Long Sunday

Not Music

From an interview with Helmut Lachenmann:

"LACHENMANN: Yes. Tonality was something that wasn't rejected, but had to be overcome. We have to find new antennae in ourselves, to listen more, and this is a wonderful adventure of discovery. For me, my music has as much beauty as any conventional music, maybe more. Beauty is a precious idea. I want to liberate this term from the standardized categories. I'll give you a little example. I used to teach children, and I presented them the music of Stockhausen, etc. They said that it wasn't beautiful, they didn't like it. I asked them what they liked, what they thought was beautiful, and they first hesitantly named some pop music. The next week, I went there and brought two pictures with me. One was an attractive photograph of the movie star Sophia Loren. The other was a drawing by Albrecht Dürer, who had drawn a picture of his mother: very old, with a long nose, and bitter looking face. She had a hard life, and her face was full of wrinkles. I showed the two pictures and asked "Who is more beautiful?" They were totally confused, and then came the wonderful answer I'll never forget - it was the highlight of my life. A girl said "I think the ugly one is more beautiful". This is the dialectical way. Looking at this picture, one feels the precise observation of her son. Not to make it more beautiful, not idealized, just showing it. It was full of intensity. To me, as important as beauty is the word intensity. I search for this in music."

Katrina Related Remix

Louisiana 1927

Hell on Earth (NPR)

George Bush Don't Like Black People

Cornel West

The Militarization of New Orleans

"He [President Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks.  They key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."  -H.R. Halderman, cited in Lockdown America by Christian Parenti

Ottawa Citizen

Notes on Universal Experience and Difference

Project Censored

Reporters Gone Wild

Crooks

New Orleans to be rebuilt without "underclass"

I'm no f&cking Buddhist, says Bjork & Zizek

Link: Revenge of Global Finance, by Slavoj Zizek.

I like this article from Zizek. Watching the stupid film I turned after Yoda's 'let go of everything' speech to someone or rather, and said to a friend: "fucking Buddhist". I like the "fucking" here, for it in itself announces a passionate dislike - itself an attachment, and one I refuse to let go of despite seeing my amigos one by one succumbing to the true Dark side. In this very attachment I announce my desire for the Other, my desire to refuse this capitalist supplement of meditating after a hard day's work. Instead I have a Guinness and blog (pardon the self-referentiality at this exact moment).

But I'm a copycat here: Bjork said it first, no doubt because many confused her as such.
"I’m no fucking buddhist, but this is enlightenment" (from "Alarm Call").

Zizek's `most interesting' point, I think, is that the reason the Revenge of the Sith seemed so bland, so narratively inferior, is because Anakin's transformation into Darth Vader was not, as it should have been, because he became Evil precisely because of his zealousness to battle Evil, but simply because he was weak-willed. Boring, especially if Lucas really wanted to make a political point... (though I'd say Bush's handlers are Evil from the get-go, not that they are perverted in their very quest for `rooting out' Evil - or if so, they were perverted a long, long time ago...). Anyway, this explains why it lacked "the proper tragic grandeur... Anakin should have become a monster out of his very excessive attachment with seeing Evil everywhere and fighting it".

ADDENDUM (for those not familiar with Zizek's understanding of Christianity, i.e., for those who aren't aware that he is, in fact, an atheist):

Part of the logic in the background of this article is that to be an atheist (as Zizek is), one must pass through the Christian experience.

Christianity is the only religion where God dies. When Christ dies on the Cross, God dies too. God only remains, then, through the faith of Christians (in the Holy Spirit, the community of believers). Obviously, then, Christians are likely to waver in their faith. This can lead to extreme violence towards others in the desperate attempt to `shore up' one's wavering faith.

It can also lead to atheism. We can only be atheist because of Christianity. If we just reject the Christian legacy tout court, we are only presupposing a dumb pagan or Buddhist God from which we cannot find a path to atheism.

There is, then, nothing more regressive than denying `our' Christian legacy.

(Of course, if you get this confused with the neocon agenda, I shall have to bonk you over the head.)