Music review: Rebuilding the Rights of Statues
November 29, 2008
As many readers will know, in a parallel universe I’d be a music reviewer (if not a full-time crossword puzzle editor/constructor). Almost Famous? Story of my wannabe life. I came exceedingly close to becoming a freelancer for the Times-Dispatch in the late 1990s, but budget cutbacks doomed that. So, to scratch my itch, from time to time I’ll pick up the music pen.
Last week I chatted with a Chinese law student and a UR law student who’s taught in China. Both advised me in no uncertain terms to give in to the guilty pleasures of karaoke in Beijing. I shuddered. My first thought was, is this like what I’ve heard about Japan? Drunken locals warbling “My Way” and forcing everyone on stage? (And from what I’ve heard about baijiu, this is a particularly terrifying thought.) Are the bars going to have anything newer than “Bus Stop”? In the spirit of adventure, I won’t resist. Judging from my students’ enthusiasm, there must be no better way to break the cross-cultural ice than yelping out “Sweet Home Alabama,” “The Joker,” or whatever dated stuff a Beijing KTV jukebox is likely to have. I think they just want to see a prof get down.
OK, then, so what song to be ready for? No chance I’m gonna do this without some advance prep. There’s a fine art to selecting the best karaoke song. You want something that showcases your vocal talent (or lack thereof). Few lyrics . . . or a ridiculously large number that makes you look suave for knowing them all. Maybe fast and loud, covering imperfections and getting off the stage as quickly as possible. Perhaps some real over-the-top cheese — like “Dancing Queen”? (The Brits have this one covered, no surprise there.) No super high notes or booming lows. Above all, you’d better know what you are doing. I’m no pro, obviously, but I would rather do this with confidence.
And wait, my friends both said the same song would be atop Chinese students’ request lists for me . . . “Hotel California.” As a karaoke song? Really? A great song, to be sure, but 6:30 of SoCal irony from 30 years ago, so unlikely to register with Beijingers?? I can think of five Eagles songs I’d rather sing, never mind those of other artists. I was shocked to discover that it’s on some top ten lists. “Billie Jean”? Sure. “YMCA”? Of course. But “Hotel California”? WTF? Well, at least that might explain why Beijing students would ask for it — it’s a song in English that they might have heard of, though as quickly as the first verse (”warm smell of colitas/rising up through the air”) there’d be some serious head-scratching in any Beijing audience.
Well, I thought, why not really surprise my hosts? Let’s be ready with something awesome.
I went looking for a representative playlist. Googling “Beijing karaoke” for inspiration was entertaining, but not helpful. Wacky descriptions of KTV bars and bloggers’ tales of late night debauchery just confirmed my gut instinct about what I’m in for. And I learned you’re typically not in a public setting, but a “karaoke room” (private, partitioned-off part of the bar). OK, so the audience will be 10, not 200. And this advice: “you’ll only be embarassed in front of friends, not strangers (which might be worse)” . . . not sure about that. There was a long story on one site about how an American student memorized a Mandarin song. I suppose the tour de force of memorizing lyrics in their language might kill. But that seems like way too much effort, and the songs themselves were mainly forgettable and maudlin.
I struck out in a different direction. If I had to get up on stage here, I’d do the Springsteen-meets-indie of the Hold Steady, and too bad for the lack of familiarity. I’d sell the song. But searching for the “Chinese indie rock” analogue seemed unpromising. In a land where bands have to have their lyrics “approved” by the government, the very idea of free-spirited rock seems impossible. I gave it a whirl anyway. And I came across the unusually named “Rebuilding the Rights of Statues,” or “Re-TROS,” for short. “Re-TRO,” get it? Man, that is clunky. Still, you have to marvel at the audacity of this effort. They have their own MySpace page, all red and black with early-80’s post-punk graphics. They’ve been to South by Southwest. They plug their record with song samples. In short, the typical indie band’s play for exposure.
And it’s not hard to figure out what “retro” means to them. Check out their MySpace page:
“Born in the shadow of . . . nihilism, the collapse of state run industry and a desert that will someday swallow their city whole, Cut Off!, the first E.P. from pioneering Beijing-based post-punks Rebuilding the Rights of Statues delivers explosive, danceable, unsettling energy that leaves you unsure whether you want to take your clothes off and shake the spiders out, or go look for a rope, a closet and a copy of Iggy Pop’s The Idiot.”
OK, so we’re in Joy Division territory. But wait, “Nihilism”? “Collapse of state run industry”? And the first song is called “Hang The Police”? How’d they get away with THAT? Or any of it? As I learned, it’s a good story in and of itself.
I listened to “Hang The Police.” It was angular, with taut chords at the intro followed by shearing guitars and jarring but insistent, minimalist Gang of Four-ish vocals. Cutting edge 25 years ago in the U.S., but passed over by the Pixies, Nirvana, and everything else since. If it were the Beijing equivalent of the soundtrack to the Velvet Revolution I might consider learning it (the lyrics are in English, at least), but it’s not . . . just a song from a band trying to make a go of it under serious restrictions. And it’s obviously no karaoke song. “American Law Professor Causes International Incident,” . . . uh, I think I’ll pass.
Then I got to thinking. Under what criteria should we judge rock music in China? Many bands are just copying Western acts — Re-TROS’ influences are obvious. But given what it takes just to get to this point, we should be impressed and mighty generous in our assessment. How does a Chinese youth discover Western musical influences? Learn to play rock guitar? Get past the societal filter? Have original thoughts that will get past said filter? Construct songs in English idiom? Be reasonably faithful to the spirit of early ’80s post-punk? I can’t fathom how tough all of that must be, even in the Internet age.
Also, I imagine that this is the first act of a much longer timeframe in which China’s uniqueness (”in China how we say things is not very direct,” says one band member) leads to a more homegrown and less derivative music. I’ve seen this in Israel’s popular music over the past 15 years; at the outset it was warmed-over Brits and Amerks, but much more now of a stew of local and international influences. And the most intriguing question remains: how is the evolving domestic situation going to manifest itself in bands’ work? I’m trying to imagine the members of My Morning Jacket constantly fretting over whether the government will let them make their music, with no definite way of knowing whether you’ve crossed the line.
Well, this was an intriguing way to spend an hour, but hardly productive for karaoke. I’ll go back to the drawing board on that. Suggestions are welcome.
Ye gods, I have 34 iPhone apps . . .
November 24, 2008
Can’t live without’s:
Beijing Taxi Guide = unbelievable value for $5. Well over 2500 listings for everything you can imagine (25 listings for duck restaurants alone), with cards in Mandarin to show taxi drivers, reviews, links to web sites, etc.
KTDict-CE = searchable Mandarin dictionary by handwriting recognition. Almost certain to be useful when looking at street signs. (I also have DianHua, same idea.)
AirSharing = yes, the 3G should have direct USB file sharing, but this is the next best thing.
Beejive = elegant multiprotocol IM.
Fring = SIP and VoIP calls in China, sounds good to me. Now if they could figure out how to sort the buddy list I’d use it for chat as well. And AT&T, you already have my money, so could you please let me make Fring calls over 3G? Thank you.
Instapaper = Caches web articles for later reading. Sounds dumb on paper, indispensable in practice. Will be a huge timesaver when I only have WiFi for an hour at a time.
Stanza = e-book reader that also reads .prc, .pdf etc. Probably good for class notes.
Google Mobile App = I think the jury is somewhat out on this one, but I like Reader for RSS feeds.
Pandora = how else would I listen to “Sounds Better In The Song”? They need to get with Apple and let this play in the background.
Tweetsville = nice Twitter app.
QQ = 400+ million subscribers can’t be wrong.
Fun, but limited . . .
Urbanspoon = the dials are fun, but where are the Beijing restaurant reviews? C’mon folks, there is even a Zagat’s now.
GPS Tracker = hope I never need someone to use it.
Uh, maybe I’ll use it . . .
Jott = one review put it best: an app in search of a function.
Truphone = more expensive than Skype, so it’s plan B.
NYTimes = somehow I just find myself on the webpage instead. Same for the Facebook app.
Constitution = I wish there were cases and commentary, not just the text.
Shakespeare = same. Pretty bare bones.
WTF?
Fliq = beam a business card? Not exactly a robust app.
SnapTell = take a pic of music, compare prices . . . deleted that.
Wish list
Could we please have a better calendar app that adds contacts and lets me call them, kinda like what every other smartphone has??
How about multi-tasking? Is that too much to ask of the company that gives me a wide-open desktop?
Obama’s economic stimulus plan: how accurate were my predictions?
November 23, 2008
Two weeks ago, I told both of my classes that within the next few weeks, President-elect Obama would announce that upon taking office he would propose an economic stimulus plan with the following features:
1. It would be termed “Green Recovery” or something to that effect
2. It would be touted as a plan that would create 2 million or more jobs in the short term
3. It would feature direct federal spending of at least $100 billion (but probably considerably more than that) over two years in the following areas:
- Retrofitting buildings to increase energy efficiency
- Expanding mass transit and freight rail
- Constructing “smart” electrical grid transmission systems
- Wind power
- Solar power
- Advanced biofuels
I also predicted that any new comprehensive federal carbon regulation (a cap-and-trade program similar to that proposed in the Climate Security Act, for example) would not be a priority until after this stimulus plan was underway.
I predicted that Obama would use the following talking points to justify this program:
– it would create 2 million new jobs, with a significant proportion in the struggling construction and manufacturing sectors (I showed a graphic detailing the professions that would see increased jobs).
– it would be a strategy to “invest in the greening of our economy,” “to jumpstart a comprehensive clean energy transformation for our nation,” to provide “more jobs, and better jobs, compared to continuing to pursue a path of inaction marked by rising dependence on energy imports.”
It now appears that this sort of plan is pretty close to what the incoming Administration has in mind, according to this report.
I had several reasons for my confident prediction.
First, “personnel is policy,” as Ronald Reagan once famously said. John Podesta, head of the Obama transition team, is the head of the Center for American Progress, the progressive think tank that issued the Green Recovery report in September. That report “shows the impact of a swift initial investment in climate solutions that would direct funding toward six energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies.” There are other proposals of this sort floating out there, but none came with Podesta’s central position in the transition to power. Robert Reich, the former Clinton Secretary of Labor and an Obama economic advisor, repeated most of the six strategies on his blog, calling for investment “mostly [in] infrastructure — – repairing roads and bridges, levees and ports; investing in light rail, electrical grids, new sources of energy, more energy conservation.” Note the substantial overlap.
Many Americans still believe that protecting the environment and growing the economy are incompatible. So what’s a new President to do in a time of economic downturn? Simple: use government spending to create “green jobs,” which was a theme Obama touched upon frequently during the campaign. It’s no accident that creating the kinds of jobs described in Green Recovery, jobs for civil engineers, mechanics, HVAC professionals and the like, could do a wealth of good in Rust Belt states. Just ask Tom Friedman.
Finally, let’s return to the idea that a “green recovery” program signals that action on a comprehensive regulatory program for carbon regulation is not forthcoming immediately. I think Obama knows that if Congress moves forward with a cap-and-trade bill shortly after taking office, he will be “Harry and Louise”‘d to no end, and it will be a major blow to his political standing. The cloture vote on the Climate Security Act was 48-36 in favor of closing off debate. Six Senators (including Obama, Clinton and McCain) were not present and indicated they would have voted with the 48. So it has been reported that 54 Senators in this outgoing Congress were in favor of the bill. That’s misleading, as the vote was on a procedural matter, not the underlying substance of the bill. I don’t think there are 60 votes for a variant of the bill in the new Congress.
Here’s an interesting nugget from Green Recovery: “[t]he next president and lawmakers can pledge to repay the Treasury the cost of the green infrastructure recovery program from cap-and-trade auction revenue.” This is both a justification for starting with a green recovery plan (the $ will come back later) and a signal that the economic stimulus plan will come first. What better way to resolve a primary difference between the two Presidential candidates’ global warming plans (McCain wanted to distribute free pollution allowances to companies) than to remind lawmakers in 2010 that auctioning off allowances is necessary to recoup the downpayment on green recovery?
And while we’re at it, let’s not forget that the international community will be meeting in Copenhagen in December, 2009 to conclude negotiations on a global warming agreement. I foresee President Obama announcing that the United States will agree to binding greenhouse gas reductions and achieve its target through implementation of a comprehensive control scheme to be put in place after Copenhagen.
As for the plan itself, I offer the words I say at the outset of every class I have ever taught: “let’s get started.”
My voice cries out
November 20, 2008
And it is heard!
Deseret Power — global warming case
November 18, 2008
Last week, the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) issued a decision in Deseret Power Electric Cooperative that could signal an increased likelihood of federal regulation of global warming in the new Administration.
The EAB is “the final Agency decisionmaker on administrative appeals under all major environmental statutes that the Agency administers.” In agency-speak, a plaintiff must typically “exhaust” all possible ways of getting a controversy with a federal agency resolved within the agency itself before suing it in federal court. The Sierra Club pursued this approach here, seeking review of the EPA’s permit that would allow Deseret to build a new coal-fired electricity generating unit at its existing power plant in Bonanza, Utah.
The Sierra Club was motivated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, the global warming case involving the EPA’s refusal to regulate automobile greenhouse gas emissions under Title II of the Clean Air Act. Broadly speaking, the CAA regulates “stationary sources” (those that do not move) under Title I, and “mobile sources” (cars, trucks, etc.) under Title II. A coalition of governments and interest groups had petitioned the EPA to regulate GHGs coming from automobiles. The EPA refused, saying it did not have the authority because GHGs were not “air pollutants” regulated under Title II. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that GHGs fall easily within the “capacious” CAA definition of “air pollutant.” It also rejected the EPA’s arguments that even if it had the authority to do so, it could avoid regulating, stating that it could deny the petition only if it could find a way to rebut the overwhelming evidence that global warming is happening.
It’s the first part of this holding that has implications for Deseret Power. The CAA’s definition of “air pollutant” covers all titles of the Act, not just Title II. So if a utility is required to get a permit for emissions of air pollutants, wouldn’t it have to control GHGs as well as traditional pollutants such as sulfur dioxide? The Sierra Club essentially argued that if CO2 is an “air pollutant” for purposes of Title II, it is for Title I as well.
Deseret Power needed a permit (in CAA-speak, a Prevention of Significant Deterioration or “PSD” permit) because its new unit was a “major modification” to the existing plant. As a permit condition, it needed to use the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to control air pollution, and the Sierra Club wanted Deseret to adopt BACT for CO2. The question the EAB confronted is whether the PSD sections of the CAA, worded differently than Title II, require controls of CO2 emissions. Much of the lengthy decision is devoted to parsing through the EPA’s historical interpretation of the Title I language. The reason for this is that in Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy, a recent CAA case involving the air pollution program of Title I, the Supreme Court determined that even words used identically in different parts of the same statute don’t necessarily mean the same thing. So, off the EAB goes to decide exactly whether the PSD requirements bind the EPA.
The EAB remanded the case to the regional office and requested that it reconsider its decision. This leaves the status of the underlying issue unclear, of course. You can imagine the EPA’s administrative law judges thinking, “whew, we fobbed this one off until January.” But notice that they didn’t reject the Sierra Club’s argument out of hand, which gives support to the idea I’ve heard floated about that the incoming EPA will use direct regulation of GHGs under the CAA as a short-term transition to a more comprehensive regulatory regime.
Supreme Court decides Winter v. NRDC
November 16, 2008
My daughter has to write a monthly current events story for her 5th grade class, & she gave a presentation in October on the oral argument in Winter v. NRDC.
My introduction to this case was at a symposium last year at William and Mary. There, Navy and NRDC lawyers did pitched battle on whether the Navy should be allowed to conduct its training exercises, when the sonar causes injuries to marine mammals.
The Supreme Court decision is really appalling, all about putting the thumb on the injunction equities scale in favor of the Navy’s arguments that it just has to keep these training exercises going or national readiness will suffer. Needless to say, we know one young woman who’s disappointed today.
XM and Sirius merge, and the result is . . .
November 16, 2008
Confusion.
Last week, I checked out the “Best of Sirius” and passed (don’t need Howard Stern, thanks), and figured that was all the combining for now. Boy, was I wrong. Like everyone else I woke up last Thursday to the “new lineup” foisted on us with no notice. Some channels gone, others “replaced.”
There’s lots of teeth gnashing by XM subscribers at places like here and here .
Anyone paying attention (and yes, I guess that should have included me) should have noticed that duplicate channels — or at least those perceived to be — were going to be gone . But the real loss is that less commercially oriented music offerings on XM were pared down in favor of more mainstream fare on Sirius. (To be fair, we did get new channels from Sirius, such as the marvelous “E Street Radio.”)
I’ve had XM from its start, and loved “X Country” (now former XM 12). It played deep into alternative country, zydeco, and so on. Steve Earle, sure, but also Townes Van Zandt. Cross Canadian Ragweed (not a fan) but also the V-Roys. It’s where I first heard the Drive-By Truckers and Jon Dee Graham. I’d chatted with their program director months before they even got underway. In this restructuring, the channel’s gone and “replaced” by Sirius’ “Outlaw Country.” From its artist lineup, it looks like there will be a lot more yee-haw, a lot less No Depression. Man, am I bummed.
Well, at least it was good to hear I’m not the only one. I feel the pain of those who mourn the loss of Fred and Lucy (XM’s ’80s and 90s alternative offerings), which were way better than the pap that replaces them. And XMU? “Sirius XM U,” which “replaced” it, is no adventurous college radio station.
I’m not likely to cancel (the news offerings alone justify a subscription), but with tons of alternatives to satellite radio out there, it’s extremely disappointing to see Sirius-XM veer toward the commercial mainstream. Last.fm will now get more and more of my music time.
Wifi in Beijing
November 16, 2008
Trying to find out how much there is.
An endeavor somewhere between “discover the secrets of the Forbidden City” and “unlock the iPhone.”
Inscrutable, to say the least. Is there . . .
a) Widespread wifi, but only really in restaurants and cafes that cater to laowai ;
b) Citywide wifi within the Third Ring Road that sprung up for the Olympics (and now requires some sort of payment); or
c) Illusory promises of the same that will devolve in practice to one bar of signal everywhere?
Stay tuned.
Obama and the “Team of Rivals”
November 15, 2008
I love the Hillary Clinton/”Team of Rivals” stuff. One of my favorite books, writ large on the public stage.
Let’s go the extra mile. I was asked “who’d be Chase?,” so I thought I would try my hand at filling out the entire team of rivals. Here goes:
Obama — Lincoln, natch. Not the first choice of his party at the start of the nominating process (that would be Seward, and how juicy is it that the “obvious choice” now is the one who may wind up filling the Seward role?) but the guy who was victorious at the end.
Clinton — Seward. But will she hang in the Prez’s digs with him in the evenings, sipping brandy and smoking cigars? Hmmm, doubt it.
Bates — I figure Joe Lieberman for this. Bates was the older, so-called “moderate” who really wasn’t a Republican and whose politics would have destroyed the party.
Chase — Al Gore, hands down. Brains, but with a brainy and not politically or socially adept view of the election borne in large part from being above/beyond the fray. But he still comes out OK with an important job (Supreme Court Justice), as I imagine Al Gore will, even if maybe it’s not this job. Not sure who’d play his charming first-lady-in-waiting daughter Kate. Evidence is not necessarily to the contrary , just not convincing that his daughters could run the country.
Yes, I know I am being historically inaccurate, as Lincoln’s rivals contended for the same nomination as him, but I hope you all will give me some license.
Stanton — McCain? I guess we’ll see on Monday.
Sounds “reasonable” to me!
November 9, 2008
