The current shutdown exercise--emphasis on "current"--is a relatively minor skirmish in the larger battle for power which is going to be fought--in the trenches, in the air, on the beaches--for 34 more months, without any break, and at tremendous financial expense.
Setting the Stage, Sticking My Neck Out with Prediction
The ultimate objective is the 2020 election, one which may determine the long-term future of this nation. I do not believe I exaggerate: If after all this chaos, dysfunction, and madness, the Trumpian Republicans can succeed in retaining power in 2020, I would view our future to be an accelerating downward spiral into insularity, a diminishing role in global affairs, and constant domestic strife, aggravated by massively increasing inequality and an exploding debt. To keep power, the oligarchy will move toward despotism, and what is left of our rights and freedoms will become a sad joke. We can see some portents of their ways, and the lengths to which they would go, in the recent examples of the manipulation of the Supreme Court nomination process, in 2016 and 2017, and the efforts to suppress votes which the Republicans are attempting in several states where they have the power to do so,
2020 is the great prize, and although we are looking at it from great distance (in political terms), there is every reason to think it will be a banner year for the Democrats. For one thing, in the same way that the Democrats will be defending many Senate seats this year in red states, in 2020 the Republicans will be on the defensive, trying to hold seats in states that tilt Democratic.
I would guess there is better than a 50-50 chance that the US economy will be either in recession or not long out of it by 2020, with the most likely scenario in the meantime being a ramping up of inflation. That would be due to the growing budget deficits, to suppression of trade leading to higher import costs, and the labor shortage-- incredible in this age of shrinking demand of labor, but created by the public's demand for more jobs and the politicians' willingness to bend policy to support the desire--which is now finally driving up wages. The Fed is trying to move up low interest rates sufficiently to contain it, but politics are making it hard: first an unneeded tax cut, and next will be a burst of additional spending on "infrastructure"--likely to end up being a massive pork-barrel spending on low-priority developments to further pay off well-connected Trump sycophants. If inflation starts surpassing acceptable levels, there will be little choice but to jack up rates, and that will lead to the recession I would predict for 12-24 months from now. I don't think it will be a mild one, either: the bursting of the bubblicious markets, the return of consumer overindebtedness, and the failure to learn enough lessons from the last recession in reducing the risk in our financial structure suggest to me that this will be one that leads to stagnation, a sharply weakened dollar and a sharp increase in unemployment.
Then there is the destruction of the Republican brand which the GOP and its alleged leader, the accidental President, are just doing to themselves. Even with all the basic measures of the US economy going great right now, the public is disenchanted with this one-party government, with the performance of the President, and with the direction the country is going.
Thank goodness for that! If it were otherwise, if this past year somehow conned a majority of Americans into thinking they were being governed well, then there would be reason for despair. Instead, we are encouraged, we are furious, and we will not be bought off by something like the phony appeal of the recent tax bill.
2018: A Historical Analogy
This year's midterm elections are an important and necessary phase in this war, though its result is unlikely to be a decisive one. The Republicans would need a substantial reversal in the current trends to be able to maintain the degree of dominance they have today in both the Federal and state governments, while the Democrats' absolute best outcome would be to reduce their deficit in governorships and state legislatures while gaining narrow majorities in the House and, more unlikely, in the Senate. It is inconceivable that we will come out of 2018 with the Republican side not in control of the Federal judicial and executive branches. Almost certainly, this year's result will be a closer contest for governmental power, with no reprieve at all from the continuous war of words, and immediate transition to the early stages of the 2020 general election. Still, the contests this year will be critical in setting the terms of the legislative battles to be held in the 2019-2020 Congress, and of contests in basically all the swing states, like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Arizona, Minnesota and Florida: all of them have contested battles both for the governors' office (and control of state legislatures) and for a Senate seat (and for some, two Senate seats).
If I were looking for a historical reference to which to compare this stage of the war, I would say that 2018 could be the equivalent of the Battle of Stalingrad for the opponents of the Drumpfenreich; the event that turns the tide, the one that gives its opponents a view of a possible victory, though the path ahead be long and bloody. Stalingrad was a long, cruel campaign of attrition and destruction, and the Democrats will have to endure, cold-bloodedly, months of hardship, tremendous cost, and frequent setbacks, just as the Soviets did.
The 2018 campaign will have three fronts--the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the state elections (the great majority of states have their governors' races in the midterm). There are different conditions in each battle. With the states, the Republicans have a huge lead which will certainly be reduced; in the House a great deal of uncertainty is present, but the Republicans are on the run; and in the Senate the Republicans have an edge, in terms of the relatively small number of seats they need to defend, while the Democrats have to defend both many seats and many in which their party is the weaker one in the state. More on this later.
The Current SNAFU
I expect the current shutdown to be resolved quickly--maybe today. It is about getting agreement on the short-term legislative agenda in Congress: how long to temporarily fund the government this time, when the immigration debate will be held and under what rules. It is true that both parties' stubbornness created this dysfunction and thus share the blame; it is also true that both sides are effectively taking hostages: the Democrats are using the shutdown to force a debate on immigration, and specifically on the status of the DACA recipients (children of undocumented immigrants who have long maintained residence here, but who have been exempted from deportation--at least, until Trump's executive order will take effect in March). The Republicans' hostages are the DACA "Dreamers" themselves--they are using the Democrats' commitment to preserving, or improving, the Dreamers' status in order to get more immigration restrictions, and Trump is using it to get funding for his Stupid Wall with Mexico--something the Democrats would never otherwise consent to doing.
The Senate Democrats are on dangerous ground: forcing this shutdown--and it is true that they did do that, by withholding their votes Friday night from allowing a continuing resolution to come to the floor for a final vote--should not backfire on them in a big way. On the other hand, though, the actual debate on DACA will be painful for them, as the Republicans will try to load up as much misery as they can onto a relatively straightforward question of allowing them to stay--something the Republican leadership and the President have said they are willing to do. A large portion of the Republican Congressional contingent is against that, though, and they will force their leadership to add more border restrictions, funding to start the Stupid Wall--and then they will still vote against it. If this bill gets loaded down excessively with poison pills, or worse, if it does not pass--and the relevant history of the past two decades is that, as an immigration bill gets broader, its support gets weaker--then the Democrats will be in a bad spot. They cannot afford to let go the small bit of leverage they have, with must-pass government funding, until they get what they want, and that might mean a longer, more brutal shutdown later.
The fact is that the Republicans have the trump cards (sorry!) in this deal, and the Democrats are in a somewhat desperate position, having made commitments that they do not have the power to fulfill. The turtle/weasel cross heading the Senate, the talking sphincter in the White House, and the epitome of white male privilege in the House Speaker's chair are going to seek revenge on the Democrats for making the Republicans' governance look ineffectual. The fact is, though, the Republicans own their inability, and this first year of Drumpfite chaos only confirms what was apparent during the Bushite Misrule (2001-09): the GOP is no longer fit to govern, and becomes less so each year.
Monday, January 22, 2018
Thursday, January 11, 2018
Excerpts from The Saga of the Talking Presidential Sphincter
Was this the tipping point finally? I could easily see Trump pull a Sarah Palin on the whole country and pass the baton to Mike Pence. Bad as Pence would be, I have to prefer that to this monstrosity and embarrassment.
I've heard a lot of criticism of Michael Wolff, and it may be warranted, but I really enjoyed the article in New York Magazine about the Trumps on Election Night (an excerpt from the book). Wolff makes a great analogy using Mel Brooks' movie "The Producers"--the campaign that was intended to lose dramatically failed to achieve its objective. And won instead.
My wife: "Stephen Miller is a putin'bot."
Nicholas Kristof said in a Times editorial last weekend argued that 2017 was the best year in History. He's right in a statistical and globalist sense, but it's a very misleading lede. Short term great, but by any other measure of time, a disaster.
He gets to the point about two-thirds of the way through, which is that the potential human value present in this moment provides urgency to do something about the threats to it.
He's right, but our focus should be on addressing the "mortal threats" he mentions briefly.
Josh Marshall had it right: It just doesn't matter whether Trump is mentally ill--if there were any doubt.
Here's a quote I liked from a Washington Post update this morning:
--James Hohmann, "The Daily 202", Washington Post, Jan. 18, 2018, talking about Sam Clovis, who was humiliatingly recalled from a nomination for the US Dept. of Agriculture. I like the phrase "multiple Trump picks" and variations of it: "multiple Trump pricks", "multiple pump tricks"
An interesting question from the respected Quinnipiac polling agency asked respondents to give him a grade from A to F, a much better one than whether someone approves of him or feels we're on the right track: much more information value. This poll, before the "shithole" comment had 39% grade him an 'F', then 17% a D, only 11% a C, 16% a B, and 16% an A. (Clearly the 'I don't know/No answer' portion is omitted from their quote.) My calculation of their average is a 74, right in the middle of the 'D' range.
If we consider our expectations about a Trump presidency after Election Night, I would agree with this rating: he hasn't gotten us into a new stupid war--yet.
I remember feeling somewhat similarly about Dubya in mid-2001 (actually writing it--probably in eRaider.com) The difference is that those who would've given Dubya an F would probably only grade him in the 60-75 range, while Trump is probably distributed uniformly over the 0-75 range. Actually, that's very generous to him, as is the 60 average I gave him in coming up with the 74 average: I would personally give him an overall rating (not compared to my expectations) to be about a 17.+
I've heard a lot of criticism of Michael Wolff, and it may be warranted, but I really enjoyed the article in New York Magazine about the Trumps on Election Night (an excerpt from the book). Wolff makes a great analogy using Mel Brooks' movie "The Producers"--the campaign that was intended to lose dramatically failed to achieve its objective. And won instead.
My wife: "Stephen Miller is a putin'bot."
Nicholas Kristof said in a Times editorial last weekend argued that 2017 was the best year in History. He's right in a statistical and globalist sense, but it's a very misleading lede. Short term great, but by any other measure of time, a disaster.
He gets to the point about two-thirds of the way through, which is that the potential human value present in this moment provides urgency to do something about the threats to it.
He's right, but our focus should be on addressing the "mortal threats" he mentions briefly.
Josh Marshall had it right: It just doesn't matter whether Trump is mentally ill--if there were any doubt.
Here's a quote I liked from a Washington Post update this morning:
He's one of multiple Trump picks who couldn't pass muster with a GOP-controlled Senate, yet continues to wield immense authority within the government.
--James Hohmann, "The Daily 202", Washington Post, Jan. 18, 2018, talking about Sam Clovis, who was humiliatingly recalled from a nomination for the US Dept. of Agriculture. I like the phrase "multiple Trump picks" and variations of it: "multiple Trump pricks", "multiple pump tricks"
An interesting question from the respected Quinnipiac polling agency asked respondents to give him a grade from A to F, a much better one than whether someone approves of him or feels we're on the right track: much more information value. This poll, before the "shithole" comment had 39% grade him an 'F', then 17% a D, only 11% a C, 16% a B, and 16% an A. (Clearly the 'I don't know/No answer' portion is omitted from their quote.) My calculation of their average is a 74, right in the middle of the 'D' range.
If we consider our expectations about a Trump presidency after Election Night, I would agree with this rating: he hasn't gotten us into a new stupid war--yet.
I remember feeling somewhat similarly about Dubya in mid-2001 (actually writing it--probably in eRaider.com) The difference is that those who would've given Dubya an F would probably only grade him in the 60-75 range, while Trump is probably distributed uniformly over the 0-75 range. Actually, that's very generous to him, as is the 60 average I gave him in coming up with the 74 average: I would personally give him an overall rating (not compared to my expectations) to be about a 17.+
"Archie Bunker with a twitter feed" - Josh on Don Lemon, CNN +Obama would probably be about a 93--topic for another day, based on a measure that is not subjected to my interest but to humanity's, and to the notion of a free, somewhat democratic America's as a key factor in our species' continued viability.) The randomness of Trump's behavior is wholly negative from the point of view of the world, but not entirely so from the American one (first, if only narrowly or currently so). |
Thursday, January 04, 2018
2017: My Year in Songs
My New Years Eve was spent at home: we were working on a plan to go to see Murder by Death downtown, but as the freeze deepened, we made a late decision to bag it. The highlight of the evening was the performance by Keith Urban (yes, Nicole Kidman's husband) at a Nashville Eve rally, playing--basically solo guitar--and singing trademark songs from among the musicians who died in 2017. It included a verse and chorus or two from--among others--Chris Cornell (of Soundgarden), Glenn Campbell, Chuck Berry, and finished with a performance of Tom Petty's "Free Fallin'".
I should have mentioned Petty's passing earlier, but I can't count myself among his foremost fans. I don't think I ever purchased a product just of Petty and/or his Heartbreakers, nor did I attend any concerts: for example, this year at New Orleans' JazzFest I watched Lorde, though Petty was playing at the other end of the Fairgrounds. With hindsight, I'd have to say that was an error, though it's not a criticism of Lorde: she may well have multiple decades of performing ahead of her, while Petty had barely a season.
I always respected his music, though. He's a genuine American rocker of merit. As a keyboard maven, I loved how well much of Petty's music featured Benmont Tench. My favorite song was the one which I would say initially brought him into the big time, "Refugee". It doesn't get much play anymore, as it's kinda politically incorrect both toward the object of his scorn and to impoverished foreigners, but I love the edgy energy in it. I would also mention "Breakdown", "The Waiting", "Even the Losers', "Runnin' Down a Dream", and "Listen to Her Heart".
"Where's the Revolution?"-- Depeche Mode
You see the theme, though from Tom Petty's music: modern American male angst. He's dealing with interpersonal relations, performing the essential popular music functions of expressing empathy and providing consolation, but he's not making a statement of any kind.
There was too much of that in 2017; I am a little disappointed, but I think to some extent the shock of the 2016 election and what it means to us all has been a little hard to process. Rock musicians' minds were elsewhere, not paying much attention, and for the most part haven't snapped to it yet. I'm not even sure it will happen in 2018, but I feel confident the rage (or counter-rage, if you prefer) will rise by 2020. I would guess the one most likely to voice it is Bruce Springsteen, but we shall see--maybe Bob Dylan's songwriting brain hasn't given up the ghost yet. Of course, it took rap no time at all to react, in variously virulent and vicious voice.
Yes, veteran Brit rockers Depeche Mode did put out and promote a song with the above subtitle. The style was quite typical, the radical, provocative words clearly enunciated (as opposed to the usual mumbling or vocal distortions all too present in all popular music genres these days, though the lyrics now can easily be found by the curious on the Internet); however, I don't think D.Mode ever got their answer, and I'm not too many heard the question.
A couple of honorable mentions from foreign bands that can afford to take a stand: Arcade Fire--their new album "Everything Now" continues the social commentary, disguised in disco format, with the title song and with "Creature Comfort", but that's both Canadian and not really new content from them. Still much appreciated. U2's new album is more topical than their previous one and has some oblique references to the fact that the nature of this republic today is contrary to their concept of America. Again, foreign and not a new theme for them.
What was a little more surprising to me was the lyric to the Killers' "Run for Cover", as that all-American band is among the last I would look to for political commentary. It includes the lines, "It's even worse when the dirtbag's famous" and "he's fake news". But, unfortunately, Brandon Flowers does not seem to be referring directly to Trump but seems to be voicing the complaint of a guy whose girlfriend is ditching him for a Trump voter. Still, some political conscience from a rock band.
Radio, Radio
I got a car this year with Sirius XM, and it has no CD player! As a result, I have been listening to digitized radio a lot this year. Here are my top 10 stations (I'm going with the minimal rental level, but I am not just grifting off their free feed):
10. ESPN Radio
9. CNN
8. Deep Tracks (SXM #28) - offbeat playlist of obscure cuts from whenever and whoever
7. 820 am - I'm getting NorMan Goldman better than ever. No FM interference from the local Polish station on this feed.
6. Lithium - grunge and near-grunge
5. Classic Vinyl--'60's and '70's, good stuff only; way better than the 80's based Classic Rewind (the cassette period), which plays too much bad Zeppelin.
4. 101.1 FM
3. 93.1 FM -- my Chicago rock stations; gotta set the radio to these when I go in the parking garage.
2. altNation - yes, my chosen genre
1. Spectrum - goes across it; past and present, mostly good selections
And please don't waste your effort by advising me to go with some ipod or Apple tunes or Spotify or Pandora, etc. Don't need it, not buying it.
(Additional note--1/11/18: I did this list spontaneously, without reference to my Sirius dial, and butchered it somewhat. I forgot to include '80's New Wave station '1st wave' (belongs between #4 and 5 above), and Billy Preston (The Beatles--belongs between #8 and 7, as it works--sometimes--in variably-sized doses, but sometimes is impossible), but I should've had NBA and MLB Radio paired--'clubbed', as some might say--with #10, which I mislabeled, and probably should've found a mention for NPR and some of the jazz stations--disappointingly mainstream--as also mentioned. )
My Top 5 Songs of 2017, with some Additional Notes (and links to them)
5) "Feel It Still" - Portugal. The Man. Revival music--I prefer that to "throwback"--is doing just fine, though Amy Winehouse is gone and Adele dormant. This group achieved overnight success after 20 years of effort. I mention also New Orleans Revivalists' "Wish I Knew You" and Rag 'n' Bone Man's "Human". But 'Feel It Still" is something special, and I like the reminder that there was once a 1966 (or was it 1986?)
4) "Dear Life" - Beck. The Grammys are hard to figure. Back in the '70's and '80's, they were so good at recognizing the value of the big acts after they reached their peak. Now that they are finally cottoning onto rap, it makes me wonder what's the next big thing. In the case of Beck, they gave him the album of the year for the wrong album for his unexciting product "Morning Phase", then two years later he puts out "Colors", which brings back the verve and variety of his early work, with some lyrics that actually tend toward intelligible meaning this time around (though the wordplay is no less). The best song is "Dreams", but that came out two years ago. This song is a very respectable one, though; it's title is a play on the cliche phrase "holding on for dear life". Beck asks, musically, Why?
3. "No Roots", Alice Merton. Not a rebellion against roots music. Really, it does have a rootsy feel, but it's self-referencing metaphor. She's a young woman has lived the itinerant life of which she sings, or so she says. Not to be tokenist, but I should also cite 2017 efforts from some other rising young women of alternative rock, such as Lana del Rey, Lorde, and Julia Michaels.
2. Napalm, Conor Oberst. The prolific transplanted Nebraskan lives at the conjunction of rock, folk, and country, and in his current format mixes styles from song to song. On 2017's "Salutations" album, the best song for my money is this anarchist chika-chika rocker which seems like somewhat overt homage to Bob Dylan in his "Rainy Day Women" period: full of fun and meanness both, ready for trouble. His lyrics are pushing boundaries but he admits he's "still on the fence": basically, his political instinct centers around trusting none of them.
1) The System Only Dreams in Total Darkness, The National. The initial appeal was the musical composition, with some interesting tone sequences, a very strange guitar lick repeated every so often, and a canonical guitar solo I would describe as thrilling. The lyrics are somewhat impenetrable, especially the title, but seem to be about a deep interpersonal crisis of some kind, delivered convincingly. I've heard it many times, and it always provides an emotional lift. At the end of the day, though, to quote the song, "I can't explain it...ah...any other/Any other way..." and that is why we need music, after all.
Honorable Alt-Mention: 2017 was also a good year for alt-J, LCD Soundsystem,
War on Drugs, Cage the Elephant, and Spoon.
I should have mentioned Petty's passing earlier, but I can't count myself among his foremost fans. I don't think I ever purchased a product just of Petty and/or his Heartbreakers, nor did I attend any concerts: for example, this year at New Orleans' JazzFest I watched Lorde, though Petty was playing at the other end of the Fairgrounds. With hindsight, I'd have to say that was an error, though it's not a criticism of Lorde: she may well have multiple decades of performing ahead of her, while Petty had barely a season.
I always respected his music, though. He's a genuine American rocker of merit. As a keyboard maven, I loved how well much of Petty's music featured Benmont Tench. My favorite song was the one which I would say initially brought him into the big time, "Refugee". It doesn't get much play anymore, as it's kinda politically incorrect both toward the object of his scorn and to impoverished foreigners, but I love the edgy energy in it. I would also mention "Breakdown", "The Waiting", "Even the Losers', "Runnin' Down a Dream", and "Listen to Her Heart".
"Where's the Revolution?"-- Depeche Mode
You see the theme, though from Tom Petty's music: modern American male angst. He's dealing with interpersonal relations, performing the essential popular music functions of expressing empathy and providing consolation, but he's not making a statement of any kind.
There was too much of that in 2017; I am a little disappointed, but I think to some extent the shock of the 2016 election and what it means to us all has been a little hard to process. Rock musicians' minds were elsewhere, not paying much attention, and for the most part haven't snapped to it yet. I'm not even sure it will happen in 2018, but I feel confident the rage (or counter-rage, if you prefer) will rise by 2020. I would guess the one most likely to voice it is Bruce Springsteen, but we shall see--maybe Bob Dylan's songwriting brain hasn't given up the ghost yet. Of course, it took rap no time at all to react, in variously virulent and vicious voice.
Yes, veteran Brit rockers Depeche Mode did put out and promote a song with the above subtitle. The style was quite typical, the radical, provocative words clearly enunciated (as opposed to the usual mumbling or vocal distortions all too present in all popular music genres these days, though the lyrics now can easily be found by the curious on the Internet); however, I don't think D.Mode ever got their answer, and I'm not too many heard the question.
A couple of honorable mentions from foreign bands that can afford to take a stand: Arcade Fire--their new album "Everything Now" continues the social commentary, disguised in disco format, with the title song and with "Creature Comfort", but that's both Canadian and not really new content from them. Still much appreciated. U2's new album is more topical than their previous one and has some oblique references to the fact that the nature of this republic today is contrary to their concept of America. Again, foreign and not a new theme for them.
What was a little more surprising to me was the lyric to the Killers' "Run for Cover", as that all-American band is among the last I would look to for political commentary. It includes the lines, "It's even worse when the dirtbag's famous" and "he's fake news". But, unfortunately, Brandon Flowers does not seem to be referring directly to Trump but seems to be voicing the complaint of a guy whose girlfriend is ditching him for a Trump voter. Still, some political conscience from a rock band.
Radio, Radio
I got a car this year with Sirius XM, and it has no CD player! As a result, I have been listening to digitized radio a lot this year. Here are my top 10 stations (I'm going with the minimal rental level, but I am not just grifting off their free feed):
10. ESPN Radio
9. CNN
8. Deep Tracks (SXM #28) - offbeat playlist of obscure cuts from whenever and whoever
7. 820 am - I'm getting NorMan Goldman better than ever. No FM interference from the local Polish station on this feed.
6. Lithium - grunge and near-grunge
5. Classic Vinyl--'60's and '70's, good stuff only; way better than the 80's based Classic Rewind (the cassette period), which plays too much bad Zeppelin.
4. 101.1 FM
3. 93.1 FM -- my Chicago rock stations; gotta set the radio to these when I go in the parking garage.
2. altNation - yes, my chosen genre
1. Spectrum - goes across it; past and present, mostly good selections
And please don't waste your effort by advising me to go with some ipod or Apple tunes or Spotify or Pandora, etc. Don't need it, not buying it.
(Additional note--1/11/18: I did this list spontaneously, without reference to my Sirius dial, and butchered it somewhat. I forgot to include '80's New Wave station '1st wave' (belongs between #4 and 5 above), and Billy Preston (The Beatles--belongs between #8 and 7, as it works--sometimes--in variably-sized doses, but sometimes is impossible), but I should've had NBA and MLB Radio paired--'clubbed', as some might say--with #10, which I mislabeled, and probably should've found a mention for NPR and some of the jazz stations--disappointingly mainstream--as also mentioned. )
My Top 5 Songs of 2017, with some Additional Notes (and links to them)
5) "Feel It Still" - Portugal. The Man. Revival music--I prefer that to "throwback"--is doing just fine, though Amy Winehouse is gone and Adele dormant. This group achieved overnight success after 20 years of effort. I mention also New Orleans Revivalists' "Wish I Knew You" and Rag 'n' Bone Man's "Human". But 'Feel It Still" is something special, and I like the reminder that there was once a 1966 (or was it 1986?)
4) "Dear Life" - Beck. The Grammys are hard to figure. Back in the '70's and '80's, they were so good at recognizing the value of the big acts after they reached their peak. Now that they are finally cottoning onto rap, it makes me wonder what's the next big thing. In the case of Beck, they gave him the album of the year for the wrong album for his unexciting product "Morning Phase", then two years later he puts out "Colors", which brings back the verve and variety of his early work, with some lyrics that actually tend toward intelligible meaning this time around (though the wordplay is no less). The best song is "Dreams", but that came out two years ago. This song is a very respectable one, though; it's title is a play on the cliche phrase "holding on for dear life". Beck asks, musically, Why?
3. "No Roots", Alice Merton. Not a rebellion against roots music. Really, it does have a rootsy feel, but it's self-referencing metaphor. She's a young woman has lived the itinerant life of which she sings, or so she says. Not to be tokenist, but I should also cite 2017 efforts from some other rising young women of alternative rock, such as Lana del Rey, Lorde, and Julia Michaels.
2. Napalm, Conor Oberst. The prolific transplanted Nebraskan lives at the conjunction of rock, folk, and country, and in his current format mixes styles from song to song. On 2017's "Salutations" album, the best song for my money is this anarchist chika-chika rocker which seems like somewhat overt homage to Bob Dylan in his "Rainy Day Women" period: full of fun and meanness both, ready for trouble. His lyrics are pushing boundaries but he admits he's "still on the fence": basically, his political instinct centers around trusting none of them.
1) The System Only Dreams in Total Darkness, The National. The initial appeal was the musical composition, with some interesting tone sequences, a very strange guitar lick repeated every so often, and a canonical guitar solo I would describe as thrilling. The lyrics are somewhat impenetrable, especially the title, but seem to be about a deep interpersonal crisis of some kind, delivered convincingly. I've heard it many times, and it always provides an emotional lift. At the end of the day, though, to quote the song, "I can't explain it...ah...any other/Any other way..." and that is why we need music, after all.
Honorable Alt-Mention: 2017 was also a good year for alt-J, LCD Soundsystem,
War on Drugs, Cage the Elephant, and Spoon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
