More of the same

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

(Note, this is a preliminary version, but I put it up anyway cause I don't have time to fiddle with images right now)

The assault on Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, AZ, has sparked an intense debate in the US, and immense media coverage abroad. The US debate is focused on how some see the violent agitation in US politics to be directly or indirectly responsible for the attack. Outsiders will probably be quick to accept that view and at least from a European or Scandinavian point of view, it's easy to also blame the US (AZ) gun laws.

What I'm missing from the coverage here is the memory of our own experiences of similar events, which is really disturbing considering I'm speaking of two of the defining moments of Swedish history of the past 25 years: the murders of Olof Palme and Anna Lindh.

Yeah. Murders of prominent politicians right on the street, apparently committed by outsiders. Way more prominent than Giffords. Twice. And Swedish political climate is way off from the anti-Obama polemics of present day US politics.

Note: for simplicity's sake, the characterization of the Palme and Lindh cases are vastly simplified in the following. The Palme case especially so, since it is officially unsolved. For the sake of discussion, assume in the following that the Pettersson-Tingström connection is the valid and proven guilty party of the Palme murder. I don't mean to imply that this is the case, I'm just using the possibility to make a point and create a discussion.

Some background: Swedish PM Olof Palme was gunned down in 1986. The man who was tried for the shooting (convicted and then aquitted, since deceased) was a small-time criminal, Christer Pettersson, with lots of links to a guy who is probably the closest you'll get in Sweden to US anti-fed extremists, Lars Tingström: a violent and systematic offender who saw in society a conspiracy against himself specifically, and the government and the left, led by Palme, as the head of the snake. Tingström was convicted of three bombings against government and justice targets, like Pettersson he also died a few years later (both from natural causes, btw).

Anna Lindh was stabbed to death in an apparent spur of the moment attack in a Stockholm department store in 2003. The murderer was Mijailo Mijailović, a 24-year old with mental issues. He simply encountered Lindh and decided to get a knife and attack her. Mijailović stated later that he'd been hearing voices and not sleeping for a period of days leading up to the attack. Mijailović's guilt is beyond doubt, linked by DNA evidence from the murder weapon and his presence documented by cameras, and after a few months in jail he also admitted his guilt.

As far as is known, neither Pettersson-Tingström nor Mijailović acted on behalf of any political group nor did they have views that aligned them to any particular extent with such groups. In the case of Palme, he was a target for right-wing hatred in a way that is quite similar to that aimed at Obama the past few years. Less abundant perhaps, but just as over the top and tasteless. Lindh was not a target in this sense. She was widely assumed to be the next leader of Sweden's biggest party, a well liked and respected political figure at the very top of the political hierarchies of Sweden. At 46, most people in the country assumed she would have gone on to become Sweden's first female PM within the next few years.

Loughner seems to be more insane than political, judging by the incoherent ravings on Youtube. More Mijailović than Pettersson or Tingström.

Enough with the background detail. Each case is different and more so the more you look at them. The point I'm getting at is that there have been two high-profile murders of prominent Swedish politicians, murders not so vastly different from the attack on Gabrielle Giffords. Perhaps the similarities between the cases could teach us all something?

Obviously, gun laws would not have stopped Mijailović - he used a Mora knife. The Smith & Wesson used to kill Palme has not been found but if one continues to assume that the Pettersson-Tingström theory is plausible, they were well enough at home in outlaw territory that they could easily have gotten hold of a weapon regardless of gun control laws. I gather that Loughner should not have been allowed to buy that Glock under the present gun laws of Arizona (though I've seen tatements indicating the opposite as well), this part of gun control obviously failed. Comparing to Mijailović, it's clear to me that nut-cases will be able to get hold of a weapon, but: if Loughner had had to make do with a knife, 5 people who are dead today would probably not have been.

The part that really interests me though, is the moral issue of the rethorics. Let us assume that Tingström indeed did enroll Pettersson in his private crusade against the Palme government. The anti-Palme rethorics of the 80s included leaflets with bull's eye patterns and caricatures that most resembled the pictures of jews favored by Julius Streicher's Der Stürmer. If that doesn't qualify as violent rethorics, I don't know what does. This rethoric appeared on the fringe of the right wing of the established political spectrum of Sweden. Similar to how the Tea party consists of the far end of the established conservatives or the Republican party in the US, actually.

That anti-Palme fringe was never part of daily political debate, but if it had been, what would we have said about guilt? Would it have been a valid point to say that it shared responsibility for the murder of Palme? Of course not. Would it have been disgusting polemics that should have no place in political debate? Certainly. It was, regardless of actual violence.

So, do Palin, Kelly and others who use violent rethorics on either end of the political spectrum share responsibility for Loughner's deed? Equally certainly, of course not. Is it disgusting polemics that anyone with a functional moral compass should stay clear of? Oh yes. Palin for one knows this. The fact that the much talked about cross hairs were promptly removed from her website tells us that she does. The lack of a straightbacked apology for the tasteless symbolics is disturbing, but it's hardly criminal in any sense of the word, nor should it be. Tasteless, foul and stupid - yes. That's the only crime relevant to the cross-hairs.

And for readers in Europe: what happened in Tucson can and will happen in Europe. It has happened in Sweden already, and it didn't take violent agitation or lack of gun control. An assault only takes one nut-case. The assault on Giffords does not prove or even illustrate anything about America being different from Europe - in fact it shows that some things are eerily similar.

Violent and tasteless rethorics has no place in serious political debate and should be left out. How this can be a surprise to anyone is beyond my grasp.

Despite the bible thumping and gun toting, America and Americans are more similar to Europe and Europeans than most of us realize. Under the skin, we're just the same. Even the psychos.

* Now you're at the end of the text and you're thinking I don't know about those cross-hairs not being cross-hairs but surveyor's markers ("purveyor's markers" according to some sources). Wrong. I do know about it. I'm still pondering whether I should write about that or not because I'm simply not sure I can keep that part as respectful as I'd like. As things now stand, I don't think I'll write that second part - for instance, Barefoot & progressive expresses it much better than I could do.

Two, no, three little things that happened not so long ago

First, anyone who missed theBloggess' heroic, fantastic holiday gift drive, check this out and think to yourself, next year I'll do something like that. Here's an article about it in the Washington Post. I also consider her daily bloggings to be among the best there is on the net but mileage may vary.

Second, another kind of serious entry in the media flow: an open letter in response to the statements by Michael Moore. Lashing out is more fun than waiting for things to run their course, and it gives less press. That's not a very good starting point for deciding what's right or wrong, though.

Third, if you're the tech type, you didn't miss this, but maybe there's still someone around who would be as fascinated, awestruck by this as I was and who hasn't seen it yet - so here's that babel fish iPhone app.



Freakin' awesome.

The meteoric rise of inanity

Stupid idiom: "meteoric rise."

Meteors go down. It's what they do. It's all they do. If they don't, they're not meteors, they're just rocks.

I am aware that technically, it is possible for a meteor to be a so-called earth-grazer. This is a one in a many-billions event, and none of you have seen one. So, nyah.

Don't call anything that's moving upwards "meteoric." The word you're looking for may be shining or brilliant, it may be ballistic or rocket-like or just upwards. Anything but meteoric.

Meteors go down.

Leonid meteor. Wikipedia image.

Bruce, pt 2

I'm mildly disappointed by the Promise box. My expectations weren't very high about the actual content, it was to a large extent more paying homage to my own past - but I did expect more after all the talk before-hand. I saw journalists handing out full score reviews left and right, and I just don't think that's fair.

There are some parts to look at when reviewing the whole package that is The Promise, let's take them one by one.

First, it's a remaster of the best record ever. That's a 5/5, how could it possibly be anything else.

Second, it's a double CD with discarded songs from the Darkness sessions. This is where I think journalists didn't quite think, step back and really think. It's a bit magic to hear these recordings. The first time we can hear them in highest possible quality at the very least, and several of them truly never heard before. But hey, guys? These songs seem mostly like... well, discarded stuff to me. Really discarded stuff. Sure, Fire and Because are pretty tight and finished, but they're not really news, and - heresy - I never really liked either of them. They're filler for me. They illustrate perfectly why none of these songs made it onto the Darkness album. Most of the songs are heavily cannibalized for lyrics and often for score as well. As can be seen in the DVD material, the band made several other songs during this period that did eventually make it onto the River, and justifiably, because those songs are all superior to anything on The promise: Sherry darling, The ties that bind, Independence day, and more.

Two other songs are worth mentioning: The "rock" version of Racing, so dubbed by journalists. WTF, "rock"? How can a journalist call this a "rock" version of anything when it's a reject from the album that starts with Badlands and Adam raised a Cain? Second, The Promise. I'm sorry, this may be the best of the songs on its own, but it's also too sentimental, it lacks a point and it lacks musical push. It would have made sense as a single somewhere around the time of Darkness but it suffers heavily in comparison to the collective works that make up Born to run and Darkness and in this context, even The river.

Taken as a new or forgotten Bruce double CD, The Promise is maybe 2 or 3/5. As add on material to Darkness, 4/5.

Third, The making of Darkness DVD. This is awesome. 5/5.

Fourth, The Houston house cut. 4/5 for afficionados. It's a shame there's apparently nothing better to release from the Darkness tour era. The Library of Congress should have intervened. For outsiders, 2-3/5. There are several better full concerts released already.

Fifth, the 2009 DVD. Hmm. A curiosity. I can't imagine why a non-fan would want this.

Finally, more scattered extra material. Not rating that, just noting that it's there.

The box is for fans, and it's a treat. It's no earth-shaker though. It's a boon and I'm glad I have it. I'm gonna leave it at that.

Why? Why?

One of the deepest mysteries of the net, to me, is how all weird page hits happen. Why are there suddenly a dozen page hits from some company's IP range, hits that leave no trace whatsoever except those page hits? On the rare occasions that you find an explanation it's always unromantic and unfantastic and very down to earth - but unexplained, these occurrences are so utterly baffling.

Bruce

I just bought a CD that cost about $100. I already have the record, I’ve owned it since before 1980. I’ve bought it on vinyl (though the first was given to me - I have two) and on CD (ok, three. Four in a day or two). (Ok I give up, I have no idea how many I have. It's less than a dozen.) The new one isn’t rare or a collector’s item. Why would I do this? Am I not grown up now? I’m not a collector or a fan of that maniac sort, never have been.  (No, really. Really!)

The answer is that this record doesn’t represent part of my youth. It is part of my youth. Part of my life happened in that record instead of within the day to day life where I walked and talked. Dozens of records have been important in my life, but none as important as this one. This is the one.

Having been a Springsteen fan will never make me cool. I can live with that.  It wasn’t being cool that made me one when I was 12 and it wasn’t being cool that kept me coming back for more.

Back side cover.
CD version, I dare say.

- You're born with nothing

 and better off that way

Darkness on the edge of town has been if not my Favorite Record, then at least one of my top 5, since the same week I got it. In an amusing twist of fate, it was my rock-o-phobic father who gave me the record – I’m sure he regretted it many times. He’d asked for advice from a colleague who was more down with the kids as to what music he should give his oldest son. The answer was Born to run, on my 11^th birthday. It wasn’t an instant success or instant love but it stuck. The lyrics were on the gatefold sleeve and they were… enough. Yeah, I’ve known the lyrics to Jungleland by heart, straight through, since I was 12. Dad noticed I played the record, and a short while later, he came home with the next Springsteen record. I think it was the day school was out for summer and me and my brother each got a record to congratulate us and encourage us to keep being nice boys. I hadn’t even figured out that there might be more records from the same dude that made Born to run. I was completely unaware of the drama in Springsteen’s life and career. I think this was before The river had come out, probably spring 1979. I put the record on straight away. I noticed the lyrics were there, I saw the sparser and grittier tone on the sleeve. And then I heard the drums opening Badlands for the first time. When the last song died down I knew I had a new favorite song and a new favorite record.

I don’t know how many times I played the record that first day. I know I played it a lot those next weeks, that whole summer. It was something I did on my own, nobody else I knew was listening to these things.

The past months I’ve seen a lot of essays, articles, reviews and interviews that all talk about the dark tone of Darkness, usually compared to the predecessor. It’s not rocket science, the analytic skill needed to see the difference isn’t vast. I saw it, felt it, when I was 12.

I understand this is what the new one looks like.

Darkness was to set the bar for me for what constituted good music. Its balance between musical and lyrical expression. The amount of jaggedness in the music, the balance between melody and rhythm. The relative adrenaline content of expression. Almost every one of my later favorites follow just this pattern. You know how some say Like a rolling stone transformed music? That's what Darkness was to me.

- Some guys they just give up living,

and start dying, 

little by little, piece by piece.

I was 12 and this was what I heard. I think it scarred me a little, made me older than I was. Then again maybe that’s just how I am. I took to that anger and despair and made it my own, instantly. I actually added it to my own experience. It was as though I had lived the lives of those guys in those stories.

In the years afterwards, I often briefly mistook misbehaving for that jagged edge I wanted, that level of honesty in pain that makes a lyric just so and that slight disharmony and off-beat rhythm that keeps the bland melody from getting boring. The human touch that makes music come alive. Like most teenagers I thought that revolt meant hurting others. It was lucky that I had already done my share or revolt – I had screamed there in the darkness on the edge.

- And I hope that you're happy now

I have one other record that competes in my mind for the top #1 spot on my list of the best records in my life, just one. It’s not similar, except for being too rough for soft radio stations and not quite loud enough for wild teenagers making statements. It’s Elvis Costello’s Blood & Chocolate, and overall they share almost every quality. The big difference is that Darkness is done seriously, Blood & Chocolate is this weird mix between agony and laughter, drunken libation and agonizing.  Blood & Chocolate isn’t serious though. It isn’t serious, the way drunken misery isn’t serious. Darkness is sober, and it wouldn’t be cured by getting stiff drunk. Everything would still be there in the morning.

- Till someday they just cut it loose, cut it loose or let it drag 'em down.

Bruce become Bruce with me during those months when I played that record over and over. Eventually The river came out and though I wasn’t old enough to see the shows in Stockholm that was when I stepped over into fandom. I stayed with Bruce from then on, and though I didn’t always pay attention I never really left.

The original.

As I think back on all those years and think about what made me faithful, I’m as certain as ever that what made me stay, what made it possible to stay friendly and loyal to Bruce was that he was always faithful and honest to his listeners.  Not only not doing ass-hat stuff, but always fair and sensible, upstanding and often willing to help, not greedy and on top of it all managing to pull it off without being holier than thou or preachy. Being that, to me, is truly something worth admiring.

I don't know what I've heard before of new material on The Promise. I know I used to have the title song in both live and studio versions. When the Tracks box came out, it didn’t have much that I hadn’t heard before, even the studio tapes had been leaked decades earlier except some very early stuff. Getting decently high quality live recordings from the era that was always my favorite in the bootleg archives would have had me drooling back then and I look forward to listening to it. A good remaster of the main record is the main draw to me though.

So when I bought a CD that cost about ten times what a normal CD should be worth, I did it out of loyalty, I did it because I recognize in myself that this part of my life is something that I can be totally honest about and live with.  I will never wish that this part of my life had not taken place, that something better had gone instead.

There's something magic about that. 

You can buy The Promise box directly from the artist/company. There are a couple versions to choose from. Bruce's official home page is at brucespringsteen.net (I think the lyrics for every single published song is there), and he's also on twitter (@brucespringsteen.net), though I wouldn't go so far as to say he's active on the net in person. The canonical fan site is backstreets.com.

Buying the box directly halfway across the world gets prohibitively expensive (in my case, around SEK 1300 instead of SEK 850); it's available on most online shops. Check out all the alternatives - there's even a free essay download for kindle users. Just so there's no confusion, the expensive CD I bought is "The Promise:  The Darkness on the Edge of Town Story".

Things not to name your blog

Don't name it /dev/random. Don't name it /dev/null either. Both have a tiny fraction of the coolness you ascribe to them and neither have even a tiny fraction of the originality you ascribe to them. No, coolness and originality are not the same thing.

For the nerdliness-challenged, don't name your blog anything that has "PC" in it. It's not cool and if you need help understanding that you either need to not be blogging or you're so cool you don't need any advice anyway. 100% in the first category will believe they belong in the latter one.

Everything really is a bitch.