still
seem to have a lot of trouble taking him seriously.
I'm writing this before I go through the paces and collect
whatever links I deem of interest, which will help me better
understand the debate and its aftermath, but my first impression
is that Biden failed to satisfy Democrats that he is really the
candidate they need to fight off Trump in November. I'll also
note that my expectation was to see a lot of confirmation bias
in reactions. I'd expect people who dislike Biden and/or Trump,
for any reason, to find faults that fortify their feelings,
while people who are personally invested in their candidates
will at least claim to be vindicated. Hence, the easy way to
scan this section is to look for reactions that go against
type.
538/Ipsos:
Who won the first Biden-Trump presidential debate: Crunch some
stats. First graphic compares expectations to results. Subhed there
is "Biden performed even worse than expectations." Likely voters
scored it 60.1% for Trump, 20.8% for Biden. Biden lost 1.5% (48.2%
to 46.7%). Of that, Trump gained 0.4% (43.5% to 43.9%), and Kennedy
gained 1.2% (17.3% to 18.4%).
Intelligencer:
The 'replace Biden' talk isn't going away after debate disaster:
Live updates.
Mike Allen: [06-29]
Biden oligarchy will decide fate: The most basic fact in American
politics is that people with money get to decide who gets to run for
office. Bernie Sanders is about the only exception to that rule, since
he figured out how to raise and thrive on small contributions, but
everywhere else you look, it's absolutely true. Often, the number of
people making those decisions is very small. I recall Newt Gingrich
explaining his loss to Mitt Romney as simple arithmetic: Gingrich
only had one billionaire backer, vs. four for Romney. As soon as a
candidate's backer gets cold feet, that candidate is gone. I don't
know who Biden's top backers are, but they're the ones who are going
to be making this decision, and Biden, as usual, will do what he's
told. I mean, isn't that why they backed him in the first place?
The only reason for the delay at this point is that they're angling
for the succession.
Maybe they realized that Biden couldn't win all along. If you're
one of Biden's oligarchs, this is the best possible scenario: no
one serious runs against him in the primaries, so he wraps up all
the delegates, at little cost, with no risk of the people thinking
differently (you know, democratically). That also produced the
benefit of Trump carrying the Republican Party: Biden made him
look electable, even though he's extremely vulnerable and easily
attacked, plus horrifying enough to keep the Democrats in line
behind anyone they anoint. (I mean, if you're going to vote for
Biden, literally any Democrats could fill in. [OK, maybe not Mike
Bloomberg, Hillary Clinton, or Andrew Cuomo.])
Then they nudge him out, replacing him with some maximally
pliable substitute. I'm not sure who they will pick, but one thing
for sure is that rank-and-file Democrats will have little to no say
over the process. And frankly, given how ugly the oligarchs won in
delivering their nominations to Clinton and Biden, I'm happy to
have missed primary season.
Zack Beauchamp: [06-28]
The silver lining to Biden's debate disaster: "The president's
performance prompted calls for a radical change. That might be just
what America needs."
Gabriel Debenedetti: [07-02]
The Biden panic is getting worse: "Anxious lawmakers can't reach
him. Donors are fighting over replacements. All of them are asking:
When will it end?"
Margaret Carlson: [06-28]
We watched Joe Biden struggle: "The incumbent president's painful
performance was no match for Trump's unabashed barrage of lies."
Zachary D Carter: [07-02]
The Democratic Party's double standard, or "Do not underestimate
the danger of a second Biden term": "Trump is not the only person on
earth who cannot be trusted with power."
Jonathan Chait:
Isaac Chotiner: [06-28]
Ezra Klein on why the Democrats are too afraid of replacing Biden.
Way back on [02-16] Klein posted his show on
Democrats have a better option than Biden; also on [06-28]
After that debate, the risk of Biden is clear. This led me to
more Klein interviews from early 2024:
Vinson Cunningham: [06-28]
The writing on Joe Biden's face at the presidential debate: "The
true locus of the President's humiliation onstage was not his
misbegotten words but the sorry pictures he made with his face."
Chas Danner: [06-29]
What the polls are saying after the TrumpBiden debate:
Democracy Corps/Greenberg Research/PSG Consulting's dial groups
recoiled a bit at Biden;
Data for Progress flash poll shows little if any advantage for
Biden alternatives;
Morning Consult poll suggests majority of voters want Biden
replaced;
Survey USA poll finds slight majority of Democrats think Biden
should stay the course;
538/Ipsos poll of debate watchers found little impact on votes.
David Dayen: [06-28]
Biden's inner circle deserves some blame too: "Even with perfect
delivery, the substance of the performance was not built for victory
in our terribly flawed modern political environment." Dayen explains:
Most first-term presidents lose the first debate of their re-election
campaigns, and they lose it in largely the same way. They have spent
nearly four years building a record, and they want to run on it. So
they lay out a blur of information about what they've done. Some
presidents trip over the details. Others just bore people with them.
Still others act like they're offended that the president of these
United States could be challenged on these points at all. Biden
slammed into all three of these obstacles, while being 81 years
old and rather feeble. . . . Biden was clearly fed way too many
figures and had way too many points to hit on his script for
someone with his difficulties in communicating.
Gabriel Debenedetti: [06-28]
Who can make Joe go? "Democrats watched the debate and stared
into the abyss. Now they ask if he's a lost cause."
Tim Dickinson: [06-28]
America lost the first Biden-Trump debate: "We just witnessed
the low-water mark in American electoral politics."
Moira Donegan: [06-28]
This debate was a disastrous opening performance for Biden.
Adam Frisch: [07-02]
Joe Biden should step aside now.
Susan B Glasser: [06-28]
Was the debate the beginning of the end of Joe Biden's presidency?
"Notes on a disastrous night for the Democrats."
Benjamin Hart: [06-27]
Biden, Trump have mortifying exchange about golf handicaps.
Jeet Heer: [07-01]
Dear Ron Klain: We need to talk about Joe: "To preserve President
Biden's legacy, the party has to find another candidate."
Seymour Hersh: [06-28]
Who is running the country? "Biden's decline has been known to
friends and insiders for months."
David Ignatius: [06-28]
Why Biden didn't accept the truth that was there for all to see:
"If he has the strength and wisdom to step aside, the Democrats will
have two months to choose another candidate."
Stephanie Kaloi: [06-30]
Pod Save America hosts defend themselves from Biden campaign's thinly
veiled 'self-important podcasters' attack. They had been among
Biden's most committed supporters in 2020, but turned on Biden for
their Thursday-night podcast. For more, see:
Ed Kilgore:
Robert Kuttner: [06-28]
A tarnished silver lining: "Biden was so inept that the case
for replacing him is now overwhelming." And: "If this had happened
in September, the usual month of the first debate, or if Biden had
been a little less pathetic and had landed a few punches, we truly
would have been screwed. Now, there is still time for Biden to step
aside, and little doubt that he must."
Chris Lehman: [06-28]
Biden's record won't win him the election if he can't make sense
for 2 minutes at a time: "At last night's debate, the president
could hardly get through an answer to a question without seeming to
get confused."
Rachel Leingang: [06-28]
'Defcon 1 moment': Biden's debate performance sends Democrats into
panic.
Eric Levitz: [06-27]
Democrats can and should replace Joe Biden: "A comatose Joe Biden
would make a better president than Donald Trump." "But Biden's senescence
spoke louder than Trump's mendacity."
Branko Marcetic: [06-28]
Democrats can no longer pretend Biden is fit to be president.
Harold Meyerson: [06-28]
The Democrats must dump Biden. Here's how.
Joe Navarro: [06-28]
A body language expert watched the debate. Here's what he noticed.
Subheds: Biden's age was clear from the first step he took onstage;
Trump's tan made Biden look pale; What can I even say about Biden's
body language?; Both candidates' eyelids fluttered -- but for different
reasons; Trump has a tell: his lips; Trump's fake smile is his shield.
New York Times: [06-28]
To serve his country, President Biden should leave the race.
A surprising lack of both-sides-ism from the "paper of record"
this time.
Heather Digby Parton: [07-01]
The drop out debate: Biden has already lost a big part of the
battle.
Justin Peters: [06-28]
The other disaster at the debate: "CNN has escaped much notice for
its performance on Thursday. It shouldn't."
Nia Prater: [06-27]
Biden stalls out in particularly bad debate moment.
Andrew Prokop: [06-28]
2 winners and 2 losers from the first Biden-Trump debate: "If
the debate ends with your own party debating whether you should
quit the race, you lost." Aside from the obvious, the other Loser
was "Substantive issues," while for balance the other Winner was
"Kamala Harris."
David Remnick: [06-29]
The reckoning of Joe Biden: "For the President to insist on
remaining the Democratic candidate would be an act not only of
self-delusion but of national endangement." Editor of The New
Yorker and pretty staunchly in Biden's camp, breaks ranks but
decided to both-sides this, by also publishing:
Jay Caspian Kang: [06-30]
The case for Joe Biden staying in the race: "The known bad
candidate is better than the chaos of the unknown." Hard not to
laugh at this one. How much risk can their be in replacing Biden
with a younger but seasoned and predictable political hack? The
only "chaos of the unknown" (besides Trump) is never knowing
when Biden is going to freeze up or flub some line or trip and
fall, in certain knowledge that any time such a thing happens --
and it's almost certain to happen multiple times -- the media
are going to fixate on Biden's age. On the other hand, take
Biden out of the equation, and pretty soon Trump's going to
look awful old, and the media are already primed to focus on
that.
Eugene Robinson: [07-01]
Biden's 2024 survival requires a lot more than hope.
Nathan J Robinson:
[06-28]
Biden must go: "Joe Biden is simply not up to the task of taking on
Donald Trump. Trump presents a major threat to the country, and Biden's
insistence on running is risking a catastrophe."
[07-01]
The Biden excuse machine kicks into gear: "There is a massive PR
effort afoot to convince us to stay aboard a sinking ship."
David Rothkopf: [06-28]
It's time. Biden needs to say to Harris, "it's your turn now."
Greg Sargent: [06-28]
What Joe Biden really owes the country right now: "There's no
sugarcoating the debate, which was a disaster."
Walter Shapiro: [06-27]
Joe Biden is facing the biggest decision of his political career:
"Can he beat Trump and save American democracy? If not, he should step
aside."
Alex Shephard: [06-27]
Ditch Biden. That debate performance was a disaster. "He failed on
every level."
Bill Scher: [06-28]
A wasted opportunity for Biden (but still time for redemption):
"Ronald Reagan overcame a bad debate that triggered panic about his
age. Here's how Biden can do the same." He's long established himself
as Biden's most devoted advocate among the Washington punditocracy,
so any chink in his defense must be telling. He is surely right that
if Democrats stick with Biden, he still might win the election. But
the ticket to winning the election is to make it about Trump, and in
order to do that, the one thing he really has to do is to not let it
be about him. Moreover, if his ineptness is tied to age -- and that's
by far the easiest explanation, one that most of us understand to be
probable -- the expectation is that it will only get worse. It may
have been unfair and unreasonable to obsess so much over Biden's age
before the debate, but now that we've all seen him falter the way he
did, every future stumble is going to be magnified even more: it's
like the zit you never noticed before, but now you can't avert your
eyes from. Reagan may have been the closest analogue, but his case
isn't a very good one. Old as he was, he was still significantly
younger than Biden. He was much more practiced at wearing makeup
and delivering prefab lines. And he was just a front man for Evil,
Inc., whereas Biden's cast as the leader in the valiant struggle
to save democracy. So while Scher hasn't disappointed me in being
the last rat to jump ship, that even he is sniffing the panic is
surely telling.
Rebecca Solnit: [06-28]
The true losers of this presidential debate were the American
people: No more substance to this review than in the debate
she strained to lampoon, the sole point of comparison being their
voices: Biden "in a hoarse voice said diligent things that were
reasonably true and definitely sincere," vs. Trump "in a booming
voice said lurid things that were flamboyantly untrue." For the
latter, she cites the Guardian's
Factchecked: Trump and Biden's presidential debate claims.
Jeffrey St Clair: [07-03]
Biden in the Bardo.
Stuart Stevens: [06-29]
Democrats: Stop panicking. Lincoln Project adviser, still a
staunch "never Trumper."
Matt Stieb: [06-27]
Joe Biden's voice sounded horrible at the debate.
Margaret Sullivan: [06-28]
Even factchecking Trump's constant lies probably wouldn't have rescued
Biden.
Michael Tomasky: [06-28]
Is there a good reason not to panic? Well, no, not really.
"Sticking with Joe Biden always seemed like the least bad option.
Last night, that changed."
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos: [06-28]
Forget the old jokes, foreign policy was the real debate horror.
Washington Post:
Democracy Now! [06-28]
"Step aside Joe": After first pres. debate, Democrats reeling from
Biden's missteps & Trump lies: Interview with Chris Lehman
and Norman Solomon.
Debate tweets:
-
Zachary D Carter: Donald Trump is delivering the second-worst
presidential debate performance I've ever seen.
And more post-debate tweets:
Zachary D Carter: [06-30] If Biden refuses to step aside it
will not be an act of high principal or strong character. He did
not just have a bad night. He is not fit for the job and stayuing
in the race would be the worst kind of vanity and betrayal.
Laura Tillem: [06-30] He did terrible in the debate because he
gags when he has to pretend to support abortion rights or universal
health care.
holly: [06-28] If you want to see Joe Biden in his prime, just go
back and watch footage of him calling Anita Hill a liar and ensuring
that we'd have to deal with Clarence Thomas forever.
Moshik Temkin: [06-28] Worth recalling that the only reason Biden
is President now is because, after he finished 5th in NH Dem primary
in 2020, Obama persuaded all the other candidates to drop out and
endorse Biden in order to stop Bernie Sanders, who was in 1st place
(and crushing Trump in the polls)
John Ganz: Dude they just gotta roll the dice with Harris.
Plus I scraped this from Facebook:
Allen Lowe [07-02]:
Cold medicine my a##. On my worst day during chemo and radiation
I made more sense than Biden did at that debate; coming out of the
anaesthetic after a 12 hour surgery with half of my nose removed
I could have debated Trump more coherently; after they pulled a
tube out of of my arm at 4 in the morning after another (8 hour)
surgery, causing me to scream in the worst pain of my life and
curse like a sailor, I would have remembered more accurately what
I last said and organized my thoughts more clearly. The night I
was born and ripped from my mother's womb I was better prepared
than Biden was (my first words were "Henry Wallace!").
This guy must go. Go. Go.
This whole thing has, honestly, made me lose all respect for
Biden, as he continues to place his personal ego and "legacy"
ahead of the country. As Carl Bernstein reports [on
YouTube], aides have privately reported a Biden loss of
coherence and noticeable cognitive slippage occurring "15 to 20
times" in the last year.
Election notes:
Trump:
Zack Beauchamp: [06-27]
Donald Trump is getting away with it: "The debate proved that
Donald Trump is still a threat to democracy. How have we lost sight
of that?" Maybe because we've forgotten what democracy means, because
we don't have one? What we have bears some resemblance to a market,
but one very skewed towards wealth and their ability to manipulate
consciousness through the media. Anyone can see that Trump would
skew it even further toward his personal and partisan power, but
the democracy he threatens is already gone -- so much so that lots
of people just laugh when you whine about his specific threat.
Jamelle Bouie: [06-11]
There's a reason Trump has friends in high places.
Jonathan Chait:
Dan Dinello: [06-26]
Wooing MAGA billionaires, fascist felon Trump holds a fire sale on
his potential presidency: Title language is a bit extreme, but
the author opens with five paragraphs on the donor-funded rise of
the Nazis in Germany, and you can't say that's irrelevant.
Margaret Hartmann:
The 6 most bizarre and baffling Trump-raly rants.
Chris Lehman: [06-25]
If leading CEOs aren't donating to Trump, it's because they don't
need to.
Will Leitch: [06-18]
The Apprentice is the skeleton key to understanding Trump:
Interview with Ramin Setoodeh, author of
Apprentice in Wonderland: How Donald Trump and Mark Burnett Took
America Through the Looking Glass.
Li Zhou: [06-26]
Trump's rumored VP shortlist, explained: "A rundown of the people
auditioning for the job and what they bring to the ticket." Story
updated from Feb. 9, still has seven candidates, although elsewhere
I've just seen it whittled down to three (Burgum, Vance, Rubio;
that omits the woman and three blacks). It's pretty clear Trump
is shopping for dowry. Burgum has his own money. Vance is a front
for Peter Thiel. Not sure who is behind Rubio, but it's pretty
obvious he's a kept man.
And other Republicans:
Zack Beauchamp: [06-18]
Taking the right seriously: "On the Right tracks how the dreams
of conservative intellectuals are becoming reality." This kicks off
a newsletter, "On the Right," with one Jonathan Mitchell, thanks to
whom "in just two years, the Comstock Act went from being a defunct
173 law to an existential threat to abortion rights in America."
See this link:
Sidney Blumenthal: [06-25]
Republicans have a ghoulish tactic to distract Trump's criminalilty.
Colin Gordon: [06-25]
The GOP attack on free lunch: "In an era of retrenchment in social
policy, food assistance is becoming more generous and inclusive. But
Republican politicians are attempting to gut one of the most popular
programs: free school lunch."
Sarah Jones:
Kim Phillips-Fein: [06-04]
The mandate for leadership, then and now: "The Heritage Foundation's
1980 manual aimed to roll back the state and unleash the free market.
The 2025 vision is more extreme, and even more dangerous." This leads
into a couple of related articles:
Nia Prater: [06-18]
Rudy Giuliani's financial woes are getting even worse.
Jennifer Senior:
American Rasputin: "Steve Bannon is still scheming. And he's still
a threat to democracy." Article from 2022, dredge up, no doubt, to
cheer him up
in jail. Also, I guess:
Rebecca Traister: [06-17]
How did Republican women end up like this? "The baffling,
contradictory demands of being female in the party of Donald
Trump."
Biden and/or the Democrats:
Jonathan Alter: [06-28]
How the Democrats should replace Biden: This seems ok to me,
aside from the snootiness of dismissing Sanders and Warren out
of hand and seeking to ban "anyone from the Squad." That they've
already limited the electorate to Biden's hand-picked supporters
is rigged enough without having to rub it in.
Aaron Blake:
Abdallah Fayyad: [06-29]
LBJ and Truman knew when to quit. Will Biden? "Some lessons from
the two presidents who walked away."
Margaret Hartmann: [07-01]
All the gossip on the Biden family's postdebate blame game.
David Klion: [06-19]
The lifelong incoherence of Biden's Israel strategy: "The
president's muddled policy course in the Middle East is angering
voters across the political spectrum -- and it could usher Trump
back into the White House."
Eric Levitz:
[06-19]
Biden's ads haven't been working. Now, he's trying something new.
Written before the debate: "President Joe Biden's odds of reelection
may be worse than they look. And they don't look great."
[06-28]
How Democrats got here: "Democrats really need to choose electable
vice presidents." This might have gone deep into the sorry history of
vice presidents and vice-presidential candidates, few of whom could
be described as "electable" -- at least as Levitz defines it to exclude
Biden and Harris, which is the point of his article.
Unfortunately, the last two Democratic presidents did not prioritize
political chops when selecting their veeps.
Barack Obama didn't choose Joe Biden because he thought that the
then-Delaware senator would make a great Democratic nominee in 2016.
To the contrary, by most accounts, Obama thought that Biden would be
a totally nonviable candidate by the time his own hypothetical
presidency ended. And he reportedly selected Biden precisely for
that reason. . . .
Biden's choice of Kamala Harris in 2020 was even more misguided.
When he made that choice in August 2020, there was little basis for
believing that Harris was one of the most politically formidable
Democrats in the country.
There's a lot that could be said about this, most of which comes
back to the poor conception of the office (both in the Constitution
and when revised after the emergence of political parties led to the
1800 fiasco and the 12th Amendment). The VP has to do three things,
which require three very different skill sets, especially since the
presidency has grown into this ridiculous imperial perch: they have
to add something to the campaign (e.g., "Tippecanoe and Tyler too");
once elected, they have to behave themselves innocuously, for which
they are sometimes given busy work (LBJ's Space Race, Pence's Space
Force, Gore's Reinventing Government) or sometimes just locked in a
closet (remember John Nance Garner?); and if the president dies,
they're thrust into a role they were rarely prepared for, with no
real, personal political mandate (some, like Tyler and Andrew
Johnson, were wretched; a few, like Teddy Roosevelt and Lyndon
Johnson, thrived; but most were just mediocre, including the
two others who went on to win full terms: Calvin Coolidge and
Harry Truman).
I accept that Obama's pick of Biden was part of a deal to give
the 2016 nomination to Hillary Clinton. The Clintons had turned
the Democratic Party into a personality cult. Obama rode a popular
backlash against that, but Obama was no revolutionary: he wanted
to lead, but was willing to leave the Party to the Clintons. We
now know that wasn't such a good idea, but after a very divisive
primary, in the midst of economic and military disaster, it was
at least understandable.
The Harris nomination made at least as much sense in 2024. The
"little basis" line is unfair and inaccurate. She won statewide
elections in the most populous and most expensive state in the
country. Her resume entering 2016 was similar to and every bit as
strong as Obama's in 2008. She had enough financial backing to
organize a top-tier presidential campaign. She floundered, because
(unlike Obama) she was outflanked on the left (Sanders and Warren),
while hemmed in on the right (Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, and
Biden). But she wasn't incompetent (like Biden already was), and
her position and standing made her the logical choice to unite the
party. And sure, her affirmative action points may have helped a
bit with the left -- at least she wasn't another Tim Kaine, or Al
Gore -- without the tokenism raising any hackles with the donors.
Sure, Harris polls poorly now, but that's largely because Biden
never put her to good use: she could have taken a more prominent
role in cajoling Congress, which would have given her opportunities
to show her mettle fighting Republicans, and she could have spelled
Biden on some of those high-profile foreign trips (especially confabs
like G7 and NATO); instead, they stuck her with the tarbaby border
issue. Having wasted those opportunities, I can see wanting to go
with some other candidate, one with a bit more distance from Biden.
But I'm not convinced that she would be a weak, let alone losing,
candidate. And while I give her zero credit for those affirmative
action tick boxes, I can't see holding them against her, either.
And as for the people who would, well, they were going to vote for
Trump anyway, so why appease them?
Nicole Narea:
Evan Osnos: [06-29]
Biden gets up after his debate meltdown: Good. But are people
talking about that, or the meltdown? Even if they could flip the
message back to "Biden's really ok," that would still be a huge
deficit. We need people talking about how awful Trump is. Even if
you can't impress on many people how bad his policies are, he gives
you lots of other things you can fixate on.
Christian Paz:
[06-26]
We rewatched the 2020 Trump-Biden debates. There's so much we didn't
see coming. "The five most telling moments and what they foreshadow
ahead of this week's rematch."
- Trump calls the 2020 election rigged and doesn't commit to
accepting the results
- Roe v. Wade is nearly forgotten
- Trump gets defensive on immigration
- No one is worried about inflation
- Everyone is worried about Russia, Ukraine, or China, but for
the wrong reasons
[06-26]
What about Kamala? "The vice president has taken on an expanded
role in the last few months. Now Biden needs her more than ever."
Rick Perlstein: [07-03]
Say it ain't so, Joe: "With democracy itself on the ballot, a
statesman with charactger would know when to let go of power."
Andrew Prokop: [06-28]
Will Biden be the nominee? 3 scenarios for what's next.
Bryan Walsh: [07-01]
Democrats say Trump is an existential threat. They're not acting like
it. "If the stakes of the 2024 election are as great as the party
says, there's no excuse for inaction."
Legal matters and other crimes:
Ian Millhiser: He is my first stop for whatever the
Supreme Court does, so I figured I should list him first here,
especially as the last couple weeks have been exceptionally dreadful,
even for this Court. [PS: Note especially today's Trump immunity
decision.]
Meher Ahmad: [06-28]
The Court forces America's homeless to stay awake or be arrested.
Kate Aronoff: [06-28]
This is why the Supreme Court shouldn't try to do the EPA's job:
"Conservative justices this week confused nitrous oxide with nitrogen
oxides and then insisted that they, not the EPA, were the final word
on environmental regulations."
Rachel Barkow: [06-29]
The Imperial Court: "SCOTUS's decision to overturn Chevron
amounts to a massive power grab."
Rachel M Cohen: [06-28]
What a big new Supreme Court decision could mean for homeless
Americans: "The Grants Pass v. Johnson decision does not spell
the end to fights over ten encampments in America."
Moira Donegan:
Matt Ford: [06-28]
The Supreme Court upends the separation of powers: "Killing off
Chevron deference, the court moves power to the judicial branch,
portending chaos."
Steven Greenhouse: [06-28]
Most Americans have no idea how anti-worker the US supreme court has
become.
Elie Honig:
Ed Kilgore: [06-18]
Tax dollars are now funding Christian-nationalist schools.
Ruth Marcus: [07-01]
God save us from this dishonorable court: "An egregious, unconscionable
ruling on presidential immunity from the Supreme Court."
Anna North: [05-25]
Pregnancy in America is starting to feel like a crime: "The
ripple effects of the fall of Roe extend far beyond abortion."
Alexandra Petri: [07-01]
The Supreme Court rules to restore the monarchy. I've seen several
people make this allusion, but I think the inaccuracies undermine its
usefulness. If it sticks, I suppose I'll have to explain why.
James Risen:
The Supreme Court wants a dictator. Now this is more accurate.
Much of the right wants a dictator. How to get there from a nominal
democracy is what this is very much about. (That's why the Orban
model looms so large among right-wing sophisticates.) Monarchies,
on the other hand, are rarely anywhere near as dictatorial as the
right wants, but they are hereditary (which, as far as I can tell,
is attractive to Trump, but not on anyone else's agenda).
Jeffrey St Clair: [06-28]
The end of innocence: Railroading Marcellus Williams to death
row.
Jesse Wegman: [06-28]
Businesses cheer their new freedom to violate regulations.
Jason Willick: [07-03]
Don't like the Supreme Court's immunity ruling? Blame Merrick
Garland.
James D Zirin: [07-02]
This horrible Supreme Court term: "Kneecapping the administrative
state, making bribery great again, immunizing presidents, and legislating
from the bench -- the justices really earned their motorcoach and
fishing vacations."
Climate and environment:
Economic matters:
Dean Baker:
[06-17]
We can't have a new paradigm as long as people think the old one was
free-market fundamentalism. He's on solid ground pointing out that
most profits in our current economy are effectively rigged by monopolies
(either government-minted, like patents, facilitated through favors,
or just tolerated with lax enforcement), it's less clear to me what
this is about:
Farah Stockman: [06-17]
The queen bee of Bidenomics: On Jennifer Harris. Back when
Trump started flirting with tariffs, I tried to make the point that
tariffs only make sense if they are exercised in concert with a
coherent economic development plan. Biden has, somewhat fitfully,
moved in that direction, so that, for instance, tariffs and content
rules can be seen as nurturing domestic production of EVs, helping
the US develop them into world-class exports, as opposed to simply
providing shelter for high prices (which was the net effect of
Trump's corrupt favoritism). Whether this amounts to a paradigm
shift is arguable, as government sponsorship of private industry
has always been part of the neoliberal position (most obviously
in arms and oil).
[06-20]
NAFTA: The great success story: Compares Mexican-to-American
GDP figures since 1980, showing that the gap has increased since
NAFTA, putting Mexicans even more behind. What would be helpful
here is another chart showing income inequality in both countries.
It has certainly increased in the US since NAFTA, and probably in
Mexico as well.
Kevin T Dugan: [06-18]
Nvidia is worth as much as all real estate in NYC -- and 9 other wild
comparisons.
Corey Robin: [06-29]
Hayek, the accidental Freudian: "The economist was fixated on
subconscious knowledge and dreamlike enchantment -- even if he denied
their part in this relationships."
Ukraine War and Russia:
Blaise Malley:
Andrew Cockburn: [06-25]
In destroying Ukraine's power grid the Russians are following our
lead.
Ivana Nikolic Hughes/Peter Kuznick: [06-27]
Prolonging the Ukraine war is flirting with nuclear disaster.
Anatol Lieven: [06-19]
Yes, we can reconcile absurd Russian & Ukrainian peace plans:
"Details emerging about talks to end the war in 2022 highlight the
fact that time isn't on Kyiv's side."
Aaron Maté: [06-27]
New evidence US blocked Ukraine-Russia peace deal, and a new Ukrainian
excuse for walking away.
Zachary Paikin: [06-26]
US contractors in Ukraine: Another 'red line' crossing?
Trudy Rubin: [06-26]
Ukraine's head of military intelligence is behind Kyiv's biggest
victories this year. He sees no point in peace talks. I rarely
read her, because she's so ideologically pro-war, always flogging
hawkish propaganda lines, sniping at anyone who doubts her causes
or simply admits that they come with costs, disparaging any who
even consider negotiation. So it was no surprise that she jumped
on the Ukraine bandwagon. Nor am I surprised that she's going out
of her way to find kindred warriors in Ukraine to champion. But
I had to read this one, because I wasn't aware that Kyiv had any
"biggest victories this year," or, well, any victories. But if you
only care about war, and are utterly indifferent to costs, you can
celebrate the sort of stunts Kyrylo Budanov claims credit for. At
best, they are minor irritants that Putin should weigh in as one
more reason to negotiate peace. On the other hand, to whatever
extent Zelensky and Biden see them as "victories," they may harden
their resolve to prolong the war and not negotiate, and they may
also provoke further offenses by Russia.
America's empire and the world:
Gordon Adams: [06-21]
Time to terminate US counterterrorism programs in Africa: "They
don't work, they don't achieve the projected goals, they waste funds,
and they are counter-productive."
Zack Beauchamp: [06-28]
France's far right is on the brink of power. Blame its centrist
president. "How Emmanuel Macron accidentally helped the far
right normalize itself."
David Broder: [07-01]
Emmanuel Macron has handed victory to the far right: "Marine
Le Pen's allies celebrated a major advance in the opening round of
France's elections. Emmanuel Macron's snap election gamble was a
miscalculation -- but the far right's rise is also a product of his
whole presidency."
Dan Grazier: [06-27]
The US military chases shiny new things and the ranks suffer:
"We were told the Osprey, LCS, and F-35 were cutting edge, but they
turned out to be boondoggles and deathtraps." Possible saving grace
here is that the pursuit of profits among US weaponsmakers is making
their wares too expensive and inefficient to operate, even for
nations that got snookered into buying them as some sort of
tribute.
Marc Martorell Junyent: [06-26]
Europe: The onslaught of the far right.
Stavroula Pabst: [07-01]
Former NSA chief revolves through OpenAI's door: "General Nakasone
was just appointed tot he board."
James Park/Mark Episkopos: [06-19]
Putin and Kim in Pyongyang, making it 'strategic'. More proof
that even enemies want to have friends, and that the US is pushing
all of its "enemies" into each other's arms. Really, how hard would
it be to cut a deal with North Korea to isolate Russia? On the other
hand, keeping North Korea hostile seems to pay off in arms sales
to South Korea and Japan:
Trita Parsi: [06-28]
Iran elections hinge on price of meat not ideology: "Regardless
of who wins, the election will not likely have a significant impact
on Iran's regional policies."
More on Iran:
Ishaan Tharoor:
Nick Turse:
After training African coup leaders, Pentagon blames Russia for African
coups.
Other stories:
Noam Chomsky: Briefly in the news after false reports that
he had died at 95 -- see Brett Wilkins: [06-18]
Manufacturing Obituaries: Media falsely reports Noam Chomsky's death --
which led to a quick burst of posts, including a couple of his own,
still vibrant and still relevant:
William Hartung: [06-25]
An AI Hell on Earth? Silicon Valley and the rush toward automated
warfare.
Sean Illing: [06-23]
What nuclear annihilation could look like: "The survivors would
envy the dead." Interview with Annie Jacobsen, author of
Nuclear War: A Scenario.
Joshua Keating: [06-16]
The world is running out of soldiers: Good. Soldiering is a
losing proposition, no matter what side you think you are on.
I'm not sure that Keating is right that "wars are getting more
common and militaries are building up." I'll grant that war
business is booming, and that the costs -- both to wage and to
suffer war -- are way up, but aren't costs supposed to be
self-limiting? One cost, which is finding people dumb and/or
desperate enough to enlist, certainly is, and that's a good
thing. Somehow some related pieces popped up:
Jack Hunter: [06-18]
Congress moves to make Selective Service automatic: "Raising
the specter of the draft, this NDAA amendment seems ill-timed."
Actually, no one's advocating to bring back the draft. All the
amendment does is simplifying the paperwork by leaving it to the
government to sign people up, giving people one less awful thing
to do. Simpler still would be to eliminate registration, and the
whole useless bureaucracy behind it.
Edward Hasbrouck: [06-29]
A war draft today can't work. Let us count the ways.
Jacob Kushner: [06-23]
The best plan to help refugees might also be the simplest:
"More refugees live in cities. Could cash help them rebuild their
lives?"
Dave Lindorff: [06-28]
Assange is finally free as America, Britain, Sweden and Australia
are shamed.
Also, some writing on music:
Robert Christgau: [06-26]
Xgau Sez: June, 2024: Several things of possible interest here,
but I wanted to comment on this interchange:
[Q] On October 18, you tweeted a defense of Israel citing a well
written piece which postulated that the hospital bombing committed one
week after 10/7 was actually not committed by Israel. You stated that
prior to this evidence, you were "profoundly disturbed" that such a
thing could happen. So now here we are, over half a year later, after
tens of thousands of deaths and countless hospital bombings which have
all undeniably been committed by Israel--and you haven't said a single
word? It's one thing for you to have stayed quiet on the issue
completely, but you only speak up when Israel can be protected? Bob,
what is wrong with you? How are you not profoundly disturbed as the
death toll of innocent civilians reaches nearly 40,000 with no clear
end in sight? The last thing I ever expected from my decades of
following your works was for you to be so spineless. I refuse to
believe you only actively stand for something when the narrative suits
your desires. -- Brandon Sparks, America
[A] Anyone but a genuine expert who writes about the appalling Gaza
war risks being incomplete and probably wrong. I cited that hospital
bombing story because that early there seemed some reason for hope
that the war would resolve itself with a modicum of sanity. It wasn't
yet clear just how appalling Netanyahu would prove to be--or, I will
add with my hands shaking, Hamas either. The "lots" I know is too
little and in public at least I intend to say as little as
possible. I've long believed in a two-state solution and this war is
easily the cruelest and most gruesome international conflict of my
adulthood. But it hasn't yet turned me into a full-bore anti-Zionist,
because as an American of German extraction with many dozens of Jewish
friends, I've spent too much of my life taking anti-Semitism seriously
to put it on any sort of back burner now.
Christgau has been a good friend for close to fifty years, and
a friend of my wife's even longer (he introduced us), and we're
generally pretty simpatico politically, drawing on similar class
and cultural backgrounds and experiences -- although he's eight
years older than I am, which is enough for him to look up to other
people as mentors (especially Greil Marcus, whose view of Israel
and Gaza I wrote about
here, and probably the late Ellen Willis, who was left of Marcus
but still a devoted Zionist) and to look down on me as a protégé
(not that he doesn't respect what I have to say; he's often a very
astute reader, but still doggedly fixed in his beliefs).
After what Marcus wrote, we gave him credit for publishing this
letter, and not for simply shirking it off. But while his cautious
and self-effacing tone evaded our worst expectations, nearly every
line in his answer is wrong in some fundamental sense, just not in
the manner of Marcus (ridiculous, hypocritical accusations cloaked
in a storm of overwrought emotion and self-pity), but mostly by
pleading ignorance and accepting it as bliss. To wit:
"Anyone but a genuine expert . . . risks being incomplete
and probably wrong." If you know any history at all, you must know
that in 1948 Israel expelled 700,000 Palestinians, driving many of
them into Gaza (more than the previous population of Gaza), leaving
them under Egyptian rule until Israel invaded and occupied Gaza in
and ever since 1967, and that under Israeli rule, they were denied
human rights and subject to multiple waves of violent repression,
a dire situation that only got worse when Israel left Gaza to the
circumscribed gang rule of Hamas. Under such circumstances, and
having repeatedly failed to appeal to Israel's and the world's sense
of justice, it was only a matter of time before Hamas resorted to
its own violence, since nothing less could move Israel.
If you don't know the history, you might not have
understood the Hamas revolt on Oct. 7, but you would have observed
that the revolt was limited and unsustainable, because Hamas had
nothing resembling a real army, few modern arms, no arms industry,
no safe haven, no allies. It may have come as a shock, but it was
no threat. Israel killed or repelled the attackers within a couple
days. After that, virtually all of the violence was committed by
Israel, not just against people who had desperately fought back
but against everyone in Gaza, against their homes, their farms,
their utilities, their hospitals. Since Hamas was powerless to
stop Israel, even to make Israel pay a further price for their
war, the only decent choice Americans had was to inhibit Israel,
to back them down from the genocide their leaders openly avowed.
There was nothing subtle or complex about this.
"There seemed some reason for hope that the war would
resolve itself with a modicum of sanity": Really? Israel,
following the example of the British before them, has always
punished Palestinian violence with disproportionate collective
punishment. The Zionist leadership embraced what is now commonly
called "ethnic cleansing" in 1937, as they embraced the Peel
Commission plan to forcibly "transfer" Palestinians from lands
that Britain would offer for Israel. From that point on, genocide
was woven into the DNA of Zionism. The only question was whether
they could afford to discredit themselves to the world (which,
by 2023, really just meant the US). When Biden vowed unlimited,
uncritical support, Israel was free to do whatever they wanted,
sane or not, with no fear of reprisal, isolation, and sanctions.
"It wasn't yet clear just how appalling Netanyahu would
prove to be": Granted, few Americans have any real appreciation
for Israeli politics, especially given the extent to which most
Israeli politicians misrepresent themselves to Americans. Still,
you have to be awful naďve not to understand where Netanyahu
came from (he was born royalty on the fascist right: his father
was Jabotinsky's secretary) and where he would go any time he
got the chance (ever farther to the right). Sure, he was more
circumspect than his partners Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, who were
free to say what he actually wanted to do. Even before the Oct.
7 revolt, their coalition was curtailing Palestinian rights
within Israel, and was encouraging and excusing a campaign of
terror against Palestinians in the West Bank, while Gaza was
being strangled, and the only relatively liberal courts were
being neutered. Outrage over Oct. 7 was immediately turned into
license to intensify operations that were already ongoing.
"I've long believed in a two-state solution": "Two states"
isn't a belief. It's just something people talk about to keep
people separated into rival, hostile blocs. Give them equal power
and they would be at each other's throats, but with unequal power
you have one standing on the other's neck. "Two states" started
out as a British idea, tried disastrously first in Ireland then
in India. Israelis endorsed the idea in 1937 (Peel Commission)
and in 1947 (UN Partition Plan), but when they had the chance to
actually build a state, they went with one powerful state of their
own, and prevented even a weak Palestinian state from emerging:
Jordan and Egypt were given temporary control of chunks of
Palestine, their population swelled with refugees from ethnic
cleansing in Israel's captured territories, then even those
chunks were regained in 1967, when Israel was finally strong
enough to keep their people confined to impoverished stans.
True, the "two state" idea recovered a bit in the 1990s, as
bait to lure corrupt "nationalists" into policing their own
people, but few Israelis took the idea seriously, and after
Sharon in 2000, most stopped pretending -- only the Americans
were gullible enough to keep up the charade. You can dice up
territories arbitrary to provide multiple states with different
ethnic mixes allowing multiple tyrannies, but that kind of
injustice only leads to more conflict. The only decent solution
is, as always, equal rights for everyone, however space is
allocated. Imagining othewise only shows how little you know
about human nature.
"Easily the cruelest and most gruesome international
conflict of my adulthood": The American wars in Indochina and
Korea were worse by almost any metric. The oft-genocidal wars
in and around India and the eastern Congo certainly killed
more people. Even the CIA-backed "white terror" in Indonesia
killed more people. Israel's wars are more protracted, because
they feed into a self-perpetuating culture of militarism, but
while the latest episode in Gaza is off the charts compared to
any of these catastrophes, but averaged out over the century
since British imperialism gave force to the Balfour Declaration,
Israel's forever war has been fairly well regulated to minimize
its inconvenience for Israelis. It persists only because Israelis
like it that way, and could be ended easily if they had any
desire to do so.
"But it hasn't yet turned me into a full-bore anti-Zionist":
You don't have to be an anti-Zionist to oppose genocide, or to
oppose a caste system where given or denied rights because of
their birth and parents. Admittedly, those behaviors are deeply
embedded in the fabric of actually-existing Zionism, but there
have been alternative concepts of Zionism that do not encourage
them, and even actual Zionists have resisted the temptation to
such barbarism more often than not. You can be Israeli, or you
can love Israel and Israelis and wish nothing more than to keep
them safe and respected and still oppose the racist and genocidal
policies of the current regime. Indeed, if you are, you really
must oppose those policies, because they do nothing but bring
shame on the people you profess to love and cherish. And you can
do this without ever describing yourself as pro-Palestinian, or
in any way associating yourself with Palestinian nationalists --
who, quite frankly, have made a lot of missteps over the years,
in the worst cases acting exactly like the Israelis they claim
to oppose.
"Because as an American of German extraction with many dozens
of Jewish friends, I've spent too much of my life taking anti-Semitism
seriously to put it on any sort of back burner now." Again, you can
be Jewish, or you can love and respect Jews, and still oppose Israel's
policies of racism and genocide. You can find ample reason within
Judaism, or Christianity, or any other religion, or secular humanism,
socialist solidarity, or simple human decency, to do so. And you can
and should be clear that if the roles were reversed you would still
oppose racism and genocide, and seek to protect and sustain victims
of those policies.
This is actually quite easy for people of the left to do, because
the definition that identifies us on the left is that we believe that
all people deserve equal political, economic, and human rights. It
is harder for people on the right, who again by definition believe
that some people are chosen to rule and that others are commanded
to serve, or at least not annoy or inconvenience their betters by
their presence. They are likely to be divided, depending on whether
they identify with the people on top or on the bottom, and they are
likely to be the worst offenders, because they also believe that
the use of force is legitimate to promote their caste and to subdue
all others.
There is a form of gravity involved in this: if you're under or
excluded from the dominant hierarchy, you tend to move left, because
your self-interest is better served by universal rights and tolerance
than by the slim odds that you can revolt and seize power. This is
why almost all Jews in America lean left -- as do most members of
most excluded and/or disparaged minorities, pretty much everywhere.
Israel is different, because right-wing Jews did manage to seize
power there, and as such have become a glaring example of why the
right is wrong.
Zionists have worked very hard to obscure the inevitable divide
between rightist power in Israel and left leanings in the diaspora,
and for a long time, especially in America, they've been remarkably
successful. I'm not going to try to explain how and why, as the key
point right now is that it's breaking down, as it is becoming obvious
that Israel acts are contrary to the political and moral beliefs of
most Jews in America -- that there is any significant support for
Israel at all can only be attributed to denial, lies, and the rote
repetition of carefully crafted talking points.
One of those talking points is that opposition to Israel's wars
and racism reflects and encourages anti-semitism, thus triggering
deep-seated fears tied back to the very real history of racism and
genocide targeting Jews -- fears that, while hard to totally dismiss,
have been systematically cultivated to Israel's advantage by what
Norman Finkelstein calls "the holocaust industry." Some people (and
Marcus presents as an example) grew up so traumatized that they are
completely unreachable (which is to say, disconnected from reality)
on Israel. Others, like Christgau, are just enmeshed in sympathy
and guilt -- although in his case, I don't see what other than his
name binds him to German, much less Nazi, history and culture (for
instance, the Christian church he often refers to was Presbyterian,
not Lutheran, not that Lutheranism is all that Teutonic either; in
music about all I can think of is that he likes Kraftwerk and Kurt
Weill, but who among us doesn't?).
That Zionists should be accusing leftists, including many Jews,
of being anti-semitic is pretty ripe. Zionism was a minority response
to the rising tide of anti-semitism in 19th century Europe, which
insisted that anti-semitism was endemic and permanent -- something
so ingrained in Euopean culture that could never be reformed by
socialist political movements or tolerated by liberalism, a curse
that could only be escaped from, by retreating to and fortifying
an exclusively Jewish nation-state, isolated by an Iron Wall.
But along the way, Zionists learned to play anti-semitism to
their advantage. They pleaded with imperialists to give them land
and to expel their unwanted Jews. They pointed Christians to the
prophecy in Revelations that sees the return of Jews to the Holy
Land as a prerequisite for the Second Coming. (David Lloyd George
was one who bought that line. In America today, Postmillennial
Dispensationalists are the staunchest supporters of Zionism, and
every last one of them relishes the Final Solution that eluded
Hitler.) They negotiated with Nazis. They lobbied to keep Jews
from emigrating to America. They organized pogroms to stampede
Arabic Jews to ascend to Israel. They stole the shameful legacy
of the Holocaust and turned it into a propaganda industry, which
plies guilt to obtain deferrence and support, even as Israel
does unto others the same horrors that others had done to Jews.
Opposition to anti-semitism is a core belief of liberals and
the left in America. This is because such forms of prejudice and
discrimination are inimical to our principles, but it's gained
extra resonance because Jews tend to be active in liberal/left
circles, so non-Jews (like Christgau and myself) know and treasure
many of them. Nearly all of us are careful, sometimes to the point
of tedium, to make clear that our criticisms of Israel are not to
be generalized against Jews. In this, we are helped by the many
Jews who share our criticisms, and often, like the group Jewish
Voice for Peace, lead the way. But not everyone who criticizes
Israel exercises such care, and not everyone does so from left
principles, and those are the ones who are most likely to fall
back on anti-semitic tropes and popularize them, increasing the
chances of an anti-semitic resurgence. That would be bad, both
politically and morally, but no form of opposition to tyranny
justifies the tyranny. We need to understand that the offense
is responsible for its opposition, and to seek its solution at
the source: Israel's racist and genocidal behavior.
So if you're really concerned that this war may make anti-semitism
more common, the only solution is to stop the war: in practical terms,
to demand a ceasefire, to halt arms deliveries to Israel, to insist
that Israel give up its claims to Gaza (if anything is clear by now,
it's that Israel is not competent to administer Gaza), to organize
aid and relief, and to open a dialogue with Israel to come to some
sort of agreeable solution where everyone can live in peace, security,
and hopefully prosperity with full and equal rights. The main reason
for doing this is that it's the right thing to do, for pretty much
everyone, but if you're primarily concerned about anti-semitism,
that is one more reason to sue for peace.
In this age where kill ratios exceed 100-to-1, and the starvation
ratio is infinite, I'm not going to pretend that the psychic trauma
the war is causing for Israelis, for Jews, and for philo-semitic
Americans somehow balances off against the pain and suffering that
is being inflicted on Palestinians, but that traums is real, and
needs to be addressed and relieved, and only peace can do that. And
in this particular conflict, only Israel can grant peace. Until
they choose to do so, all focus should be directed on those who
are responsible for this war: for fighting it, for supporting it,
for excusing it, and for letting them get away with it.
I guess that last point ran away from me a bit, while still
leaving much more to be said. More succinctly: to whatever extent
Israel is able to identify its war with Jews in general, and to
equate opposition to its war with anti-semitism, the prevalence
and threat of anti-semitism will grow. To stop this, stop the war.
If anti-semitism is the issue you really care about, stopping the
war is the only thing that will help you.
People on the left, by definition, are opposed to the war, and
are opposed to anti-semitism, and see their opposition to both as
part of the same fight. People on the right are often confused,
crazy, and/or sick. You may or may not be able to help them, but
know that they are much less dangerous in times of peace and good
will than in times of war and turmoil, so again the imperative is
to stop the war. And if you, like Christgau (and even Marcus) hate
and fear Donald Trump (who's firmly on the right for all three
reasons), same prescription: stop the war.
One last point: you don't have to specifically care about Jews
on this matter. I'm addressing these points to people who do. While
I think it would be more helpful to protest in ways that help gain
support from people who are initially sympathetic to Israelis --
e.g., I think a lot of Palestinian flag waving isn't very helpful --
I understand that people can come to the right conclusion from all
sorts of reasoning. What matters most is that we all demand a
ceasefire, and an end to Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians.
David A Graham:
Doug Emhoff, first jazz fan: "The second gentleman gets the beauty
and meaning of the genre."
Chris Monsen:
[06-19]
Midweek pick, June 19th, 2024: Okka Disk: A reminder of Bruno
Johnson's Milwaukee-based avant-jazz label, noting that "perhaps a
deep dive into their output would be in order at a later date."
For what little it's worth, I started working on
Ken Vandermark & Friends: A Consumer Guide back around 2004,
as it seemed like a good follow up to my
A Consumer Guide to William Parker, Matthew Shipp, et al.,
but I didn't get very far. My
database does contain 66 albums
released by Okka Disk, 55 with grades, of which the following rated
A- or higher:
- Jim Baker/Steve Hunt/Brian Sandstrom/Mars Williams: Extraordinary Popular Delusions (2005 [2007])
- Peter Brötzmann/Toshinori Kondo/Massimo Pupillo/Paal Nilssen-Love: Hairy Bones (2008 [2009])
- Caffeine [Ken Vandermark]: Caffeine (1993 [1994])
- FME [Vandermark]: Underground (2004)
- FME: Cuts (2004 [2005])
- Triage [Dave Rempis]: Twenty Minute Cliff (2003)
- Triage: American Mythology (2004) [A]
- School Days [Vandermark]: Crossing Division (2000)
- School Days: In Our Times (2001 [2002])
- Steelwool Trio [Vandermark]: International Front (1994 [1998])
- Ken Vandermark/Kent Kessler/Ingebrigt Hĺker Flaten/Nate McBride/Wilbert De Joode: Collected Fiction (2008 [2009])
[06-26]
Midweek pick, June 26th, 2024: Gayle, Graves and Parker's WEBO:
What I'm listening to to calm my nerves while writing about Gaza
and Biden.
Phil Overeem:
June 2024: Halfway there + "old reggae albums I'd never heard
before were my June salvation."
Robert Sullivan: [06-24]
The Sun Ra Arkestra's maestro hits one hundred: "Marshall Allen,
the musical collective's sax-playing leader, is celebrating with a
deep-spacey video installation during the Venice Biennale."
Werner Trieschmann: [06-20]
Fox Green score hat trick with excellent third album, Light
Over Darkness.
Ask a question, or send a comment.
Wednesday, June 26, 2024
Music Week
June archive
(final).
Music: Current count 42549 [42503] rated (+46), 22 [22] unrated (+0).
Updated: look for change bar below.
I perhaps foolishly agreed to write up an article on William Parker,
this year's deserving recipient of a Lifetime Achievement Award, and
a feature evening of performances, at the
2024 Vision Festival, in New York last week. I figured I could dust
off the
Parker/Shipp Consumer Guide
I wrote up back in 2003, and add a few odds and ends about later albums.
It turned out not to be not quite that simple.
For one thing, when I finally rounded up all the reviews I had written
on albums he had played on, the count came to 249. I then had to go back
and check for false positives (the 2003 CG also included albums with
Shipp but no Parker, and a few extras by artists in their circle), and
for omissions. In this, I was massively aided by being able to consult
Rick Lopez's
William Parker Sessionography, but I was also slowed by its
completeness and accumulation of fascinating detail. Back in the
notes for my 2003 CG, I collected a select but fairly extensive
discogrpahy. As I needed something similar to keep track of what
I was doing, I started to update it, and that wound up taking a
lot of time.
By last Thursday, I had gotten so flustered and panicked that
I decided I had to give up trying to multitask and just focus on
the Parker essay. I had started to write some introductory comments
for the week's Speaking of Which, so I stopped there, and vowed to
do no more until the piece was done. (I'm belatedly posting that
introduction today, but with no news links or comments.
Second, I resolved to only play Parker albums until I finished.
I later relaxed that to allow myself to play and review albums
I hadn't heard before, which is where most of the albums below
came from.
I finally sent the essay in yesterday. No word yet on when (or
I suppose if) it will be published. I decided that the best way
to proceed from here is to post the partial Speaking of Which
intro (which already had a sequence number) along with the Music
Week reviews, then start on new blog posts for the usual dates
next week. Of course, it's never that simple. This also turns
out to be the last Music Week in June, so I have to wrap up one
month's Streamnotes archive, and open up another.
I also have a jammed up pile of other work I need to crack on
with, more email problems, plus home tasks, health troubles, etc.
More stuff in flux, but I've droned on enough for here and now.
PS: [06-27] My piece on William Parker has
been posted on ArtsFuse now:
Jazz Commentary: Celebrating Bassist William Parker's Lifetime of
Achievement. I have some notes to go along with this, but
they're not really ready for presentation yet, so I'll work on
them and have more to say later. Note that I did add the two
books I referred at the end to my Recent Reading sidebar and
roll.
I changed the status of
June Streamnotes to
"final," added the Music Week text, and compiled the
2024 and
Artists indexes.
Next on my plate is to do some work on the
Carola Dibbell and
Robert Christgau
websites, or maybe something with email, or maybe just get
dinner first -- things I need to square away before getting to
the mid-year Jazz Critics Poll (which I should send out notices
on by Monday, assuming email works by then). But I'm really
itching to open up a Speaking of Which draft file, as even
with my recent blackout it's pretty obvious that there's an
insane amount of important news to note and (mostly) bemoan.
PPS: I was going to apologize for not being able to
figure out how to move the right-margin change mark inside the
album cover pics so it's clearly tied to the changed text, but
then it dawned on me to allow an option to put the change bar
on the left, which should be good enough for now.
If the change bar doesn't appear for you, that's because
your browser is using a cached CSS file. CTRL-SHIFT-R fixes
this in Firefox. I also had to fix a ton of mistakes in the
aforelinked Parker-Shipp CG file. I knew it wasn't ready,
but should at least have made sure it loaded. That much is
fixed now.
New records reviewed this week:
Fox Green: Light Over Darkness (2024, self-released):
Alt/indie band from Little Rock, third album since 2020, Wade Derden
is the singer and co-writer with Cam Patterson, both on guitar (and
mandolin), backed with keyboards, bass, and drums, the production
detailed but not cluttered with bits of horns, strings, and backup
singers. First take suggests a clear distillation of the Allmans,
but that may just be for lack of comparable referents, for what
they lack in guitar power they make up for ballad touch and song
smarts -- the latter drawing on Jesus, the Devil, and Sleepy John
Estes.
A- [cd]
Joel Futterman/William Parker: Why (2020 [2024],
Soul City Sounds): Piano and bass duo. Futterman started in
Chicago, moved to Virginia Beach in 1972, and started recording
in 1979, becoming increasingly prolific in the 1990s. He's a
very distinctive pianist, and Parker is as robust as ever.
B+(***) [sp]
Andrea Grossi Blend 3 + Jim Black: Axes (2023
[2024], We Insist!): Italian bassist, second group album with
Manuel Caliumi (alto sax) and Michele Bonifati (guitar), plus
a drummer this time -- a really good one.
B+(***) [sp]
Jared Hall: Influences (2022 [2024], Origin):
Trumper player, based in Seattle, third album, quartet with
piano (Tal Cohen), bass (Michael Glynn), and drums (John
Bishop), playing originals plus one tune from Gigi Gryce.
B+(***) [cd]
Jihee Heo: Flow (2023 [2024], OA2): South Korean
pianist, studied in Amsterdam before landing in New York, second
album, mostly trio (Alexander Claffy and Joe Farnsworth), nicely
done, with a bonus: Vincent Herring (alto sax) joining for two tracks.
B+(**) [cd]
Arushi Jain: Delight (2024, Leaving): Based
in Brooklyn, plays synths and sings, having trained in India
as a classical vocalist, is interested in "instrument design
and sonic experimentation with a focus on linking western and
eastern musicology." Result is you're engulfed in thick layers
of sonic texture, searching for even the faintest hint of beat,
which is faint indeed.
B- [sp]
Kneecap: Fine Art (2024, Heavenly): Bilingual
Irish hip-hop group from West Belfast (Mo Chara, Móglai Bap,
DJ Próval), billed as their first album (aside from an 8-song,
31:03, self-released mixtape from 2021). Sounded more post-punk
at first, but the cadences eventually signify, and the energy
is compounded. Words? Hell if I know, but they have a rep as
political.
A- [sp]
Jim Kweskin: Never Too Late: Duets With Friends
(2024, Storysound): Folksinger and guitarist, best known for his
1963-70 Jug Band, which introduced us to Geoff & Maria Muldaur --
she is the first of his featured friends here to appear here. Lots
of friends, lots of songs.
B+(***) [sp]
Jon Langford: Gubbins (2023, self-released):
This seems to be an "odds & sods" compilation -- "songs that
fell between the cracks" -- but without further documentation we
might as well treat it as a new album. Eleven songs, 45:29, all
interesting, valuable, not quite essential.
B+(***) [sp]
Jon Langford & the Bright Shiners: Where It Really
Starts (2024, Tiny Global Productions): Nominally an
Austin band (or maybe found in northern California), led by the
peripatetic Welshman, offhandedly countryish.
B+(**) [bc]
Joe McPhee With Ken Vandermark: Musings of a Bahamian Son:
Poems and Other Words (2021 [2024], Corbett vs. Dempsey):
Mostly as advertised, which is not something I often get into, but
pretty interesting spoken word, with little bits of soprano sax by
McPhee, or clarinet/bass clarinet by Vandermark, which are always
welcome.
B+(*) [bc]
Star Splitter [Gabriele Mitelli/Rob Mazurek]: Medea
(2022 [2024], We Insist!): Trumpet players (alternatively cornet
or pocket trumpet), also credited with electronics and voice, did
an album together in 2019 called Star Splitter. Rather tough
going.
B [sp]
Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:
Tony Oxley Quintet: Angular Apron (1992 [2024],
Corbett vs. Dempsey): British avant-jazz drummer (1938-2023),
his 1969 The Baptised Traveler is a Penguin Guide crown
album, the piece here (64:42) dates from the early 1970s, this
previously unreleased take from the Ruhr Jazz Festival, with
Larry Stabbins (soprano/tenor sax), Manfred Schoof (trumpet/flugelhorn),
Pat Thomas (piano/electronics), and Sirone (bass).
B+(***) [bc]
Tomasz Stanko Quartet: September Night (2004 [2024],
ECM): Polish trumpet player (1942-2018), well known even before the
Iron Curtain fell, a spare live tape with what at the time was
referred to as his "young Polish quartet," rather than stumbling
over the names Marcin Wasilewski, Slawomir Kurkiewicz, and Michal
Miskiewicz.
B+(***) [sp]
Mars Williams & Hamid Drake: I Know You Are but What
Am I (1996 [2024], Corbett vs. Dempsey): The late saxophonist
(1955-2023, credited here with "reeds"), started with Hal Russell
and continued his NRG Ensemble after Russell's death, bringing in
Ken Vandermark for reinforcements, leading to his work in the first
edition of the Vandermark 5. Williams' avant-gardism branched out
into rock and acid jazz (Liquid Soul), as well as more esoteric
ventures (like multiple volumes of An Ayler Xmas). This
tape with exceptional drums is just what friends and fans most
remember him for.
A- [bc]
Mars Williams/Darin Gray/Chris Corsano: Elastic
(2012 [2024], Corbett vs. Dempsey): Leader credited with "reeds,
toys," joined by bass and drums for an improv set (43:51). Peaks
points are intense and thrilling. The same year Williams founded
a similar trio, Boneshaker, with Kent Kessler and Paal Nilssen-Love.
B+(***) [bc]
Old music:
Peter Brötzmann/William Parker/Hamid Drake: Song
Sentimentale (2015 [2016], Otoroku): The bassist and
drummer are inventive as ever, while the tenor saxophonist
blasts away, even when he switches up on clarinet or tarogato.
Nothing obviously sentimental about it.
B+(***) [bc]
Rob Brown Trio: Breath Rhyme (1989, Silkheart):
Alto saxophonist, first album as leader here (following a duo
with Matthew Shipp), with William Parker (bass) and Denis
Charles (drums). He has a distinctive tone and flow, which he
would go on to use to great effect in Parker's quartets and
other projects, in many other associated groups, and sometimes,
as here, as a leader.
B+(**) [r]
Rob Brown Quartet: The Big Picture (2003 [2004],
Marge): Alto saxophonist, with Roy Campbell (trumpet), William
Parker (bass), and Hamid Drake (drums).
B+(**) [r]
Dave Cappello & Jeff Albert With William Parker: New
Normal (2015 [2016], Breakfast 4 Dinner): Drummer, doesn't
have much except for duo and quartet work with the trombonist (who
I know mostly from a group he co-led with Jeb Bishop), but evidently
he got started playing with guitarist Bern Nix (who goes back to
the 1970s Loft Scene, but is best known for his work with Ornette
Coleman, and maybe James Chance). So Nix, who died in 2017, might
have provided a connection to Parker, who adds bass and wood flute,
elevating everyone's game.
B+(***) [sp]
Kevin Coyne/Jon Langford/The Pine Valley Cosmonauts: One
Day in Chicago (2002 [2005], Spinney): An oddball British
singer-songwriter from the early 1970s, I'm surprised to only find
one of his albums in my database (1974's Marjory Razor Blade,
a B+, but a memorable one) as I'm sure I've heard more. He never
made it big, but recorded pretty regularly up to his death in 2004,
and surely rates a compilation, even if one would be hard-pressed
to agree on a "best of." At this point I have no idea whether it
would improve on this delightful live set, with a band of fans he
found in Chicago.
B+(***) [sp]
Jeremy Danneman: Lady Boom Boom (2013 [2015],
Ropeadope): Saxophonist, played alto, tenor, clarinet, and more
in three sessions that produced as many albums, released on a
label that appreciates a good groove and is careless about who
played what when in which order. But the personnel could do
that and more: William Parker (not just bass), Anders Nilsson
(guitar), and Timothy Keiper (drums).
B+(***) [sp]
Jeremy Danneman: Help (2013 [2015], Ropeadope):
More from the same sessions.
B+(**) [sp]
Jeremy Danneman: Lost Signals (2013 [2016],
Ropeadope): Same group, same sessions for a third album, with
groove appeal informed by third world interests.
A- [sp]
Jeremy Danneman and Sophie Nzayisenga: Honey Wine
(2015 [2017], Ropeadope): The saxophonist has an organization/project
called "Parade of One," slogan "engaging the international community
with street performance." He met Nzayisenga in Rwanda, where she
plays inanga and sings, and arranged to bring her to New York to
record. Visa problems delayed that until here, where they are joined
by William Parker (bass) and Tim Keiper (drums). A groove delight.
A- [sp]
Jeremy Danneman and the Down on Me: The Big Fruit Salad
(2022, Ropeadope): One more album (so far), wrote and sung lyrics,
which reduces the saxophone/clarinet. Also lost the bass and drums,
so less groove to brag about, but Anders Nilsson returns on guitar,
and Joe Exley's sousaphone saves with swing. For singer-songwriter
comps, the first two that pop into mind are Thomas Anderson and Ed
Hammel. He's not as good (or maybe I just mean as funny) as either,
but he's interesting in similar ways. Choice cut: "Tomato."
B+(*) [sp]
Die Like a Dog Quartet Featuring Roy Campbell: From Valley
to Valley (1998 [1999], Eremite): Peter Brötzmann quartet,
name derives from their 1993 album, originally with Toshinori Kondo
(trumpet), William Parker (bass), and Hamid Drake (drums), but on
this particular date -- recorded in Amherst, MA -- Campbell replaces
Kondon on trumpet.
B+(*) [sp]
Sophia Domancich/Hamid Drake/William Parker: Washed Away:
Live at the Sunside (2008 [2009], Marge): French pianist,
side credits start in 1983, with her first trio in 1991. Another
trio here, as can happen when famous Americans wander about Europe.
Set of three pieces: one joint credit, one from Mal Waldron, and
no less than 36:37 of "Lonely Woman."
B+(***) [sp]
Hamid Drake & Sabir Mateen: Brothers Together
(2000 [2002], Eremite): Duo, Drake plays frame and trap drums,
Mateen is credited with clarinets, flute, alto sax, tenor sax,
vocals. Terrific.
A- [sp]
Farmers by Nature [Gerald Cleaver/William Parker/Craig
Taborn]: Love and Ghosts (2011 [2014], AUM Fidelity,
2CD): Drums-bass-piano trio, group name from their 2009 album,
third group album, all pieces joint credits so presumably
improvised, this from two days in France, 133 minutes. Long,
some major high stretches.
B+(***) [sp]
Peter Kuhn: Ghost of a Trance (1979-80 [1981],
Hat Hut): Clarinet/saxophone player, was consistently excellent
in William Parker circles 1978-81, vanished after that until
2015, when he released another series of superb albums. This
combines two sessions, one fairly abstract 19:00 clarinet piece
with Phillip Wilson on percussion and Parker on tuba, the other
a more typical free jazz outing with Dave Sewelson on alto/bari
sax, plus guitar, piano, and vibes (but no drums).
B+(**) [yt]
Jon Langford & the Men of Gwent: The Legend of LL
(2015, Country Mile): Mekons founder, moved from Leeds to Chicago
in 1992 without severing his ties, but had already run through
several side projects like the Three Johns and the Killer Shrews,
adding the Waco Brothers and the Pine Valley Cosmonauts in Chicago.
This group is described as "Newport-based" (but otherwise I don't
know squat about them, but Newport seems to be Langford's original
home town in Wales). This was their debut, and strikes me as not
just fresher but wilder and woolier than their latest (which was
first for me).
A- [bc]
Jon Langford & the Men of Gwent: President of Wales
(2019, Country Mile): If only the Waco Brothers had been Welsh.
B+(***) [bc]
Jemeel Moondoc Quintet: Nostalgia in Times Square
(1985 [1986], Soul Note): Alto saxophonist (1946-2021), his group
Muntu made a splash in the late-1970s New York avant-garde, retains
bassist William Parker here, joined by Rahn Burton (piano), Bern
Nix (guitar), and Dennis Charles (drums). Title piece from Mingus.
The others are credited to Moondoc, but "In Walked Monk" sounds
kind of familiar (as in Monk's "In Walked Bud"), and "Dance of
the Clowns" has at least a whiff of Mingus.
B+(***) [r]
Jemeel Moondoc Vtet: Revolt of the Negro Lawn Jockeys
(2000, Eremite): Alto saxophonist-led quintet, with Nethan Breedlove
(trumpet), Khan Jamal (vibes), John Voigt (bass), and Cody Moffett
(drums).
B+(**) [sp]
Jemeel Moondoc & the Jus Grew Orchestra: Spirit House
(2000, Eremite): The alto saxophonist conducts a strong
group of horns here: trumpets (Lewis Barnes, Roy Campbell Jr.),
trombones (Steve Swell, Tyrone Hill), saxophones (plus Zane Massey
on tenor, Michael Marcus on baritone), with a guitar-bass-drums
rhythm section (Bern Nix, John Voigt, Codaryl Moffett). Not quite
a big band, but they pack a lot of power, fly free, and even swing
some.
A- [sp]
Jameel Moondoc With Dennis Charles: We Don't (1981
[2003], Eremite): Alto sax, with the drummer (1933-98, from Virgin
Islands, also played with Billy Bang and Cecil Taylor). Challenging
free jazz.
B+(***) [sp]
Joe Morris/William Parker/Gerald Cleaver: Altitude
(2011 [2012], AUM Fidelity): Guitar-bass-drums trio, with Parker
switching to sintir (a Moroccan bass lute), live improv recorded
one night at the Stone in NYC, four tracks stretched out to 72:27.
B+(**) [sp]
William Parker & the Little Huey Creative Music Orchestra:
Mass for the Healing of the World (1998 [2003], Black
Saint): The bassist's 15-piece big band, less brass and more sax,
an explosive rhythm section (Cooper-Moore on piano, Susie Ibarra
on drums, and Parker), plus vocalist Aleta Heyes for the mass-like
bits (not many).
A- [sp]
William Parker Quartet: Live in Wroclove (2012
[2013], ForTune): The bassist's "pianoless" quartet, which dates
back at least to 2001's O'Neal's Porch, with two freewheeling
horns -- Lewis Barnes' trumpet and Rob Brown's alto sax -- and
great Hamid Drake on drums. So this is a great band, with some
interesting music -- starting with a 47:33 set called "Kalaparusha
Dancing on the Edge of the Horizon" -- but it's also a concert,
where they pace themselves to set up the moments fans will recall.
It's also kind of a big deal for a label that mostly documents
the local scene -- in this case, better known as Wroclaw. But it's
a tad less compelling than the group's studio albums.
B+(***) [sp]
William Parker: For Those Who Are, Still (2000-13
[2013], AUM Fidelity, 3CD): By this time, Parker has become so
prolific he's building boxes from scattered sets: this one is
formally organized into three albums from five sessions: "For
Fannie Hammer" from 2000; "Vermeer," with Leena Conquest, from
2011; "Red Giraffe With Dreadlocks," with Sangeeta Bandyopadhyay,
from 2012; a Charles Gayle trio, to open "Ceremonies for Those
Who Are Still," with NFM Orchestra and Choir.
A- [r]
William Parker/David Budbill: What I Saw This Morning
2014 [2016], AUM Fidelity): Budbill (1940-2016) was mostly a writer,
posthumously named "the people's poet of Vermont," also wrote plays,
two novels, a libretto, and recorded three albums of spoken word with
William Parker providing the music, here mostly using his exotic
instruments. Comparable to David Greenberger, but more intimate and
personal.
[Streamed 14/35 tracks.]
B+(***) [bc]
The Cecil Taylor Unit: Live in Bologna (1987 [1988],
Leo): Avant-pianist, group was his quintet (more or less, long
defined by saxophonist Jimmy Lyons, who died in 1986, leaving
a large gap for Carlos Ward to try to fill. Also with Leroy
Jenkins (violin), William Parker (bass), and Thurman Baker
(drums/marimba). Ward lurks until the rhythm drives him to
deliver.
A- [r]
The Cecil Taylor Unit: Live in Vienna (1987
[1988], Leo): Same group, recorded four days later, again
one long piece, a bit longer at 71:21, but hacked up for
the original 2-LP. While I understand that every performance
is different, that doesn't make them all cost-effective, even
at this level.
B+(***) [r]
Cecil Taylor: Tzotzil Mummers Tzotzil (1987 [1988],
Leo): The same group a week later in Paris, last stop on the tour,
sandwiched between some poetry recorded a few days later in London.
I find the poetry exceptionally hard to follow.
B+(*) [sp]
David S. Ware Trio: Passage to Music (1988,
Silkheart): Tenor saxophone great, started in the 1970s but
didn't really take off until he organized this group, with
William Parker (bass) and Marc Edwards (drums), soon to be
a quartet with the addition of pianist Matthew Shipp. Already
quite impressive.
B+(***) [r]
David S. Ware Quartet: Cryptology (1994 [1995],
Homestead): The one Quartet album that slipped past me, with
Matthew Shipp (piano), William Parker (bass), and Whit Dickey
(drums), as intense as any in a very remarkable series. This
seems to have been where Steven Joerg entered the picture,
before his AUM Fidelity label provided Ware and Parker a
long-term home.
A- [yt]
David S. Ware: Organica (Solo Saxophones, Volume 2)
(2010 [2011], AUM Fidelity): Ware's kidneys started to fail in
1999, and he was near death ten years later when he was rescued
by a kidney transplant. He died in 2012 of an infection fueled
by immunosuppresant meds, but over his last couple years he
recorded a wide variety of works, including two solo volumes --
Saturnian from late a late 2009 set, plus two sets here,
each opening with a piece on sopranino sax, followed by one on
tenor. Usual caveats apply, but interesting as these things go.
B+(**) [r]
Grade (or other) changes:
Jon Langford & the Men of Gwent: Lost on Land &
Sea (2023, Country Mile): The Waco Brothers return as
a Welsh bar band. Multiple plays prove this to be tuneful and
thoughtful but most of all consistent, so it's hard to fault
the notion that this is a great album, but if it really was,
wouldn't I have noticed by now?
[was: B+(**)] B+(***) [bc]
Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:
- Fox Green: Holy Souls (self-released '22)
- Fox Green: Light Darkness (self-released)
- Frank London/The Elders: Spirit Stronger Than Blood (ESP-Disk)
- Michael Pagán: Paganova (Capri) [07-19]
- Jerome Sabbagh: Heart (Analog Tone Factory) [08-30]
- Natsuki Tamura/Satoko Fujii: Aloft (Libra) [07-12]
- Thollem: Worlds in a Life, Two (ESP-Disk)
Ask a question, or send a comment.
-- next
|