Showing posts with label Arts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arts. Show all posts

03 July 2010

LITERATURE / 'Punto Final' : 'Adios' to Monsivais and Saramago

Carlos Monsivais (top), and Jose Saramago. Photos from el idiota de la familia, top, and La Nousfera.

Left writers as endangered species:
Adios to Carlos Monsivais and Jose Saramago


By John Ross / The Rag Blog / July 3, 2010

MEXICO CITY -- Jose Saramago and Carlos Monsivais, two writers who shared an enthusiasm for popular struggle and a mutual disaffection with the Catholic Church, were buried a few Sundays ago amidst tumultuous public acclaim.

Saramago, the first writer in the Portuguese language to win the Nobel Prize for Literature, drew tens of thousands of mourners in Lisbon, as did Monsivais in his beloved Mexico City, a megalopolis whose foibles he chronicled for a half a century.

Although the two writers held much in common -- they were both writers of conviction and commitment, Quijotes who tilted at the windmills of power -- they were hardly peas in a pod.

Immaculately dressed even when visiting tropical jungles, Saramago was tall and almost gaunt -- only a profound sadness saved him from generalized dourness. Monsi, as he was universally pet-named around here, was short and bumptious and rumpled. So far as can be determined, Monsivais was never photographed wearing a necktie.

If one were casting them for a play it would have to be Samuel Beckett's Waiting For Godot with Saramago in the role of Vladimir (played by the master character actor E.G. Marshall in the original Broadway production) and Estragon, portrayed by the comic Bert Lahr, "the Cowardly Lion," both of them stranded at a crossroads in time pondering Godot's arrival or fretful that he (she?) may have passed by before they even got there.

Saramago was not even his name. Like his father, he was a Souza, born in 1922 in the impoverished Portuguese farming town of Azingha. As the writer lovingly recalled it in The Small Memories, his father had acquired the nickname of "Saramago," a wild radish with which poor farmers fed the bellies of their families when times were tough on the land which they always were, and when the writer's father went to City Hall to register the birth of his new son, town officials ascribed him the surname of Saramago. It fit.

Jose Saramago grew like dry grass, bereft and barefoot. There were no books in his home and no Nobel in his future. His first novel with the flaming title of Tierra de Pecado ("Land Of Sin") appeared in the post-World War II rush and achieved little notoriety. He did not publish again for 30 years and then inexplicably exploded, producing 32 volumes in the two decades he had left on earth.

The Year of The Death of Ricardo Reis, which put him on the literary map in 1985, is in fact his only screed in which he confronts the Salazar dictatorship that kept Portugal in chains from 1926 through 1974, the longest ruling tyranny in Europe, eventually overthrown in the Revolution of Los Claveles ("The Carnations").

For decades, Saramago was a militant of the clandestine Portuguese Communist Party, often blacklisted and dodging Salazar's secret police. But Jose Saramago had little taste for ideological palaver, considering himself an "hormonal communist," an identity he fiercely maintained until he breathed his last at 87 June 18th in Lanzarote, the Canary Islands, where he lived blissfully with his translator and collaborator Pilar del Rio in self-imposed exile.

Saramago abandoned Portugal in a moment of pique after a right-wing government, at the behest of the Catholic Church (which despised the writer) refused to nominate his Gospel According To Jesus Christ for an important European literary prize. In Saramago's Gospel, Jesus, in the throes of the Crucifixion, denounces God's crimes against the people.

The volume earned Saramago eternal damnation by the Catholic hierarchy, which never wearied of describing the writer as "a noxious weed who has placed himself in the wheat fields of the Evangelization." The Church, the Nobelist complained, had even denied him the right to speak with god -- even if he believed god did not exist.

Similarly, Carlos Monsivais was deemed an acute thorn in the side of the Mexican Church and the pompous, all-powerful Cardinal of Mexico City Norberto Rivera whom he lampooned without mercy. Raised in a Protestant family, Monsi suffered the brunt of Catholic intolerance and never missed a chance to strip bare the Church's fork-tongued moral message.

"I am a communist everywhere but in Mexico, I am a Zapatista," Jose Saramago proclaimed with pride when he touched down here in 1998, his Nobel Year. The Portuguese laureate won the hearts of many Mexicans when he traveled twice to Chiapas to meet with the Zapatista rebels in defiance of President Ernesto Zedillo who threatened the writer's arrest and deportation under Article 33 of the Mexican Constitution that provides for the removal of any non-Mexican the president deems "inconvenient."

"If we don't go to where the pain and the indignation are, we are not alive," Saramago protested. "We are compelled to go to Chiapas, the center of the pain, and look into the eyes of the Indians, the survivors of all the massacres of history." When stopped by soldiers at a roadblock in Chenalho, Saramago stood tall: "I am going to visit the Zapatistas. It my right and my obligation."

Accompanied by Monsivais, Saramago canoodled with Subcomandante Marcos and visited the village of Acteal soon after 45 Tzotzil Indians had been massacred by paramilitaries trained and armed by the Mexican army. As he hunkered down with the farmers to hear the stories of their Via Cruces, his long, grave face darkened and Saramago's kindly features seemed to absorb all the pain of the people.

In 2001, the Nobelist returned to Mexico to welcome Marcos and the Comandancia of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EXLN) to the capitol. As the huge Zocalo plaza filled with "the people the color of the earth," Saramago, a kerchief of solidarity knotted around his throat, mounted to the roof of Mexico City City Hall to display his jubilation. But later, the writer would chastise Marcos for his poison pen attacks on Spanish judge Baltazar Garzon.

Jose Saramago stood with the wretched of Fanon's earth, always at the ready to express his solidarity with those the rulers single out for punishment, whether it be the Saharan activist Aminatu Haidar, starving herself to death at the Tenerife airport because Moroccan authorities would not let her return to her homeland (his final political act) or with the Palestinian people -- Saramago was designated persona non grata in Israel after decrying the treatment the Zionists inflicted on the Palestinians as a holocaust of the dimensions the Jews had suffered under the Nazis.

Carlos Monsivais, an indefatigueable "cronista" of pop culture and its intersection with social struggle, broke into the business as a teenage participant in the watershed 1968 student strike at the National Autonomous University (UNAM) in which hundreds were slaughtered by the military in the days before the Olympic Games were to begin. Along with his longtime co-conspirator Elena Poniatowska's Noche De Tlatelolco, Monsi's Dias De Guardar ("Days To Treasure" - 1971) denounced this act of genocide before the world.

Carlos Monsivais's identification with the barrios and colonias of this monstrous metropolis (he himself lived practically all of his life in the San Simon barrio of the working class Portales Colonia) was the truth serum that validated his chronicles of civil society. In his No Sin Nosotros ("Not Without Us") Monsi's words animated the civic uprising that emerged from the ashes of the 1985 8.1 killer earthquake that felled tens of thousands here.

Carlos Monsivais was a self-confessed addict of "lost causes" (a Mexico City university once honored him with a Doctorus of Lost Causes), a Quijote-like figment who embraced every social movement to flex its fist from the 1959 railroad workers strike to gay liberation.

A disciplined, stylish writer whose baroque syntax sometimes confounded critics, Monsivais authored 50 books in 50 years, many defending popular culture against the MacDonaldization of post-NAFTA Mexico -- read his final judgment in the just-published Apocalipstick. Untranslated and virtually untranslatable because his chronicles are so focused on the little things, Monsivais remains largely ignored north of the border.

Like Saramago, Monsi was fascinated by the Zapatista rebellion, penning the prologues to five volumes of EZLN documents but later quarreled with Marcos over the Sup's gung-ho support for "ultras" who took over the 1999-2000 UNAM strike.

Although once a member of the Young Communist League, Monsi was mostly a Groucho Marxist. Unlike his Portuguese comrade, Monsivais, a critic of the cult of Fidel and Che, was not an aficionado of the Cuban revolution. Instead he walked the twisty walk of Mexican social democrats like Cuauhtemoc Cardenas in whose foiled 1988 presidential campaign he immersed himself.

Monsi often spoke his truth from the podiums during Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's 2006 bid for the presidency, thwarted by Felipe Calderon and the right-wing PAN in the most fraud-mired Mexican election yet. Monsi later split with AMLO, decrying the inconveniences forced upon motorists during the left candidate's three-week occupation of Reforma Boulevard.

Carlos Monsivais neither owned nor drove an automobile.

One of the few writers with face recognition on the streets of the city (dixit poet and pal Jose Emilio Pacheco), the sudden demise of Monsivais's weekly assemblage of the absurdist stupidities of Mexico's political class, "Por Mi Madre, Bohemios" (a poem his mother loved), will leave a profound pothole in the street life of Mexican journalism.

Carlos Monsivais died young enough to have been my contemporary (indeed, I was six weeks' his senior) from pulmonary fibrosis, a disease that turns one's lungs to cardboard. The cause of death is attributed to (a) Mexico City's unbreathable air; (b) Monsi's 20 beloved cats, one of whom once pissed on the world's richest man Carlos Slim (Monsi's family claims the cats killed him); (c) the dust and spores of antiquarian books for which the writer had an unquenchable Jones. Monsi did not smoke or drink anything more damaging to his health than jeroboams of Coca Cola.

Funerals and wakes with the "corpus presente" are organized quickly in Latin America. The climate contributes to quick spoilage and death is such a familiar feature of everyday life that when someone passes, everyone knows just what to do.

Hours after Monsi had gasped his last June 19th, friends and admirers gathered at the Museum of the City. "Viva Monsis!" echoed through the gloomy old building and white flowers showered his coffin. Mariachis tootled his favorite "rancheras" and "boleros" and writers reminisced into the dawn about their Monsi connection. Here's mine:

A year or so after the great Mexico City earthquake that had brought me back here, I jumped into a car with Carlos Monsivais, Hector Garcia, the consummate photographer of social strife in Mexico, and Feliciano Bejar, an eccentric sculptor, bon vivant, and early environmentalist.

We were headed to Veracruz to stop the start-up of Laguna Verde, Mexico's first and last thermo nuclear power plant. For five hours, the three artists meticulously reviewed every cantina "de mala muerte" (dive) in Mexico City, a virtual journey through the underbelly of this urban jungle I had only recently settled in.

Down in Jalapa Veracruz, Monsi schooled me in the ordering of a "Tampiquena", a slab of thin-sliced beef with intricate accessories that is a staple of northern Veracruz cuisine. I still can't lunch on a tampiquena without wondering if Monsi would approve.

Over the years, I consulted with the writer frequently on the social implications of the "damnificado" (earthquake victims') movement. We shared a mutual fascination for popular anti-heroes, masked wrestlers, and the narco lord Rafael Caro Quintero who once offered to pay off Mexico's $100 billion buck foreign debt.

In August 1994, we were both trapped beneath a sagging tent after a monumental rainstorm had ended the Zapatistas' Democratic National Convention deep in the Lacandon jungle. Herded into the only wooden structure on the premises, a rustic library filled with the books of Monsivais and Poniatowska, Carlos fell flat on his face and twisted his ankle painfully. When we finally raised him from the deepening muck, he was plastered with mud from scalp to socks "just like at Avandaro" (Mexico's Woodstock) he giggled.

Carlos Monsivais was blessed with peripheral vision -- "his chronicles put the marginal in the center" commented Salvador Novo, the chronicler of Mexico City life in whose footsteps young Monsi eagerly followed. Carlos Monsivais was a collector of things and people whose personal coterie included the likes of Tongolele, a pseudo Polynesian drum dancer (she was born Yolanda Montes in San Francisco), the roly-poly ranchera idol Juan Gabriel, aging sex kitten Gloria Trevi, and the hardcore feminist torch singers Chavela Vargas and Paquita La del Barrio ("Rata De Dos Patas").

An obsessive bibliophile and tchotchke collector, Monsi prowled the flea markets of La Merced and the Lagunilla for political and pop culture memorabilia and when his Colonia Portales' home became so cluttered with exotic bric-a-brac, he opened a museum, "El Museo del Estanquillo" (a sort of neighborhood general store), in a handsome colonial building just down the street from my rooms in the old quarter of the city.

The Estanquillo is now filled with artifacts like Mexican lottery cards, Diego Rivera's "Dream of Sunday on the Alameda" entirely fashioned from toothpicks, Spencer Tunick's photos of 17,000 naked chilangos (Mexico City residents), comic books featuring the down-at-the-heels Family Burron, Zapatista dolls, facsimile Adelitas (women soldiers in the Mexican revolution), the words to popular corridos (ballads), and reportedly an x-ray of Emiliano Zapata's skull. Dead or alive, Monsi continues to thrive just down Isabel la Catolica Street.

Although Carlos Monsivais was an ardent crusader for gay, lesbian, and transgender rights, he himself was barely out of the closet, never publicly professing his sexual preferences. Nonetheless, he was an apostle of the nation's gay liberation movement and at the official state lying-in under the rotunda at the Bellas Artes fine arts palace, when Calderon's cultural czarina Consuelo Saizar draped a Mexican flag over Monsi's bier, his disciples laid the rainbow flag representing sexual diversity on top of it, inciting momentary scandal.

The incident recalled Frida Kahlo's farewell in this same spot in 1954 when the painter's devotees rolled out a red flag with an embossed hammer and sickle upon it to the horror of Mexico's then toxically anti-communist president (Monsi had been a witness).

Felipe Calderon himself failed to attend Carlos Monsivais's funeral, perhaps because his nemesis Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was programmed to appear at the same hour. At the marking of Frida's centennial three years ago, Lopez Obrador's supporters chased the neophyte president across the esplanade of Bellas Artes, shouting "Frida Belongs To The Left!" and necessitating military intervention.

Inside the rococo palace, the crowd chanted Monsi's name and clenched fists shot up from wall to wall - Benito Juarez's theme song "La Paloma" replaced "The Internationale." When it was suggested that Monsivais be carried off to lie in state in the great Zocalo plaza where dozens of members of the Mexican Electricity Workers Union were in the 60th day of a hunger strike protesting Calderon's privatization of electricity generation, Saizar and Education Secretary Alfonso Lujambio quickly loaded the writer's corpse into a hearse and drove it non-stop to the incineration ovens at the Spanish Cemetery.

The next noon at a celebration of Monsivais's life mounted by the capitol's left government, Poniatowska poignantly asked how the city would survive without its cronista? To add a kitsch touch to the ceremonials that certainly would have tickled Monsi's funny bone, dozens of Hari Krishnas appeared on the steps of the Theater of the City, to chant and to dance for the writer's lively spirit.

Neither Jose Saramago nor Carlos Monsivais were much invested in the afterlife. "First you are here and then you are not," the Portuguese Nobelist considered. When queried about what came next, Saramago described the process as "Nada. Punto." ("Nothing. Period.")

Saramago and Monsivais were joined in death by another of Mexico's premium left writers, Carlos Montemayor, whose ashes were stashed in his native Parral Chihuahua, Pancho Villa's one-time place of rest, on the same Sunday (June 20th) that tens of thousands saw off his contemporaries in Mexico City and Lisbon.

Montemayor's novels of Mexico's guerrilla movements, including his masterpiece War In Paradise, remain achingly pertinent today. The Chihuahua writer's analysis of the Zapatista struggle is perhaps the most penetrating study of that indigenous uprising.

Fluent in dozens of native languages, Montemayor translated Indian poets from all over Latin America and Mexico in addition to publishing translations of Sephardic literature, and the works of Virgil, Sappho, and the Carmina Burana (he performed as an operatic tenor). Carlos Montemayor's passing along with Saramago and Monsivais underscores just how endangered a species left writers have become in this age of scoundrels, hacks, and Pharisees.

[John Ross has lived in Mexico City for the past quarter of a century. His El Monstruo: Dread and Redemption in Mexico City ("gritty and pulsating" -- the New York Post) describes this difficult passage. You can register your complaints and/or admiration at johnross@igc.org.]

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

31 October 2009

Photographer Roy DeCarava : 'The Sound I Saw'

Photographer Roy DeCarava. Photo by triggahappy76 / Flickr.

Roy DeCarava : 1919-2009
Photographer Roy DeCarava, who died Oct. 27 at age 89, dedicated his 60-year career to capturing images of African Americans. His subjects ranged from daily life in his hometown of Harlem to the Civil Rights movement, but his most noted work featured photographs of jazz greats like Duke Ellington, Thelonious Monk, Billie Holiday and Louis Armstrong...

The first black photographer to win a Guggenheim Fellowship, DeCarava was also awarded the National Medal of Arts... In 1996, his work was the subject of a major traveling retrospective organized by the Museum of Modern Art in New York City.

NPR / October 30, 2009
"pepsi," 1964. Photo by Roy DeCarava.

The Sound I Saw:
Photography from a black point of view


By Carl R. Hultberg / The Rag Blog / October 31, 2009

Pictures of a man leaving the subway, of a saxophone, a black woman’s face. John Coltrane. Langston Hughes. The black New York City photographer who captured this Harlem history in its latter heyday was Roy DeCarava.

Educated at Cooper Union, and struggling to survive working as an illustrator, Mr. DeCarava always managed to find time to photograph ordinary life in his neighborhood. Whether it was the murky view out a dirty window from a cheap room, or the iconic image of a (now) Jazz Giant, Roy had a way of ennobling everything he snapped. But not in the usual style of strictly European art based traditions or sentimentality. It was as if the simple objects portrayed were the same as the faces of the people, of the Jazz musicians -- all possessing a story to tell.

What Roy DeCarava accomplished, and what we now take for granted, is a black point of view. What English word do we use to describe this type of vision? Good question. Perhaps it is better that it doesn’t have a name like “Soul” that could be easily turned into advertising copy and lose all meaning. What Roy DeCarava photographed was the tenderness and quiet pride flowing through everyday Harlem life, the smoldering Jazz solo across a smoke filled club, the structural beauty of a black person’s face.

Included in the seminal photo collection The Family of Man (1955), DeCarava was still mostly intolerant of the white art world. Although he received a Guggenheim Grant in 1952, Roy felt no need to acknowledge that art world or participate in the mainstream art scene. Instead he turned his own apartment in Harlem into a gallery for a few years, exhibiting the work of other art photographers. Instead of working for Life Magazine full time like black photo pioneer Gordon Parks, Roy DeCarava sponsored a protest against the publication.

Roy was also a great photography teacher (at Hunter College), sending hundreds of student camera eyes out into the streets in search of poetic truth. Roy DeCaravara’s great cultural accomplishment was to equate black street life with black Jazz, seemingly in an effort to ensure that one would not rise without the other. It was all about timing, whether it was Jazz, or Photography, or Life.

Asked what he saw in the Jazz performance that made it like photography he said: "I improvise. Improvisation is all about individual interpretations, individual expression. And that's what I'm doing." He also said: “in between that one-fifteenth of a second, there is a thickness.” That was a poet speaking. Roy DeCarava passed on this week, but his photographs are still telling their simple eloquent stories of black life.

Also see:The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

30 October 2009

Paul Baker : Giant of Texas Theater Dies at 98

Paul Baker in front of Dallas Theater Center, designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, 1960. Photo by Eliot Elisofon / Life Images.

Giant of Texas theater Paul Baker:
Director, educator, firebrand dies at 98
See 'Paul Baker at Baylor: A student remembers,' by Jim Simons, Below.
Texas has lost one of its legendary artistic mavericks: Theater pioneer Paul Baker died Sunday [October. 25, 2009] of complications from pneumonia at his Central Texas ranch.

Mr. Baker, 98, was the founding artistic director of the Dallas Theater Center, which he led for 23 of its 50 years. His unconventional ideas about education nurtured such playwrights as Preston Jones, and his students have been among the most influential Dallas arts leaders...

Mr. Baker was also known for his mercurial moods and his practical jokes. Actor Charles Laughton, whom he directed in the 1950s, called him "crude, irritating, arrogant, nuts and a genius..."
While a professor at Baylor University in the 1950s, Mr. Baker attracted national attention with his experimental productions. His national profile caused Dallas theater backers to invite him to set the initial course for the city's leading theatrical institution. He worked with master architect Frank Lloyd Wright on the design of the Theater Center's home for its first 50 years, the Kalita Humphreys Theater. [This would be Wright’s last building.]

Controversy always lurked near Mr. Baker. In 1963, Baylor University asked him to omit language the school objected to from Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey Into Night. He, his wife, Kitty (who taught mathematics at the Baptist-affiliated university), and his entire staff resigned -- but immediately set up an even bigger shop at Trinity University, by then in San Antonio.

Lawson Taitte / Dallas Morning News

In the 1950s, Baker invented revolutionary arts training known as “integration of abilities,” which won the attention of theater artists around the world...

...Baker made a crucial voyage to England, Germany, Russia and Japan to observe theater. Insights from this trip helped form a new Baylor theater, Studio One, which placed the audience in swivel chairs embraced by six stages. Over the next decades, Baker would contribute to 10 other Texas theater designs that positioned the dramatic action around the halls, rather than on a 19th century-style picture frame stage.

Michael Barnes / Austin American-Statesman

From left, Burgess Meredith, director Paul Baker, and Charles Laughton at rehearsal for Hamlet, Baylor University. Photo by Myron Davis / Time & Life Pictures /Getty Images.
Paul Baker at Baylor:
A student remembers


By Jim Simons / The Rag Blog / October 30, 2009

In my one year at Baylor University in the late ‘50s, I was not impressed by the quality of education or the professors. Even so, my best college professor at the three universities I attended may well have been Paul Baker at Baylor.

I took two courses he taught: Beginning Playwriting and Introduction to the Creative Process. I quickly confirmed I was no playwright in the making. My heavy-handed play, laden with obvious symbolism and self-consciously intellectual dialogue, earned me a C, generous at that. But the other course was one of the best I ever encountered in
Texas academe. We studied all kinds of art -- literature, painting (I wrote a paper on Joan Miro), architecture, dance and music in one electrifying semester.

It was the process of creating art that Baker was after. We read what artists themselves had written in letters or essays about their work. We read their works (literature) and the analyses of critics. It was, as you can tell, a lot of work. Work undertaken willingly and enthusiastically. In class Professor Baker lectured in his roving and animated style and he brought in a few of the people we studied to lecture in person. Luckily, all my other courses were a cakewalk and so I made an A in this scintillating class.

At the time I did not realize how truly marvelous this course, or Baker himself, was. It was only years later that I came to view this as a significant part of my education. Day dreaming in law school as the teacher droned on about the Statute of Uses or Texas land titles, I found my mind going back to things we learned from Baker, or more accurately, with Baker. His mind seemed always sweeping over the familiar (to him) material and finding new insights which clearly delighted him. He was equally delighted if one of the lunks seated in the Baylor Theater where the class was held came upon a revelation.

At the time it was said that there were about three avowed liberals on the Baylor faculty. I believe Paul Baker was one of them. I knew my great debate coach, Glenn Capp, was one of them and I had heard that Dr. A.J. Armstrong of the English Department (and his wife Anne) completed the courageous Baylor triumvirate. There might have been a few other pretenders or, as we said in other contexts, “LBJ liberals,” not unlike what Sam Rayburn said of Dixiecrats, they were like "new antiques." (Of course, Rayburn never said that of his close ally, Lyndon.)

I was shocked to see that the story about Paul Baker’s death at age 98 that ran in the Austin paper failed to even mention Baker’s resignation from Baylor in 1963 over the attempt to censor a play at the Baylor Theater. I wondered whether Baylor University had succeeded in whitewashing history?

In 1963 Paul Baker mounted a production of Eugene O’Neill’s “Long Days Journey Into Night” at Baylor Theater and, if I recall, got to perform it once before Baptist ministers in Waco and others incensed by its language and themes put up a righteous howl, as Baptists do so well. Then president of Baylor Abner McCall ordered Baker to excise all the “bad language” and some of the improper themes before going on with the production.

Baker resigned rather than accede to this demand. Virtually the entire Drama Department, including its graduate students, also resigned. Many followed Baker to Trinity University in San Antonio where he kept teaching and producing plays. His principled stand at Baylor had only enlarged the gigantic stature of this man in my eyes.

A few years ago, perhaps in the ‘90s, I saw Paul Baker again when he appeared at the Hyde Park Theater in Austin to support a play written and performed in by Ken Webster. Did I actually speak to Baker and stumblingly try to tell him how he had lit up my young mind back at Baylor University four decades ago? Or, did I so vividly imagine my encounter with him that I had come to believe my fantasy? I am honestly not sure. I hope I did at least try to tell him what he meant to the education of one kid at Baylor.

Growing up in Waco in the ‘40s I had gotten the idea that Baylor was the pinnacle of the college experience, an experience no one else in my family had. Hence, after my freshman year at SMU, I jumped at the full debate scholarship offered to me by Prof Capp (as he was known by all) and took up residence in old Brooks Hall, a gothic five story men’s dormitory without elevators, now gone, replaced by a gleaming 21st century dorm.

Unfortunately, not all of our youthful ideas survive a reality check. Baylor did not live up to the idea I had of it from living in Waco and rooting for the football team on Saturdays when my long dead father took me to the games. Some of the fondest memories of my life. As a student at Baylor in 1958, even I could see how narrow and parochial the school was and how limited its horizons in assessing the human condition through great literature and science. Diversity was something strenuously resisted and so the intellectual climate there was stifling.

Some five years before the dustup that drove Paul Baker away, I left Waco to take up residence at the Campus Guild Coop on the campus of the big state university in Austin. Home at last. But the part of Baylor I took with me was what I learned three hours a week in Paul Baker’s course, perhaps the best one I had in my checkered college life.

The season has been marked by the shaking of the earth as giants have fallen. Before word of Paul Baker there was another giant who passed. The great American and Texas jurist William Wayne Justice was also taken away. It is likely that they never met each other even though close in age. But both men affected my life and the lives of so many others.

[Civil rights lawyer and activist Jim Simons wrote Molly Chronicles: Serotonin Serenade, a memoir about movement law and radical poitics in Sixties Austin.]

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

04 March 2009

Stimulus Bill Continues Tradition : No Funding for LGBT Arts Groups

San Francisco Lesbian/Gay Freedom Band during "christening" of the Pink Triangle on Twin Peaks in 2008. Photo by Bill Wilson © 2008 / San Francisco Sentinel>
After more than 40 years of business as usual, will the NEA be able to perpetuate its Eurocentric and anti-LGBT biases under a mixed-race President?
By Jeff Jones / The Rag Blog / March 4, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO -- The National Endowment for the Arts will receive $50 million as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 signed by President Obama on Feb. 17, 2009. Since the Robert Mapplethorpe controversy almost 20 years ago, the NEA has refused to fund out-of–the-closet LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) arts organizations. The agency’s recently released eligibility requirements for Stimulus funding ensure that the NEA’s ongoing censorship of LGBT arts groups will continue: they exclude organizations that have not been funded by NEA during the past four years.

Since the Bush administration’s NEA did not fund LGBT arts groups and only paid lip-service to diversity, most Stimulus-funded grants are expected to be funneled to the nation’s symphonies, operas and ballets (the SOBs); these groups already receive the lion’s share of government arts funds and serve almost exclusively affluent white audiences.

While the NEA’s failure to financially support the nation’s cultural diversity stretches back to its founding during the LBJ era, the agency’s anti-LGBT zeal hit its zenith during the Clinton administration, when his appointee—Jane Alexander—personally censored every LGBT grant recommended for funding by the agency’s peer panelists. The NEA’s largest grant program “Access to Artistic Excellence” illustrates the agency’s overall Eurocentric and anti-LGBT bias: in the last two rounds of funding, this NEA category awarded 1479 grants worth more than $34,000,000, but less than 10% were awarded to arts groups rooted in communities of color and not a single grant was awarded to an out-of-the-closet LGBT arts organization.

After more than 40 years of business as usual, will the NEA be able to perpetuate its Eurocentric and anti-LGBT biases under a mixed-race President? Will the NEA’s blatantly discriminatory policies be challenged along with Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? Will the NEA continue to spend millions of dollars funding Madame Butterfly instead of supporting the hundreds of community-based arts projects taking place across the country that promote social justice? More soon on this developing story.

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

08 January 2009

FILM / Indie Beat: Hot Amnesia Babe Meets Mexican Mennonites

Charlotte Fich and Anders W. Bertelsen in "Just Another Love Story," left, and Maria Pankratz in "Silent Light." Photo courtesy of salon.com.

'The movies that are most daring and strange -- and often the most extraordinary -- don't get much of a shot.'
By Andrew O'Hehir / January 8, 2008

After years of covering the indie-film beat, I'm pretty well convinced of the dogma that drives the business: The audience for art-house films is still out there, no smaller or larger than it ever was. But it's carved up differently, and the demands on its attention are far more various than they were in the days when reverent big-city throngs lined up for the latest Bergman or Fellini flick.

Basically, the movies that are most daring and strange -- and often the most extraordinary -- don't get much of a shot. They have to stop off in a few theaters on the way to video-on-demand or DVD, because otherwise people like me don't pay attention and the public never hears about them at all. But outside the world of movie bloggers and their readership (hi, guys!), even films that might have provoked furious debate 20 or 30 years ago will just come and go, momentary blips on a bewildering radar screen.

Consider the cases of two movies about adultery, the Danish thriller "Just Another Love Story" and the Mexican rural drama "Silent Light," pictures that were rapturously received on the 2008 festival circuit. Whatever their virtues and flaws, they're both arresting and accomplished films that evince a visionary sensibility, reject ordinary storytelling forms and seek to take the viewer on an unpredictable journey. I'd recommend both to any serious film buff. Both are getting quickie releases in Manhattan theaters this week, with some wider release (but not much) to follow. If you don't live in New York or L.A., very likely your next chance to see them will be in your living room. So it goes these days.

As you may have surmised, the title of writer-director Ole Bornedal's "Just Another Love Story" is meant to be ironic. Bornedal has made a bloody, showoffy, self-mocking noir, the kind of movie that presumes nothing good ever comes of two people falling in love. It's narrated by Jonas (Anders W. Bertelsen), whom we see in the opening shot lying prostrate in the rain on a Copenhagen street, evidently bleeding to death. A blond woman arrives to moan and shriek over him, but he isn't impressed. "The woman," he tells us in tones of resignation. "There's always a woman."

Actually, the blond shrieking woman isn't the woman. Instead she's his long-suffering wife, Mette (Charlotte Fich), whom he abandoned some months earlier to go live with the sultry and mysterious Julia (Rebecka Hemse), renegade heiress to a publishing fortune. You see, it's no wonder Jonas finds himself dying in the street, since he's violated at least three of the cardinal rules of the film-noir universe: Never leave your wife for the Other Woman; never take the suitcase that doesn't belong to you; and never pretend to be someone you're not.

Punishment awaits those who break those rules, of course, and Bornedal's task is to make all those forbidden fruits completely irresistible to Jonas and bring him full circle, from dying in the street to upstanding family man and back to, well, dying in the street. "Just Another Love Story" is a monumentally implausible tale told with a bravura array of flashbacks, flash-forwards, dream sequences and slo-mo incidents, and involving a beautiful woman suffering from both amnesia and blindness, an undead boyfriend, a mysterious fellow wrapped in mummy-style bandages, and a suicide pact in a Hanoi junkie hotel.

When Jonas' piece-of-crap car stalls out on the highway, with wife and kids aboard, Julia swerves to avoid it and nearly dies in a head-on collision. She's just arriving from Frankfurt, where she got off a plane from Vietnam, where she was fleeing a poisonous relationship with a boyfriend named Sebastian (Nikolaj Lie Kaas), whom she met in Asia. But her super-rich family have never met this mysterious paramour, and when Jonas shows up at the hospital to check on the comatose Julia, they all assume that he's Sebastian. Within minutes he's been assigned to kiss her and murmur in her ear, bathe her naked body with a loofah glove, and accept a blank check tucked into his pocket by Julia's publishing-magnate papa.

Look, I said it was ridiculous. Of course when Julia wakes up she can't see anything and doesn't remember the real Sebastian anyway (who has reportedly been murdered in Hanoi) and, hey, Jonas has gotten kind of bored with life with Mette and the kids anyway. Work all week, shop on Saturday, have some friends over to dinner -- why not chuck all that away and shack up with blind, ultra-rich amnesia-babe, anyway? As you have figured out by now, there are many reasons why not, and those all come together in a crashing finale.

You could call "Just Another Love Story" nothing more than an exercise in style, but A) Bornedal's got style to burn and B) that's not quite fair. Beneath all the dazzling cinematography, propulsive score and overcommitted acting, I found this movie an affecting, mordant comedy about male midlife crisis in its most extreme form. As Jonas observes to his best friend -- who's eager to get his paws on Mette, if Jonas doesn't want her -- his own behavior makes him sick. Which doesn't mean he can stop.

Mexican director Carlos Reygadas -- a one-time attorney who reinvented himself as an art-cinema auteur -- also has a flair for opening shots. His last film, "Battle in Heaven," began by bringing us up close and personal with a punk-hippie chick administering an enthusiastic blow job to a remarkably ugly man. In "Silent Light" he goes in a somewhat different direction; the film opens with a six-minute shot of the night sky gradually giving way to dawn, accompanied by a chorus of birds and insects (and ends with a similar shot in reverse, as evening moves into night). It's amazingly beautiful and it tests your patience; both things are par for the course with Reygadas, After that, you've either surrendered to his idiosyncratic sense of rhythm, or you're out of there.

Unlike Bornedal, Reygadas has no interest in mimicking or tweaking conventional film genres. Despite the in-your-face sexuality of his earlier films, they're ambiguous and nearly plotless dramas featuring nonprofessional actors and long, contemplative takes, whose roots lie in the cinema of Andrei Tarkovsky or Abbas Kiarostami. "Silent Light" both departs and does not depart from Reygadas' pattern. There's no explicit sex at all, but the setting and subject are certainly peculiar. This is presumably the first Mexican film ever made that isn't in Spanish, as well as the first film from any nation made in Plautdietsch, a Germanic language or dialect spoken (at least in recent centuries) only by isolated communities of Mennonites.

I don't know how in the world Reygadas recruited Mennonites from the Mexican state of Chihuahua -- where about 50,000 Plautdietsch-speakers still hang on -- to act in his film. I don't even know how many of them have ever seen a film. (Unlike their Amish brethren in the United States, the Mexican Mennonites do not universally reject modern technology, but I doubt that movies play a large role in their lives.) Regardless, the results are astonishing. "Silent Light" brings us intimately into the private world of this esoteric society without ever feeling like ethnography or gawkery; at the risk of cliché, this prodigiously atmospheric fable of love and faith feels both timeless and modern. Reygadas deliberately evokes biblical parable and Bergman's "The Virgin Spring," but also features a wonderful scene where two men work on an old Chevy pickup and sing along to a norteno hit on the radio.

Like "Battle in Heaven," "Silent Light" is at least nominally about an individual's internal moral struggle. Johan (Cornelio Wall), the taciturn father and husband in a Mennonite farm family, has conceived a powerful romantic passion for Marianne (Maria Pankratz), who runs a coffee shop in the nearest town. Johan is too upstanding not to tell his wife, Esther (Miriam Toews), everything, including the fact that he has physically transgressed their marriage vows. For her part, Esther seems determined to bear it all in silence. Advised by a friend that his love for Marianne may be sacred in nature, and by his father (played by Wall's actual father) that it's "the work of the Enemy," Johan is trapped by indecision, which leads first to tragedy and then to miraculous sacrifice and transfiguration.

But as usual with Reygadas, the story accounts for maybe one-quarter of the film's impact and meaning. His spectacular, ultra-long takes focused on the rituals and details of rural life each become their own little movie, animated by the interaction between the dramatic Chihuahua landscape and the faces and figures of these handsome, stoical people. Are Wall and Pankratz and Toews "acting," in the normal sense? It's tough to say. There's a scene when Johan and his children go for a swim, clad in Mennonite long underwear, in their homemade outdoor pool that's among the most gorgeous things I've ever seen in a motion picture. It isn't fiction but also isn't exactly documentary, and it has a passion and mystery and immanent vitality that, for my money, outstrips the film's somewhat forced conclusion.

"Just Another Love Story" opens Jan. 9 at Cinema Village in New York, with other cities and DVD release to follow. "Silent Light" is now playing at Film Forum in New York, with other cities to follow.

Source / salon.com

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

29 August 2008

Burning Man : Snail Car Is Born When Math, Dreams Collide

John Sarriugarte, a blacksmith and fire artist, makes adjustments to the flame-emitting feelers on the front of The Golden Mean, his snail-shaped art car. Photo by Emily Lang.

Kyrsten Mate woke up and said, 'We have to build this giant snail'
By Emily Lang / August 29, 2008

OAKLAND, California -- In a project that would make Franz Kafka grin, a 30-year-old bug has metamorphosed into a snail. The resulting creation, an art car called The Golden Mean, is a golden gastropod that glows in the dark and shoots rings of fire from its feelers. It also seats six comfortably.

Blacksmith John Sarriugarte, who fabricates custom home furnishings, worked with his wife, Kyrsten Mate, to transform a 1966 VW Bug into the rolling piece of art. The Golden Mean is making its debut at the Burning Man art festival this year.

Mate says she literally dreamed up the concept.

"I woke up and said, 'We have to build this giant snail,'" she said. "It totally wasn't planned. This whole project has been weird coincidences and math."

The visually stunning vehicle takes its name from the golden ratio, a mathematical proportion that's said to produce aesthetically pleasing art and architecture. The spiral in the snail's shell is shockingly close to the ratio. Other inspirations for the project include the giant pink snail from Doctor Dolittle, giant mechanical elephant puppets by Royal de Luxe and Jules Verne's imaginative creations.

For a peek at last-minute preparations that took place in Sarriugarte's Form & Reform shop before Golden Mean headed off for its date with the playa, go here.

Source / Wired

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

21 June 2008

Jazz : The Colossus


Sonny Rollins, Take One
By Ishmael Reed

Bebop was my generation’s hip-hop. It was more than a pastime; it was an obsession. I used to play trombone with bebop groups. When I turned sixty, I enrolled in Berkeley’s Jazz School, where I studied with jazz pianist Susan Muscarella for nearly five years. I’ve continued with jazz pianist Mary Watkins. When I met Max Roach, I thanked him for keeping me out of reform school; we were too busy listening to bop to get into trouble. We’d spend hours at each others’ homes listening to the latest recordings. We dressed like beboppers. We were clean. We went around looking like Gregory Peck in The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. Our idea of a party was where they’d play “Moody’s Mood for Love.” We knew all the words.

Bebop musicians didn’t walk. They came at you, dancing. When Sonny Rollins descended from his studio after our interview, he was wearing this great greenish raincoat that hit him near the ankles. Rollins, who had turned sixty-six when this interview took place, said that when he was a teenager, he was impressed with the way an older trumpet player shined his shoes. Beboppers were sharp, and we were their acolytes.

Theodore Walter “Sonny” Rollins first picked up the sax in 1944 as a sophomore in high school. By the 1950s he had come into his own, playing tenor with a variety of all-time jazz greats, including Art Blakey, Bud Powell, Thelonious Monk and Miles Davis. When he left the Max Roach Quintet in 1957, Rollins created his own unique trio (sax, bass and drums) that spotlighted the versatility of his solos and hard bop style. Several years later, in an attempt to regain inspiration in his playing, he stopped recording and began practicing regularly while walking along New York’s Williamsburg Bridge; his triumphant return took place in 1962 with an album titled simply The Bridge.

Rollins’ early recording styles show him developing what would become the Rollins style: a broad repertoire including blues, standards and even spirituals and an intense devotion to melody. No matter how abstract his solos become, one is always mindful of the tune with which he started out—a trait he shares with Thelonious Monk.

Though jazz solos may sound spontaneous, many are rehearsed and memorized. Some musicians are still recycling solos originated by Charlie “Bird” Parker. Rollins, on the other hand, is known for pure improvision. He has a dedicated following but fame in the United States has been slow to come. For some of the white critics, who form the largest segment of the fraternity of jazz critics, Rollins has an attitude. He is recognized as one of the first artists to make reference to the growing militancy of the 1960s with his Freedom Suite.

Both the Yoruba and biblical traditions hold that sometimes your worst adversary is inside your family—in this case, American fans and critics. The prophet is no honored in his own country. Abroad, though, it’s different. Rollins’ Saxophone Colossus is a best-seller in Japan, which he has visited nineteen times and where he has appeared in computer commercials. At seventy-six, he still continues his vigorous touring.

But Rollins doesn’t have to go anywhere, if he doesn’t want to. He’s come a long way since his mother bought him that first Zephyr tenor. He can kick around his Germantown, New York farm and continue to develop his music.

Rollins has accumulated a catalogue of close to fifty albums. More importantly, he’s one of the only surviving icons left from an era in jazz when genius was the norm and musicians like Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Thelonious Monk were not only changing music but also affecting black culture and American society. When members of my generation tried to break away from the linear forms of novel writing, we did so because we were trying to keep up with the musicians and painters. How would it look if I did some refried Faulkner and Hemingway, when I lived in a community on the Lower East Side that included Joe Overstreet, Sun Ra and Cecil Taylor? Kenny Dorham and I used to drink together at a dive named the Port of Call, and Albert Ayler and his brother were guests in my home. It’s appropriate that the central image of associated with Rollins is a bridge, because the beboppers, like the hip-hoppers, those who are not pushed into music that degrades by avaricious record producers, have established a bridge that reaches back thousands of years to the sound of the mother drum, the root of all black music. But sometimes it seems that in a white supremacist society, constantly on guard against minorities gaining the upper hand, even the creators of one form of homegrown music are denied credit for their invention. American Experience, on PBS, ran a program about the history of New Orleans. Based on the visuals, one would gain the impression that whites invented jazz. Photos of great black musicians like Jelly Roll Morton, Louis and Lil Armstrong, King Oliver and others roll by without the musicians being identified. All one has to do is notice the names associated with the production to realize the problem.

Reed: There aren’t many survivors from the great bebop revolution. Who is still left?

Rollins: Well, J.J. Johnson [who, since this interview, has died], Milt Jackson [died], Percy Heath [died], and his little brother Jimmy. There’s not many of us left. Art Farmer, who I guess would be about my age. Johnny Griffin. [Since the interview was conducted, bop pioneer Jackie MacLean also died.]

Reed: Do you guys have a survivor’s guild? (Laughter)

Rollins: No, we don’t have one. We should have something like that, ‘cause in the old days in Harlem, they used to have all these clubs and everyone would be together, to help guys. There should really be some kind of federation. But people just see each other now and then, you know.

Reed: You’ve said your mind is like a computer—you have different programs and you snatch from everyplace. Tin Pan Alley, country and western—very eclectic. Do you consider your music to be at all political or satirical, like poking fun at institutions that take themselves too seriously?

Rollins: Yeah, oh sure. Of course. I got a lot of criticism for The Freedom Suite, especially when I went down South on tour and we were playing mainly white colleges. A lot of people had me against the wall, asking, “What did you mean by that?”

Reed: We still get that with gangsta rap, and I remember the horrible things they used to say about bebop. When middle-class black people listened to bebop, they said the music was strange. They didn’t like the culture, they didn’t like the style; just a lot of hate.

Rollins: In a way, because of the guys in that day using drugs and stuff, they might have associated the music with that culture. So maybe I can cut them a little slack.

Reed: Let’s talk about the music here. One critic, Gunther Schuller, said that your method of playing, through melody rather than running harmonic changes, was a radical concept. What did he mean by that?

Rollins: I guess what he’s talking about is thematic improvisation. In other words, if I played “Mary Had a Little Lamb” [sings the melody], I might play for two hours from that same song, variations on that theme. What he meant was that I didn’t just play the melody of “Mary Had a Little Lamb” and go into the chord changes. I kept it as a theme. I think that’s what he meant. But at the time he wrote that, I didn’t know what he meant. I might have understood it, but it was so strange to have someone tell me what I was doing that it sort of tricked me for a minute.

Reed: Describe your apprenticeship with Coleman Hawkins. I know he influenced you a great deal.

Rollins: I would say Monk was more like that. Coleman, he was sort of—I didn’t really work with him. He was just my adult. But I actually used to go to Monk’s house after school and rehearse with his band and stuff, so with him I would say it was more of a real apprenticeship. He was like my guru. Monk would say, “Yeah, man, Sonny is bad. Cats have to work out what they play; Sonny just plays that shit out of the top of his head.”

Reed: In the old days, the players and the gangsters were the real patrons of the art. And if you had talent, they would get you gigs in their clubs. Then a new kind of drug came on the scene. What was the impact of heroin on the jazz scene?

Rollins: Devastating. Devastating.

Reed: When you got in trouble, was that peer group stuff?

Rollins: To an extent, but you know, Bird [Charlie Parker] was doing it, Billie Holiday was doing it, but especially Bird. That’s why Bird was such a distraught figure. Because cats were copying him, and he knew it was wrong but he couldn’t stop. So we figured, Yeah, man, Bird is doing it, let’s go and get high. And I got strung out. I got fucked up. I mean, that’s normal when you don’t know better.

Reed: But you overcame it.

Rollins: That was a rough one. The person that gave me pride to overcome it—besides Bird—was my mother, who stood by me after I had nobody. After I had ripped everybody off. People would see me coming down the street, they’d run. But my mother stayed with me all the way. And Charlie Parker.

Reed: You had a great reputation, but you went to Chicago and worked as a laborer. How did you feel about that?

Rollins: Well, I had messed myself up so bad and burned all these bridges, so when I went to Chicago, I went there to kick my habit.

Reed: And then you went to the government rehab center in Lexington, Kentucky. And afterward made your comeback.

Rollins: I came out and I was thinking about Bird, and what happened when I was in there. I thought, boy, wait till I come out. I’ma show Bird that I’m cool. And then he died while I was still in there. But anyway, I came out and still had to struggle with cats saying, “Hey, man, come on, let’s step out.” But I won that struggle. I wanted to work, and I had to come all the way back out myself. I knew how far down I’d been; I did janitor work and all of this—well, what else was there to really do?

Reed: What about your relationship with club owners?

Rollins: I was blackballed by a lot of these people.

Reed: Why?

Rollins: Because I was what you would call an uppity nigger or whatever. So a lot of these cats were keeping me from playing festivals and shit. This was for acting up and asking for money. Some cats be so glad to play that they don’t say nothing.

Reed: People are so happy to play that they lower the standards?

Rollins: It’s not just in the past, either. I’m going through this shit all the time. They just called me to do a commercial for this car, Infiniti. They wanted us to go to Czechoslovakia to shoot it. There were no speaking parts. It would be this actor and myself sitting down in a jazz club at a table, and there’ll be some Czech jazz musicians up there playing and then a voice-over about Infiniti. Something like that. So naturally I didn’t do it. I mean, for me to just be validating white jazz music. I’m not going to put myself in that position. I’m glad they still think I’m viable, but I’m not gonna do that shit, man.

I did one commercial some time ago, where I was playing on the bridge for Pioneer. They said, “Sonny Rollins really went to practice on the bridge and became excellent, like our product.” Something like that was cool, where I’m identified and the people know it’s me playing. But to sit down and validate someone else’s shit, it’s just not right. It would get me a lot of exposure, it would be cash, of course, but I reached the conclusion a long time ago that I’m not rich. I’m not going to get rich, I just want to make enough to make it. Fuck trying to get into that race. I don’t want it; I don’t even want to speak to those people about it ‘cause I don’t like them.

Reed: Was that like a revelation—some sort of spiritual thing that led you to do that?

Rollins: It happened because I was getting a lot of publicity at the time. I had a band with Elvin Jones and I was playing these places, and I remember the place I played in Baltimore and people really didn’t get it, so I said, “Man, I’m not really doing it. I got to get myself together. First of all, I’ma go back to the woodshed.” That’s why I went on the bridge. Some cat, a writer, was up across the bridge one day and saw me playing, but nobody would have even known it if it hadn’t been for him. That’s how it happened. It didn’t have anything to do with trying to make it public.

Reed: Why are you so hard on yourself?

Rollins: I’m hard on myself because maybe I been around a lot great musicians, and I don’t think I’ll ever be at the level of some of the people I been around. So I’m trying to reach that level. I’m trying to reach a level of performance, and that’s what it’s about.

Reed: They used to hose something called the “Pat Juba” in slavery days: the white slave owners made two black guys beat each other up and one survives, and the masters stand around and watch. I think that still goes on. When it comes to blacks it always seems to be a competition, fighting to see who’s going to be the diva, like they’re having a diva war to see who’s going to be accepted. There can only be one dancer, one writer, one musician. They tried to do that with you and Coltrane, to play you against each other.

Rollins: We didn’t react to it. Coltrane was beautiful, a very spiritual person. He was like a minister. We were thinking about music. It was the writers who influenced the friends who….

Reed: Was it just a few writers who did this?

Rollins: Probably. Remember when Coltrane and I came out. I was popular before Coltrane. We used to be referred to as the angry young tenors—we were against, like, the Stan Getzes, the Birth of the Cool; we were sort of a reaction against that. That was still going on at that time, so we were the angry tenors and nobody was thinking about that shit. But I noticed that withour even realizing that’s what they were doing in slavery days. I noticed that you could never have more than one person up there at a time.

Reed: Let me ask you about gangsta rap.

Rollins: I like the content of rap because it’s the black experience; what they’re saying is the truth. Not everything—I’m talking about the political stuff, of course. We have to accept that ‘cause that’s what’s happening.

Reed: What about the style, all this mixing and sampling and stuff they do?

Rollins: Well, they sampled some of my stuff. This group Digable Planets did some of my stuff. I heard it in a store. I heard somebody playing some of my stuff.

Reed: How do you feel about that?

Rollins: It’s okay, it’s alright. I just don’t want to be ripped off. I need my money. So I like the political thing and I like some of the rhythms them cats are playing. I can use it. I’m not an old fogy. I think jazz has done so much to bring people together, but jazz is only an art form. You can’t change a society with jazz. The society is still backward on racial matters. I like to be democratic; I have a white boy playing in my band right at the moment. But it’s not a personal thing. I find people personally who are great, but the oppressive society just makes it impossible to be real with people. It always fucks everything up.

[This essay is excerpted from Ishmael Reed's new collection, Mixing It Up: Taking On the Media Bullies and Other Reflections. It is reprinted with permission of the author.

Ishmael Reed is a poet, novelist and essayist who lives in Oakland. His novels include, Mumbo Jumbo, the Freelance Pallbearers and The Last Days of Louisiana Red.]

Source. / CounterPunch / Posted June 15, 2008

Thanks to Carlos Lowry / The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

10 June 2008

Gary Chason on His Life in Independent Film

Still from Gary Chason's God Thinks You're a Loser.

The Independent Film Movement:
Letter From the Front Lines

By Gary Chason / The Rag Blog / June 11, 2008

[Gary Chason is an Austin-based filmmaker, screenwriter, actor, casting director, playwright, stage director and acting teacher. He also is a contributor to The Rag Blog.]

The Movement

Rejection letters from film festivals always tell you about the thousands of entries they received. And I’m not talking about short subjects either. Feature-length narrative motion pictures are being produced at an unprecedented rate all over the globe. The days when aspiring storytellers wanted to write the great American novel are long gone; now they want to make a hit movie.

Independent filmmaking has been around for as long as the medium has existed. The early independents were experimentalists, searching for the possibilities the medium contained. The fundamental principles of narrative film structure - which we now take for granted - were developed through such experiments. Dali and Bunuel were early pioneers, as was Andy Warhol’s group at the Factory. Independents often made horror genre films because they had the best chance of returning the capital investment. A few, like John Waters, explored highly controversial story lines and themes. Regional legend Eagle Pennell made idiosyncratic films that reeked with authenticity, concentrating on deluded losers and alcoholics and making us care about them as people. And, tortured artist that he was, no doubt used his work to grapple with his own demons.

In recent times, the Hollywood studio system has capitalized on the interest generated by independents, churning out their own “independent” features. Numerous subsidiaries, with studio backing, have taken on the mantel, and subsequent cachet, of independence. Their product, however, lacks the necessary spirit to be included in the movement. The authentically independent filmmaker works outside of the establishment, uses mostly unknown actors, avoids the standard formulas of genre films, and pursues themes, story lines, and subject matter that are clearly outside the mainstream. They make films that Hollywood wouldn’t – or couldn’t – make. And they do it because they are driven by their passion for the work, which makes them a part of the ancient tradition of the artist.

The Digital Revolution

But why are so many features being created now? The digital revolution is the empowering phenomenon here. You can buy or rent an excellent camera very cheaply, or, if you’re clever enough, you can borrow one. Write a script, get some actors together, pick up some tape, and away you go. And you can edit it on your laptop while sipping latte at a coffee house. So the “Suits” no longer hold the keys to the toybox.

The bad news is that a whole lot of dreadful movies are getting made. The good news is that amidst all the crap there are some real gems, films that would never have been made a few years ago because the costs were prohibitive. This has spawned a new generation of filmmaker with a fresh set of priorities, and an aesthetic that often departs radically from Hollywood dogma. (BTW: it is acceptable to use the term “film” even if no actual film was ever involved. “Digital filmmaking” and “digital cinematography” are standard terms.)

Film - especially its main format, 35 millimeter - is still the gold standard. But that won’t last long. In only the second or third generation of high definition, digital cameras have already achieved resolution equal to 35 mm (The Red One Camera), and there’s no end in sight. They are smaller and lighter than film cameras, and they can also record audio, which is automatically synchronized with picture. With film, you have to use two separate machines and then sync audio to picture at the lab.

And that’s another thing: no lab costs. The price of film is high enough – approximately fifty dollars a minute for raw stock – but by the time you get it processed at the lab, printed, and synchronized with the sound, it’s double that amount. And you haven’t done any editing yet. Since it’s fairly normal to shoot ten times as much as you will ultimately need, you reach six figures just on stock and processing. And that’s not counting props, wardrobe, lunches, talent fees, etc.

Low (and No) Budget Wonders

I acted in a lead role in a digital feature, Dear Pillow (Bryan Poyser – Writer/Director), which was produced on a modest grant. It played at festivals all over the world and is currently for rent or sale through the standard outlets. Another, The Puffy Chair (DuPlass Brothers), was made for about the same amount and it got a theatrical release, launching the filmmakers, who now live in L.A. and who are rumored to be lining up five more features. Similar projects are in the works all over the world. None of this would have happened prior to the digital revolution.

Gary Chason in scene from movie Dear Pillow.

Personal Experiences

I made my first feature as a Writer/Director, Charlie’s Ear, in the early nineties when film was the only viable option. It required three years of full-time work to cobble together the unwieldly sum it took to make the picture. Just succeeding at that was a miracle in itself, but it was the only way and I was absolutely determined to get it done no matter what. That, and I was lucky to have excellent partners and associates.

In the end, it was beneficial to learn all aspects of the process, from the legalities of equity capital to the delivery schedule required by distributors, and everything in between. I was already skilled at production from my days in the theater and as a Casting Director (The Last Picture Show, Paper Moon, Pretty Baby, Paris, Texas, etc.), so I had to learn about labs, sound design and mix, timing (now color correction), and much more.

I was at the cusp of the digital age. I used the earliest “non-linear” (a term now passé) editing system in a hybrid with the old-fashioned method of literally cutting and taping together strands of workprint film. It screened for the first time at the Independent Film Market in New York, barely dry from the lab, and snagged a deal. Sadly, the distribution company went belly up before they could release the picture. I got it back, along with some greatly appreciated cash. It played at SXSW in ’94 and so impressed the management at the Dobie Theater in Austin that it got booked there for a short run. It also won all the top awards at the Madrid Festival and the Critics’ Prize at Mannheim. But that was the end of the road. It is not available for rent yet. I expect that it will be at some point in the future.

It’s a dark comedy about a middle-aged schlub (Austin Pendleton) who comes home from work one day to find two guys in his apartment who claim to be working for him. To do what? They say that he hired them to kill his wife. From there, we’re off and running through a story that is full of surprises, turning on itself repeatedly, before ending much the way it began, with the main character’s anger and self-loathing.

Eventually I wound up in Austin, Texas, a veritable hotbed of digital filmmaking and the ideal place for doing my thing. Shortly after arriving in town, I produced and directed another feature, Everything or Nothing, making full use of the latest HD technology. I was able to use the money that otherwise would be spent on film to enhance production values in hundreds of ways - including casting a Los Angeles semi-name actress, Natasha Melnick, in the lead role. Natasha was in Freaks and Geeks, Boston Public, and other TV shows.

It’s about a young girl, orphaned by murder-suicide, who grows up to be a prostitute and heroin addict, and her struggles to get her life straightened out. The film is still finding its way through the festival circuit, and has a distribution offer on the table which hasn’t been, as yet, executed. It should be available for rent in a year or so.

Gary Chason, far left, talks with cast and crew during making of God Thinks You're a Loser.

Lunatics Running the Asylum

My latest opus as Writer/Director, God Thinks You’re a Loser, just had a cast and crew screening and is being entered into festivals now. It is about three losers on the elevator to Hell, flashing back to reveal why they are condemned and then following them to their destiny. It is way out of the mainstream, definitely a picture that the studios would not make. It is, like Charlie’s Ear, a very dark comedy. Actually, it has been more accurately described as a perverse comedy. And it is experimental in its approach, a deadly sin in the minds of the Suits, but definitely in keeping with the experimental, avant garde theater I cut my directing teeth on.

Since I didn’t have to answer to studio committees – the lunatics were running the asylum - I was able to create a unique visual style, in the manner of comic books. Rather than imitate the look and feel of film, which is usually the case with movies that originate on videotape, I embraced digital technology to create vivid imagery that would be difficult, if not impossible, to duplicate with emulsion. Low budget indies are usually naturalistic in style. I chose to be expressionistic.

The picture doesn’t shy away from being blatently polemical either. It is, in fact, a moral fable, taking the stand that morality has to do with how we treat others. Drug use or sexual activity with a consenting adult, no matter how perverse, won’t get you in trouble. No. A “sin” is to bring harm upon another person. In the Hell of my imagination, the harmful things you have done to others are done to you, over and over, in a kind of karmic reprogramming. Sick and disturbing to be sure, but nevertheless very funny.

The rationale for such radical choices on my part? The glut of product in the marketplace, as so eloquently expressed in those rejection letters from festivals. With so many films vying for attention, to be different - unusual, weird, wacky, zany, schizo – should prove to be a big asset. And besides, I wouldn’t have it any other way because I’m fiercely independent!

Go to God Thinks You're a Loser for preview, clips and stills.

Dear Pillow on Amazon.com.

Gary's homesite: Gary Chason Studio.

Gary Chason was a contributor to The Rag, Austin's sixties underground newspaper and forerunner to The Rag Blog. Here is his listing on the Rag Author's Page.

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

08 June 2008

Bob Dylan Endorses Obama; Discusses Upcoming Art Show


Bob Dylan says Barack Obama is 'changin' America
By Alan Jackson and David Byers

See entire Times Online interview with Bob Dylan, about his upcoming London art show and much more, at end of this article.
His 1964 track 'The Times They are a-Changin' became the anthem for his generation, symbolising the era-defining social struggle against the establishment.

Now Bob Dylan - who could justifiably claim to be the architect of Barack Obama's 'change' catchphrase - has backed the Illinois senator to do for modern America what the generation before did in the 1960s.

In an exclusive interview with The Times, published today, Dylan gives a ringing endorsement to Mr Obama, the first ever black presidential candidate, claiming he is "redefining the nature of politics from the ground up".

Dylan, 67, made the comments when being interviewed in Denmark, where he stopped over in a hotel during a tour of Scandinavia.

Asked about his views on American politics, he said: "Well, you know right now America is in a state of upheaval. Poverty is demoralising. You can't expect people to have the virtue of purity when they are poor.

"But we've got this guy out there now who is redefining the nature of politics from the ground up...Barack Obama.

"He's redefining what a politician is, so we'll have to see how things play out. Am I hopeful? Yes, I'm hopeful that things might change. Some things are going to have to."

He added: “You should always take the best from the past, leave the worst back there and go forward into the future."

Dylan's endorsement contains much symbolic significance. The legendary singer-songwriter, who has an art exhibition opening in London next week, became a focal point for young people worldwide when he released the album 'The times they are a-changin'," including the famous song of that name, in 1964.

The track, which he wrote as the social liberation of the '60s astonished politicians and parents, included lines urging people to accept and embrace what was happening around them.

Memorable lines included: "Come senators, congressmen, please heed the call. Don't stand in the doorway, don't block up the hall," and: "Come mothers and fathers throughout the land, and don't criticise what you can't understand. Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command. Your old road is rapidly agin'."

Source. / Times Online, UK / June 5, 2008

Artwork by Bob Dylan.
Bob Dylan: He's got everything he needs, he's an artist, he don't look back
By Alan Jackson

The legendary singer/songwriter has an art exhibition opening in London next week and loves to talk about it. But you risk his 1,000-yard stare if you touch on his personal life

Odense, Denmark, and the not-quite-grand hotel that for the next two nights will be a home away from home for Bob Dylan. He arrived here from Reykjavik, four days after his 67th birthday and in the first stages of a lengthy itinerary that will take him through Scandinavia, the Baltic states, Austria, Italy, France, Andorra, Spain and Portugal between now and mid-July. To his irritation, others long ago gave this ongoing schedule the title of The Never-Ending Tour (habitually, he plays upwards of 100 concerts each year, often considerably more). As he prefers to see it: “I'm just making my living by plying a trade.”

Achieving my promised audience with the legendary singer-songwriter and now exhibited painter proves to be a two-step process. First, his road manager takes me from the lobby to a darkened, sparsely furnished meeting room in which an orange-haired woman is sitting straight-backed and reading a novel. “If you could just wait here,” he begins, then disappears, his mobile clamped to his ear. Left alone, I introduce myself to the woman but she merely smiles enigmatically and continues with her book. Who is or was she? I still have no idea.

Minutes later I am collected, taken up a flight of stairs and ushered towards a door that is ajar. As I approach it is opened by Dylan, who welcomes me inside with a soft handshake and a volley of courtesies: “How have you been?” [I have interviewed him twice before, in 1997 and 2001], “What's been going on in your life?” and “Are you OK with the dark [here in what appears to be his bedroom, all the curtains have been drawn]?”

My eyes adjusting to this premature twilight, I take in the fact that he is wearing boots, jeans and a loose sweatshirt, its sleeves pushed up above the elbows. That famous face is heavily lined and pale, but always warm and quick to smile. As we take seats at right angles to each other, he presses his fingertips into his grey-flecked curls and vigorously rubs his scalp, as if to do so will focus his mind.

I place on the low table between us the book that I have brought with me. “Heh, heh, heh!” Dylan chuckles, reaching out for it. “This is pretty handsome stuff.” He is looking at a straight-from-the-presses copy of The Drawn Blank Series, produced by the Halcyon Gallery to coincide with the exhibition of that name in Bruton Street, Mayfair. Will he visit the show itself? “I don't know,” he says, seemingly transfixed by the book's cover, his voice the familiar rasp that has inspired a million amateur impressionists. “I have all these dates to play. It might not be possible. I'd like to. We'll have to see.”

The haphazard process leading to the London show began nearly 20 years ago when he was approached by an editor at the American publishing company Random House. “They'd seen some of my sketches somewhere and asked if I'd like to do a whole book. Why not, you know? There was no predetermined brief. ‘Just deal with the material to hand, whatever that is. And do it however you want. You can be fussy, you can be slam-bang, it doesn't matter.' Then they gave me a drawing book, I took it away with me and turned it back in again, full three years later.”

Published in 1994 under the abbreviated title Drawn Blank, the resultant images had been executed both on the hoof while he was touring and in a more structured way in studios, using models (“Just anyone who'd be open to doing it”) and lights. What was going on in his life during that three-year period to inform or provide a back story to the work? “Just the usual,” Dylan shrugs, fixed in the hunkered-forward, hands-clasped position he will maintain for most of our time together. “I try to live as simply as is possible and was just drawing whatever I felt like drawing, whenever I felt like doing it. The idea was always to do it without affectation or self-reference, to provide some kind of panoramic view of the world as I was seeing it.”

Built up of work that is often contemplative, sometimes exuberant but consistently technically accomplished and engaging, that view is of train halts, diners and dockyards, barflies, dandies and uniformed drivers glimpsed in New Orleans or New York, Stockholm or South Dakota. And of women. We're left in no doubt that Dylan likes women. “They weren't actually there at the same time,” he notes quickly, pointing, when his page-turning reveals the painting Two Sisters, its subjects lounging, one clothed, the other naked but for her bra. “They posed separately and I put them together afterwards.”

There was little precedent within his own family for this talented eye, it seems. “Instead of playing cards, my maternal grandmother would do these little still lives, but I can't really say that had any influence on what I've done.” Art formed no part of his formal education and he recalls there being no public galleries in the Minnesotan communities (first Duluth, then Hibbing) of his youth. “I was in my teens before I started to see books of paintings in the school library - frescoes or the work of Michelangelo, that kind of thing. And I didn't really see the stuff that properly had an impact on me - Matisse, Derain, Monet, Gauguin - 'til later on, when I was in my twenties.”

By then, Dylan the university dropout and fledgeling folk performer had gravitated to New York, where he quickly discovered the Metropolitan Museum of Art. “It was overwhelming for me at the time, the immensity and sheer variety of stuff on display. The first exhibition I saw there was of Gauguin paintings and I found I could stand in front of any one of them for as long as I'd sit at the movies, yet not get tired on my feet. I'd lose all sense of time. It was an intriguing thing.” It was as his music career gathered pace that he found himself first trying his own hand at drawing. “Mostly when I was on a train or in a café, just to make sense of what was in my immediate world. I found it relaxed me. Some of the stuff I kept, some I didn't.”

It was sketches completed in this manner and spirit that, years later, came to the attention of Random House and led to that commission. However, little accord was given to the book on its eventual publication. “The critics didn't want to review it. The publisher told me they couldn't get past the idea of another singer who dabbled. You know, like, ‘David Bowie, Joni Mitchell, Paul McCartney...Everyone's doing it these days.' No one from the singing profession was going to be taken seriously by the art world, I was told, but that was OK. I wasn't expecting anything phenomenal to happen. It's not like the drawings were revolutionary. They weren't going to change anyone's way of thinking.”

But years later there came an approach from the Chemnitz City Art Gallery in Germany. Ingrid Mossinger, its director and a fan of the 1965 album Bringing it all Back Home, had felt it likely that someone as adept as Dylan in the use of metaphoric and abstract language might also draw or paint. Her research led her to the book Drawn Blank, in the preface of which Dylan wrote of hoping to “eventually complete” its collection of sketches. She encouraged him to do just that.

The method used to turn them into the paintings about to go on exhibition in London involved making digital scans of the original drawings and enlarging and then transferring them on to heavy paper ready for reworking. Dylan then experimented with treating individual images with a variety of colours. “And doing so subverted the light. Every picture spoke a different language to me as the various colours were applied.”

Attempts have been made to pin down and name his influences. When I mention this, Dylan wrongly takes it as a suggestion that the work is pastiche or somehow derivative. “I haven't trained in any academy where you learn how to do something in the style of Degas or Van Gogh, or how to copy Da Vinci,” he retorts. “I don't have that facility to copy note for note. Influenced by? If I had the ability to paint like any of those guys I might see the similarity, but I don't. If there is anything it's just by accident and instinctive.” Which is all that any critic was suggesting, after all. But, it seems, he is as uncomfortable at having his paintings deconstructed as he is his songs.

Of the latter process, he said on our last meeting: “These so-called connoisseurs of Bob Dylan music? I don't feel they know a thing or have an inkling of who I am and what I'm about. That such people have spent so much time thinking about who? Me? Get a life, please.”

Today he expresses similar impatience with the critics who have read into his art a variety of underlying feelings - anonymity, transience, rootlessness, even loneliness. Reaching again for the Halcyon book. “Let's have a look, shall we [the pages fall open at Woman in Red Lion Pub, her dress executed in a vivid yellow]? Do you see loneliness in that? Or that [Six Women]? I don't. And this one's just a pastoral scene [Sunday Afternoon]. What's rootless, transient and lonely about that? It's a mystery why anybody would say or think such a thing.”

And the idea that, in framing various images with windows and doors, he is revealing himself as a perennial outsider, forced by his name and status to observe the world rather than connect directly with it? Dylan rolls his eyes. “I just find it to be less satisfying to have the ends [by which he means the edges of the image] being endless, so I'll put a window there or block it in some way. It just looks better to me that way.” So he would prefer a purely emotional, instinctive response to the work rather than any searching for themes and insights? “If it pleases the eye of the beholder...There's no more to it than that, to my mind. Or even if it repels the eye. Either one is fine.”

On both our previous meetings, Dylan voiced his disdain for those completists who wish to see every scrap of paper he has written on or hear every studio out-take that he has rejected. With that in mind, I ask if it was a big deal for him to sign his name on each of the Drawn Blank paintings. “Yes!” he exclaims, laughing. “I finally grew into it, but yes, it was.” And did he perhaps practise his signature in advance? “I did, because it's tricky getting it just right. Finally you think, ‘Oh, to hell...' and just go for it, like you're writing a cheque or something.” He has, he says, no particular favourite among the images. “It's the same as with the early songs...In the Sixties, by the time they came out we were way past the recorded versions and were saying, ‘No, don't release that. We are playing it this way now.' So it is with the art. I find myself thinking, ‘I could have done this or that to make it better'. In the end, though, you've just got to let the work go and hope you'll know to do better next time.”

When I ask if he finds the art establishment preferable to the one he is more used to, Dylan grins and pulls a face of mock disgust. “The music world's a made-up bunch of hypocritical rubbish. I know from publishing a memoir [2004's Chronicles Volume One] that the book people are a whole lot saner. And the art world? From the small steps I've taken in it, I'd say, yeah, the people are honest, upfront and deliver what they say. Basically, they are who they say they are. They don't pretend. And having been in the music world most of my life [he laughs again], I can tell you it's not that way. Let's just say it's less...dignified.”

He tells me that he continued to draw for his pleasure after the Random House commission was fulfilled. “Not as intensely but yes, I have sketchbooks from the years since then. Of course, what I release to the public and what I keep for myself are two different things.”

He has had proposals for two future series of paintings, the first of which would involve having celebrities sit for him. “I could pick the names but don't want to. I'd rather be given a list and have someone else contact the people to find out if they're up for it. So I'm waiting to see who they might be thinking of. I assume it's movers and shakers. You know, inventors, mathematicians, scientists, business people, actors...We'll see.

“But what interests me more is the idea of a collection based on historically romantic figures. Napoleon and Josephine, Dante and Beatrice, Captain John Smith and Pocahontas, Brad and Angelina [here he laughs]... I could use my own imagination for that. It wouldn't have to be the actual people, obviously.” But the latter two might be delighted to sit for him, no? Dylan chuckles at the possibility. “Maybe. Who knows? All I'll say is that I'm intrigued by the basic idea. Whether or not it comes to fruition, time will tell. This [The Drawn Blank Series] was easy to do because it didn't clash with any other commitments. If something does, then I simply cannot do it.”

By commitments, one presumes Dylan means not just his touring schedule but also his personal and familial relationships. Only the bald facts are known in this regard. He has four grown-up children (Jesse, Anna Lea, Samuel and rock singer Jakob) from a ten-year marriage to former model Sara Lowndes that ended in divorce in 1977. And in 2001 it was revealed by a biographer that he was married from 1986 to 1992 to one of his former backing singers, Carol Dennis, and has another daughter, Desiree, also now an adult, from the union.

But inquiries about his non-work life causes him to shut down. Not even a fact as basic as that of where he lives (his main home is believed to be a mansion on the coast beyond Los Angeles) receives ready validation, and when I ask if he has a studio in which he worked on the paintings, he will offer only, “Well, there are spaces in some of the properties where I can do just about any old thing”, before looking off into the middle distance, awaiting the next question.

Such reticence has earned him a reputation as rock's grumpy old man, a curmudgeon who refuses to appear grateful that he is revered and adored. But whether or not he intends it to do so, such determined self-protection merely enhances the myth and mystery. Today and after spending much of the 1980s through to the mid-1990s out in the critical cold, Dylan's star is higher than at any time since the 1960s, the decade with which he is most closely associated (erroneously in his view). Honours, awards and citations all but rain down upon him these days: it is as if we have all awoken to the fact that we will not see his like again. Not that anyone doubts that he has a long life still to live. “Well, thank you for that!” he notes with a laugh.

For any further insights into his private world we must wait to see if any crumbs are thrown in the next instalment of the intended three-book Chronicles (“I could do more. It wouldn't be a problem in terms of material”), at which he is already at work. Yes, he allows, he was gratified by the critical and commercial success of Volume One. “Especially given the effort that went into it. Writing any kind of book is a lonely thing. You cut yourself off from friends and family to find that necessarily quiet place in your mind. You have to disassociate and detach yourself from just about everything and everybody. I didn't like that part of it at all.

“It took me maybe two years in total. I was touring so much in the beginning, on days off or on a bus, I'd write my thoughts out in longhand or on a typewriter. It was the transcribing of the stuff, the rereading and retelling of it, that was time-consuming and I came to figure that there had to be a better way. I know what that is now. You need a full-time secretary so that you can get the ideas down immediately, then deal with them later.”

Meanwhile, there is the continuing delight that is his own radio show (he smiles at the mention of it), Theme Time Radio Hour with your Host Bob Dylan, the brainchild of America's XM Satellite Radio and now broadcast weekly here on Radio 2. And later this year he will release a further volume within the ongoing Bob Dylan Bootleg Series, featuring previously unreleased or rare material alongside alternative versions of existing tracks recorded between 1989 and 2006.

Coming on top of the recent award to him of a special Pulitzer prize recognising “his profound impact on popular music and American culture, marked by lyrical compositions of extraordinary poetic power” (“I hope they don't ask for it back!”), all of this would suggest that he has arrived at a very creative but also contented period within his life.

“I've always felt that,” he says. “It's just sometimes I've got more going on than at other times.” But life is good? “To me, it's never been otherwise.”

My time with Dylan is up and we stand in preparation for my leaving the room. As a last aside, I ask for his take on the US political situation in the run-up to November's presidential election.

“Well, you know right now America is in a state of upheaval,” he says. “Poverty is demoralising. You can't expect people to have the virtue of purity when they are poor. But we've got this guy out there now who is redefining the nature of politics from the ground up...Barack Obama. He's redefining what a politician is, so we'll have to see how things play out. Am I hopeful? Yes, I'm hopeful that things might change. Some things are going to have to.” He offers a parting handshake. “You should always take the best from the past, leave the worst back there and go forward into the future,” he notes as the door closes between us.

For more, see www.halcyongallery.comand www.bobdylanart.com

Source. / Times Online, UK
The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

Only a few posts now show on a page, due to Blogger pagination changes beyond our control.

Please click on 'Older Posts' to continue reading The Rag Blog.