Historical relevance

Ever since my honey moon trip to Europe, I feel like I have a wider understanding of the world. Not that anything specific happened on the trip to suddenly make me a genius, but having a international perspective for the first time, gave me a wider scope of how different nations interact with each other, and where sentiments towards each other come from.

Earlier this year there was a lot of news going on about a little thing going in congress about an Armenian genocide. This apparently unheard of travesty was the Holocaust before the Holocaust. I had never heard of it, and with my incredible lack of knowledge in the history department, it's no surprise.

There were a number of Americans in an uproar with the Congressmen and women who were involved with the discussion. For those that don't follow the news or current events, here is the scoop. Durring the first World War, The Turks allegedly murdered hundreds of thousands of its Armenian citizens.

" The Armenian Genocide was centrally planned and administered by the Turkish government against the entire Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire. It was carried out during W.W.I between the years 1915 and 1918. The Armenian people was subjected to deportation, expropriation, abduction, torture, massacre, and starvation. The great bulk of the Armenian population was forcibly removed from Armenia and Anatolia to Syria, where the vast majority was sent into the desert to die of thirst and hunger. Large numbers of Armenians were methodically massacred throughout the Ottoman Empire. Women and children were abducted and horribly abused. The entire wealth of the Armenian people was expropriated. After only a little more than a year of calm at the end of W.W.I, the atrocities were renewed between 1920 and 1923, and the remaining Armenians were subjected to further massacres and expulsions. In 1915, thirty-three years before UN Genocide Convention was adopted, the Armenian Genocide was condemned by the international community as a crime against humanity."

Unfortunately, genocides have happened all throughout history. They are an embarrasing scar on the reality that is the human race. Turkey thinks so, and has spent the better part of the last century trying to pretend this one didn't happen. This unspoken subject matter is a cause for shame and is to be swept under the carpet at all costs.

Why then did our United States congress decide now, of all times, when our allegiance to the nation of Turkey is of grave importance to the troops over in that part of the world, to pull the rug out from underneath the Turks? Why was it necessary to expose them, now? If you ask the congressmen, they said that it wasn't a matter of why now, but when else? There had always been reason to ignore these crimes, and after several wars in the region, there never seemed to be a "good time" to piss off the Turks. Now was as good a time as any to say what needed to be said. Okay, I'll buy that.

In the meantime, this whole discussion got me to thinking about World War, and the state of our world today. First of all, I was lacking some major knowledge about the World Wars. Both of them, but in particular the first, durring which the Armenian Genocide occurred. Saddly, like most Americans, my interest in history has generally been surrounded by my trips to the cinema. It didn't happen unless someone made a movie about it. With this news developing about the Armenians, I decided, enough is enough. I can't wait for Hollywood to film the epic about Armenian genocide starring George Clooney to magically appear. It was time to spread my wings and do a little investigating on my own. I'm starting with some books.

I picked up a book about World War I. I've read quite a bit of it, but there is no mention of the Armenian genocide. Several other books on the same subject I have picked up seemed to glaze over the topic as well. Apparently, if history is written by those that write it, the historians perpetuated this whole armenian genocide by trying to make a non subject out of what was clearly a key world event. We can only ignore the past so long as it is far enough behind us not to bite us in the ass. This clearly isn't.

I'm going to continue to read up on WWI over the next several weeks. In the meantime, a quick comment on what I have imparted so far from my readings.

1) If you look at the origins of the first world war, they seem to have striking similarities to what has been happening in the world lately. Nations entering into agreements to help each other out if the need ever arrises, and sides are quickly chosen. WWI happened because a seemingly unimportant event pitted one small country against another. Each of these countries had agreements with allies and when the two small nations began the war, other nations fell into step like dominos. September 11, 2001 could in many ways be likened to the assasination of Franz Ferdinand. So much has happened as a direct result of that tragedy. At this point though it almost seems as if it is being used as an overblown excuse to invade countries and create war on countries that aren't involved. That might sound like a stretch, and yes I'm sure you can trace some responsibility of 9/11 to many of the countries involved, but when you talk about continually adding to the list of nations we are ready to engage in war, logic has to prevail at some point. This has gotten so much bigger than 9/11.

2) Things that are happening today, can be traced right back to decisions that happened at the end of WWI. I don't have details yet, but if you look at the nation of Israel alone, and how the land was partitioned up between Jews and Palestinians, and then read the headlines of today, it's hard to disconnect the two.

While I wouldn't say what is going on today neccesarily will predicate a WWIII, it's not as far fetched as we might hope. I think all it would take at this point is for the opponents to get organized. With the instant communication that modern technology makes available to the world, all it would take is another event like 9/11 on the wrong side to make the nations that seem to be opposing America to stand up, take notice and mobilize. That's without a doubt the last thing we need.

Of course, I hope I'm blowing smoke here. Let's hope so, but the proof is in the punch. I'm going to continue to read up on WWI and WWII and try and see where the connections lie. Maybe we can avoid making the same mistakes that led to the previous two wars.

yub chub!

Great little ad series for music lovers

Requiem for an iPod

Three years ago, I finally broke down and joined the masses to purchase my first iPod. Yesterday, I laid that iPod to rest. I had treated the old girl well, but apparently herr time had come. The cost to fix her was was about the same to replace her, and so I did. While I am frustrated at the lifespan she gave me, I did listen to her constantly, and in that 3 years, I probably put about 5 years of use on that little contraption.

The sad iPod icon that it showed me on it's last day told me that it was going to miss me too. While I'm sure the new ipod will more than fill her shoes, I will never forget the original. So long ipod. It was nice, while it lasted.

Nate's Lil Buddy
2004 - 2007
iPod, friend, paperweight
"Please eject before disconnecting."

Abrupt endings

While I didn't get to watch the last season of Sopranos when everyone else did, it was hard to miss the outrage fans had over the "just push stop" approach to ending the series. Longtime fans of the show wanted more than a blackout screen and ambiguity. Tony Soprano should either live or die, but it should be clear.

Then came all the speculation. The black out screen actually was his death, some said. Others pointed out that the Soprano family keeps on keeping on just like they did from the first episode, and therein lies some sort of lesson on life.

While many spurnned the idea of such an unsatisfying ending to their favorite ganster, others gave the creator of the series the benefit of the doubt. He had written a wonderful series up to that point, why should he be scornned for finishing it in his unique way? Absolute faith in an artists vision is to be admired.

Yesterday I saw another fantastic crime drama, "No Country for Old Men." The Cohen brothers seem to have drawn a line in the sand with this one, returning to their glory days of fine film making like "Fargo" and "The Big Lebowski." Yes, it's hard to ignore that their last several efforts were less than worthy of their previous repetoire. Then a week ago, my wife and I rented "Paris Je Taime." For those that don't know anything about that one. Some 15-20 top notch film makers were asked to film a three minute short centered on one of the burroughs in Paris with the subject of love. The Cohen brother's submission was worth the price of admission alone. At long last, my favorite storytellers had triumphantly returned to their talents and told a story hard to ignore, it was so artfully done. As it turns out, their humorous and thoughtful segment in "Paris Je Taime" was simply an amuse-bouche for the main course that was "No Country for Old Men."

From the first frame and on through, the Cohen brothers tell a violent and harrowing story in the way only they can. Immediately, fans of their earlier works are forced to compare this new masterpiece to the likes of "Fargo" and "Blood Simple". The latter for its location, the former for it's general storyline and characters which seemed to closely echo each other. In both "No Country" and "Fargo" you have the lawman, (or lawwoman in Fargo's case) A bumbling lawman's buddy, a hapless idiot who stumbles onto a darker world, an innocent and of course, the psychotic killer, this time played moltenly by Javier Bardem. Not to mention the simpleton citizens littered throughout the story, some living to the end, some dieing at the unmerciful hand of fate.

Where "Fargo's" violence was subtle, "No Country" seems to make the ensuing carnage a character all it's own. In fact, by the time you have seen the movie to it's odd conclusion, the trail of dead bodies seems like it may have been the only character the Cohen brother's really wanted you to focus on at all. The rest of the characters are secondary and simply pedestrians in the larger statement that is being made. The only other "character" that seems as important is the location itself, South Texas, which broods as harshly and expansively as any of the narative, which is indeed ample.

And yes, while the human characters in this film may ultimately serve as pawns along the way, they are written with such flare that even Tommy Lee Jones playing a lawman seems remarkably fresh and original. A feat probably only the Cohen brothers and a story such as this could probably pull off.

And then there is the ending. At first it seems naked. The black screen is as much a slap in the face as the final screen of "The Sopranos." We leave our storyline feeling so unfulfilled. It was just this slap that I think the Cohen brothers felt was neccessary to draw unignorable attention to the larger message, the message that was being communicated from the opening frames. That message in my mind is: no matter how many bad guys there are, and no matter how many heros try and oppose them, there never seems to be an end to the cycle. While it's clear that Tommy Lee Jones's character lives beyond the final frame, his surrender as a lawman works as an effective death to his character. Violence and the struggle against it will live long past us. The harshness of our world and the human condition perpetuate them. This film is a fazing glimpse at that harsh reality, the storyline that seems to skitter aimlessly into the credits, forces us to hone in on this larger message. Luckily, the Cohen brothers tell such a savvy tale along the way, you can't help but enjoy the journey.

sketchbook entry

Introducing Jesca Hoop

I haven't been watching the new music scene as closely as I used to. I tend to get behind with the stuff I already have to listen to. Every now and then a release will find a way to catch my ear though. This one sure did. I stumbled onto Jesca Hoop's website randomly one night. The video below and a few other songs were on there, and I liked what I saw, but not enough to purchase anything yet. I was broke that week after all.

About two weeks later on my drive home from work NPR's All Things Considered did a lovely interview with Jesca that made up my mind. I haven't been sorry.

Jesca Hoop's sound is part old world, part new world. She mixes odd instruments and sounds with inventive and mood setting soundscapes that point back to the etherreal sound of the Sunday's or early Cranberries. She also uses her vocal range to communicate a range of moods from a deep sultry passion in the lower registers to a more naive girlish higher register.

The song that caught the public's eye is here on her new album Kismet. "Seed of Wonder" marches through a simple beat and baseline with softly rapped lyrics and luxurious vocal harmonies. It's genius is in it's relentless vocal structure changes which are held together by that singular beat. Other highlights include "Out the Back Door," which brings an old Ragtime feel into the very solid present and "Money" which seems to get inpiration from "Money" from the muscial Cabaret and Alison Goldfrapp's lucious dance beats.

All I can say is, if her next releases improve at all on this first album's feats, she is destined for a great musical carreer. I know I'm already a fan.

pleghm philm