Art/Culture

Top 50 Conservative Rock Songs?

Posted by on May 31, 2006 at 3:51 am. NO Comments :

This may be the funniest best of list I’ve ever seen. Contemporary artists from diverse pop genres are pumping out material critical of Bush and his administration. Neil Young (Let’s Impeach the President), Pearl Jam (World Wide Suicide), Pink (Dear Mr. President), Dixie Chicks (Not Ready to Make Nice), Green Day (American Idiot), Bruce Springsteen (We Shall Overcome), and that’s just the superstars. These progressive artists are producing new work with specific targets in public life. Now right wing rockers are feeling left out, so they have compiled their own compendium of headbangers that they believe places them in with the in crowd. It’s such a pathetic exercise in desperation that it transcends satire.

Here are a few choice examples:

  • 1) “Won’t Get Fooled Again,” by The Who
  • 3) “Sympathy for the Devil,” by The Rolling Stones
  • 13) “My City Was Gone,” by The Pretenders
  • 20) “Rock the Casbah,” by The Clash
  • 35) “Who’ll Stop the Rain,” by Creedence Clearwater Revival

These are just a few of the more blatantly liberal, anti-establishment songs and/or artists that the right is misinterpreting in their pitiful yearning to play with the cool kids. Many of these artists would laugh themselves into convulsions if they found their music on this list, particularly artists like The Clash or The Sex Pistols who had outright disdain for traditional authority.

It should be noted that the majority of the list was released between 15 and 40 years ago. Only four were recorded this century. None of them were overtly pro-conservative politically, but rather had a theme (or just a single line) that expressed what conservatives view as their exclusive values. I’m not sure that the Beach Boys lyric anticipating a happy future married to a loved one could be considered conservative. The last I heard, liberals like to marry their lovers too.

Contrast those tenuous ties with the unequivocal revulsion in the brand new work by progressive artists that is directed squarely at our current neocon political leaders. There really is no comparison. This compilation just demonstrates the lengths to which these sad and envious losers will go to convince themselves that they’re popular.

Creativism And The Rise Of The Art Insurgency

Posted by on May 6, 2006 at 3:07 pm. NO Comments :

In its many forms, movies, books, music, etc., art entertains, enlightens, challenges and comforts us. We encounter it in virtually every waking moment, if not in the creative aspect, then in the commercial. We transform the creators into objects of desire and curiosity. Creativism, the pursuit of truth through expression, in one way or another consumes more of our consciousness than any other activity of life not directly associated with survival.

And yet, the past decade has seen an unsettling evolution of thought with regard to the artist’s place in society. That place has increasingly become a wobbly axis of discord. Painters, poets, actors, authors and musicians are battered and belittled for doing nothing more than what they were born to do: express themselves. While the artist’s contribution to the world community was once valued for its conscience and vision, in recent years it has depreciated and even become a liability.

Now there has arisen a class of self-appointed, civic hall monitors who believe that they can decide who passes through the corridors of free expression. These martinets of virtue want artists to repress their natural inclination to share their insight and their soul. Emblematic of this trend is the book by censorious pundit Laura Ingraham, “Shut Up and Sing.” The publisher touts the book for exposing, “the outrageous howlers and muddled thinking peddled by a rogues’ gallery of Hollywood celebs…” This view has infected modern society and is propelled by critics, moralists and pseudo-patriots whose shallowness demands that artists be nothing more than amusements. They must certainly never make us think or feel.

I’m sick and tired of limp-brained gasbags like John McCain saying, “Do I know how to sing? About as well as she [Barbra Streisand] knows how to govern America!”. The obvious extension of that thought is that anyone who does any job other than serving in Congress is unqualified to have an opinion about what our government does in our name. Just try changing the word “sing” with the word “farm” or “teach” or “weld.” This is unadulterated elitist bullshit. If we’re qualified to vote them into office, then we’re qualified to comment on the job they are doing.

When did this happen? How did artists come to be assaulted for having opinions and the courage to express them? That is, in fact, their strength and purpose. Throughout history it was artists who shaped the character of our culture. It was artists who illustrated our spiritual quests; documented our humanity; exposed our flaws; inspired us to repair them. The enlightened observations they shared were like medicinal potions. They were sometimes caustic, but they always served to heal. Today, merely being controversial (a side effect of honesty) subjects the artist to condemnation and ridicule from the ranks of the cultural imperialists.

This is not happening by accident. There is a deliberate campaign to denigrate artists due specifically to their ability to communicate. Popular artists are natural targets because their popularity increases the volume of their voices. Thus we find artists, whose work was once profound enough to enrich our lives, are disparaged for employing that same vision to touch our lives in ever more meaningful ways.

By silencing the voices of creativism, the ruling class seeks to dominate an inconvenient public. The McCarthyites did it to the Hollywood 10, and they’re doing it still. They don’t even try to be subtle. An example:

In January of 2003, shortly before the U. S. invasion of Iraq, Colin Powell assembled the media at the United Nations to comment on his presentation. But before the media arrived, the tapestry of Picasso’s masterpiece, Guernica, was covered by a blue drape. A press conference to discuss launching an unprecedented war of aggression could not be held in front of one of the twentieth century’s most moving anti-war statements.

The symbolism of literally throwing a blanket over this representation of truth is unmistakable. They know the power of art – and they fear it. Another example:

Shortly after 9/11, Clear Channel Communications, the world’s largest radio conglomerate, distributed a list of 164 songs they deemed inappropriate for airing. The list bordered on the absurd, including:

  • Louis Armstrong – “What A Wonderful World”
  • Buddy Holly and the Crickets – “That’ll Be The Day”
  • Carole King – “I Feel the Earth Move”
  • John Lennon – “Imagine”
  • Frank Sinatra – “New York, New York”

And in a master stroke:

  • Rage Against The Machine – All Songs!

The time has come to restore the dignity of creativism. We must beat back the repressive forces that would prefer the Dark Ages to the Renaissance. We must recognize the power that speaking the truth brings to our world and ourselves. We must support our creative advocates. They are more reliable as leaders than their political counterparts. Too often, the politician’s voice is reduced to platitudes for fear of alienating a listener. The artist’s voice, unencumbered by these fears, is more likely to resonate with independence and honesty.

Every great social movement was fueled in part by the arts – from the Napoleonic era Disasters of War by Goya, to the guerilla postering of Robbie Conal. The art insurgency is latent now, but it is strong and committed. Like other insurgencies, it blends in with the populace and can strike with fierce and startling force. It stockpiles its weapons of mass construction for the building of consensus and passion and hope.

Now is the time to reignite creativism for social progress. A new generation of artists is already engaged. But they need to be embraced by the political actors – the campaigners and strategists; the wonks and activists; the publicists and what’s left of the independent media. Those that presently grip the reins of our society know the strength with which art speaks, and they are doing their best to suppress it. We must not leave them alone on that battlefield.

The American Idolization of America

Posted by on May 7, 2005 at 10:27 am. 1 Comments :

What is it about life in America today that makes it so easy to feel overwhelmed by societal events yet so securely oblivious to all but the most innocuous? It’s like we are protectively shrink-wrapped in a miracle fabric that lets light in, but keeps heat out. In searching for a parable to explain the current American zeitgeist, there is one story whose web of plots and sub-plots lends itself almost too perfectly.

American IdleAs reported with the customary lascivious glee of the Corporate Media, American Idol judge, Paula Abdul, has been engulfed in a scandal that mirrors the scandalous state of our nation. By engaging in a sexual affair with a contestant whose fate her vote would influence, Miss Abdul has given us the opportunity to understand ourselves more fully and satiate our hunger for controversy. What other recipe gives us all of these tasty ingredients?

• Activist judges
• Voting irregularities
• Partisan favoritism
• Clandestine operations
• And, of course, sex

Moreover, American Idol itself is an allegory for war. It pits opponents (contestants) and their allies (audience) against one another. And the principle over which this war is fought (talent) is as ethereal as that which inspires many actual wars (religion). As in all wars, the winners write the history, and we are expected to behave in accordance with the outcome. The winner of this televised karaoke is not just the prevailing contestant, but someone we are now required to Idolize. This is the same kind of jingoistic thought control that will get you thrown out of a taxpayer funded presidential forum for flashing a peace sign.

There is an intentional duality of meaning in the title of this article.

    • The American Idolization of America refers to America taking on the confrontational, black or white, right or wrong, characteristics of the television program.
    • The American Idolization of America refers to the blind loyalty that many Americans feel toward our government or leaders, even when it is contrary to our principles and laws.

Has American Idealism been supplanted by American Idolism? I think so. Contemporary culture in America has just found the perfect combination of nationalism and celebrity worship. Now you know why Fox News is the number one cable news network. Now you know why Ronald Reagan, Jesse Ventura, and Arnold Schwarzenegger were all elected to positions of power. Now you know why Clinton’s lies about sex got him impeached, while Bush’s lies about weapons of mass destruction got him reelected.

Now, don’t get me started on the Apprenticization of America.

The Real Fake News

Posted by on October 18, 2004 at 8:04 pm. 5 Comments :

Speak Fake To Power

The cast and writers of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show have taken on an awesome assignment. While delivering biting satire on the events of the day, they are also savagely exposing the journalistic failure of the conventional media.

Anchor, Jon Stewart, is fond of referring to the program as the “fake” news. He displays an abundance of modesty that suggests that he truly doesn’t grasp the impact this program has on its viewers and its conventional news counterpart. Peter Jennings, in naming Stewart the ABC Person of the week, said that he is

“…the man who often says in public what the rest of us tend to say only in the newsroom.”

The recognition the program receives belies Stewart’s protests that all he does is a funny show on a comedy network that follows puppets making crank phone calls. The show has won five Emmys. It won a Peabody award for election coverage. The Columbia Journalism Review included Stewart on its list of the nation’s 10 most influential political reporters. Newsday placed Stewart on their list of the 20 media players who will most influence the 2004 campaign. Ranking lower on the list were the likes of Tim Russert, Ted Koppel, and Sean Hannity, among others. And yet, when Stewart is confronted with compliments about his strikingly funny presentation of important social events, his response is that

“…that either speaks to the sad state of comedy or the sad state of news. I can’t figure out which one.”

I’m going to have to go with the latter.

The Daily Show’s popularity is significant and growing. It has averaged about 1 million viewers per episode this season, surpassing the total number of viewers for real cable networks like CNN, Fox News and MSNBC. This audience is not, as Bill O’Reilly tagged them, a bunch of “stoned slackers”. According to the National Annenberg Election Survey, Daily Show viewers know more about election issues than people who regularly read newspapers or watch television news. They are 78 percent more likely than the average adult to have four or more years of college education. O’Reilly’s audience is only 24 percent more likely to have that much schooling.

Which is the Real Fake News?

People turn to trusted sources to deliver the information they consider important about their lives and their world. And young people are increasingly turning to The Daily Show. Stephen Colbert, a Daily Show correspondent, has said that he doesn’t believe that viewers learn anything from the show. He contends that, if they weren’t already knowledgeable about political and social affairs, they wouldn’t get the jokes. This is certainly true, but it is possible for well informed persons to become better informed. The Daily Show does this often by juxtaposing a news event with additional relevant information in a way that other news outlets do not. For instance, earlier this year they played a video that aired on most news programs of Bush praising the productive spirit of the American worker in front of warehouse shelves chock full of the fruits of their labor. However, The Daily Show was the only broadcast that aired the camera zooming out to reveal that the scene of the fully stocked shelves was actually a painted backdrop. And in front of the president’s podium was a stack boxes with tape covering the words “Made in China”.

The evidence that The Daily Show is educating or enhancing the education of its viewers is borne out by the fact that viewers are choosing it as a source for news. The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that 21 percent of people aged 18 to 29 cited The Daily Show and Saturday Night Live as a place where they regularly learned presidential campaign news. By contrast, 23 percent of the young people mentioned ABC, CBS or NBC’s nightly news broadcasts as a source.

The Daily Show has proven that it is a trustworthy purveyor of the news. Unfortunately, the “News” has done no such thing. With news fabricators like Steven Glass (New Republic), Jack Kelley (USA Today) and Jayson Blair (New York Times), representing only the fraternity of those who were caught, the mainstream media’s credibility is in freefall. Dan Rather’s sloppy reportage on the Texas Air National Guard’s special treatment of young Lt. Bush helps to speed the descent, as does Fox’s Carl Cameron who posted a false Kerry story on Fox’s web site by accident.

Even worse is when the government and the media work in concert to deceive. The Washington Post reported earlier this year that

“…the General Accounting Office concluded that the Department of Health and Human Services illegally spent federal money on what amounted to covert propaganda by producing videos about the Medicare changes that were made to look like news reports. Portions of the videos, which have been aired by 40 television stations around the country, do not make it clear that the announcers were paid by HHS and were not real reporters.”

WTVF in Nashville is one of the stations that aired the video. They later admitted that they learned of the segment’s fraudulent sourcing from watching The Daily Show’s coverage of the matter.

Recently, Jon Stewart appeared on CNN’s Crossfire. This program should be added to the curriculum of all journalism schools. From the very beginning, Stewart ripped into the famous bickerers and was unrelenting throughout. In the belly of the beast, Stewart accused them of being pawns to the politicians and corporations adding “…You’re part of their strategies. You are partisan…what do you call it…hacks.” He lamented that they are doing “…theater when you should be doing debate.” When Tucker Carlson belittled him by suggesting that he get a job at a journalism school, Stewart replied saying “You need to go to one.” Most memorable, however, was Stewart’s response to Carlson’s insult that “… you’re more fun on your show. Just my opinion.” Stewart fired back “You’re as big a dick on your show as you are on any show.” The next episode of Crossfire had co-host Robert Novak coming to Carlson’s defense declaring that he thinks Stewart is not funny, and that he knows Stewart is uninformed. He did not say how he knows this. Maybe he disagrees with Stewart’s pet name for him: the Douche Bag of Liberty.

This kind of uncensored honesty is almost never seen in the conventional press. But maybe it is just what is needed now. USA Today reported last year that

“Public confidence in the media, already low, continues to slip. Only 36%, among the lowest in years, believe news organizations get the facts straight, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows.”

While esteem for the media is spiraling ever-lower, respect for The Daily Show continues to grow. It receives awards for both its humor and its news content. And it performs the function of a media watchdog, alerting us to the hypocrisy, collaboration, and contrivance of the corporate-dominated media.

If it seems depressingly ironic to you that the mainstream media is now being monitored and corrected by Comedy Central’s “fake” news, the only advice I have is to watch The Daily Show. It might cheer you up for at least half an hour.

The Simple Life

Posted by on September 7, 2004 at 10:27 pm. NO Comments :

The Simple Life

Coming this Fall on Fox

They’re rich. They’re sexy. They’re totally OUT-OF-CONTROL!

Be sure not to miss any of the outrageous antics as Jenna and Barbara try to fit in with the common folk. It’s a laugh riot that will leave you in stitches.

Next week’s episode: The Bush twins invade Iraq. Performing their patriotic duty, the girls enlist in the Air Force and, like their father, spend more time in the hot tub than in uniform. As daddy taught them, “If we don’t party over there they’ll bring the party here. And then we’ll have to clean up afterwards”

Only on FOX
[and on Crass Commerce]