Blog Entries [960 - 969]

Monday, September 19, 2016


Music Week

Music: Current count 27153 [27128] rated (+25), 376 [374] unrated (+2).

First, I screwed up last night and misnumbered my Weekend Roundup post, so for various technical reasons the link I tweeted last night needs to be removed. Since the half-life of tweets seems to be less than two hours, the old one should soon be forgotten.

Second, here again is the download link for my book-in-progress, Recorded Jazz in the Early 21st Century: A Consumer Guide. It is currently at what I call Stage One, which is to say that I've collected and sorted reviews from all of the 2004-11 Jazz Consumer Guide columns, but haven't done much further editing. Stage Two will add reviews for many more records: things I'm currently collecting from my Jazz Prospecting, Recycled Goods, and Rhapsody Streamnotes files. I currently have all of the JCG prospecting notes collected, and about one-third of Recycled Goods, so I'm at least a week away from starting to revise the draft. The PDF file is unchanged from last week, so no need to download it again, but if you haven't yet, please do.

I've made a couple of piddly decisions on formatting since then: to remove the bold from the parenthetical label/year, and to change the year notation from '## to -## -- the latter because I've started to use "smart quotes" and getting all that consistent is going to be difficult. I'm also considering making a fairly substantial change to the grading system. I thought it might be better to convert the letter grades (with their 3-star subdivision of B+) into a numeric scale (1-10). My first attempt at a conversion was: 10 = A+, 9 = A, 8 = A-, 7 = B+(***), 6 = B+(**), 5 = B+(*), 4 = B, 3 = B- or C+, 2 = C or C-, 1 = any D, 0 = any E.

Two problems there, one at the top of the scale, the other near the bottom. The former started when I initially applied my letter grade scale to my records list, A and A+ made sense only for records that had stood the test of time and many plays. However, after JCG started my working methodology changed so that I almost never managed the several dozen plays those older records had enjoyed. I basically stopped using those grades. For instance, the one and only A+ I've given to a jazz record released this century was James Carter's Chasin' the Gypsy, and that was released in 2000. (I'm pretty sure my most recent A+ was Lily Allen's It's Not Me, It's You in 2009, although it didn't get promoted until several years later.)

Actually, there's not much A+ jazz earlier either: I count 41 albums, one each (or more in parens, but some are redundant) for: Louis Armstrong (5), Ornette Coleman, John Coltrane, Miles Davis (2), Duke Ellington (9), Ella Fitzgerald (3), Coleman Hawkins (2), Billie Holiday (2), Fletcher Henderson, Johnny Hodges (2), Louis Jordan, Charles Mingus, Thelonious Monk, Art Pepper, Don Pullen, Sonny Rollins (3), Roswell Rudd, Jimmy Rushing, Pharoah Sanders, Horace Silver, Frank Sinatra, Art Tatum. That's out of 14032 jazz albums rated, so 1/334 (0.2%). That's, well, even I have to admit that's pretty picky -- rarefied even -- especially if the concept is to grade on some sort of curve.

There are a good deal more A records, ten times as many (419, or 2.9% of the total), but they too are concentrated among older artists. From 2000 onward, I've given out 65 A grades (counting Carter's A+), an average of 4 per year (exactly, not counting 2016, which so far has 1). I don't have an easy way of counting the sample size there, but it's at least 5000 and probably closer to 7000 so we're looking at a number that will round off (probably up) to 1%. Seems to me like I could combine A and A+ at 10 and still have no more than 1% at that level -- less than 100 records covering two decades.

The other problem is at the bottom. Keeping the three subdivisions of B+, which I think is well justified by my recent practice, pegging A- at 8 pushes B down to 4, and forces me to combine lower grades. This is less important, but intuitively it seems to me that B should be 5, and that the distinction between B- and C+ is meaningful (not that the difference between 4 and 3, or 3 and 2, is really going to sway any of your buying decisions). Below that matters less, not least because I put so little effort into discerning qualitative distinctions between records I actively dislike.

In recent years my impression has been that each of the three B+ levels were fairly evenly distributed (possibly with a slight bulge in the middle, at **), with A- and B tapered off, and sub-B grades rare -- partly because I don't seek out records I'm unlikely to like, and partly because many of their publicists have given up on me. But I've never counted until now. I did three counts, first on the entire rated database (27526 albums), then on the jazz subset (14032), and finally on the post-2000 jazz subset (undercounted a bit at 8268), which breaks down thus: A+ 1 (0.01%), A 63 (0.76%), A- 883 (10.7%), B+(***) 1445 (19.0%), B+(**) 2122 (27.7%), B+(*) 1730 (22.6%), B 1064 (12.9%), B- 364 (4.4%), C+ 81 (0.97%), C 30 (0.36%) C- 15 (0.18%), D+ 2 (0.02%), D 2 (0.02%), plus 455 additional B+ albums (divided proportionately for the percentages; the overall B+ percentage is 69.56%). This actually looks rather like a pretty normal distribution, left-shifted by various factors biased in favor of selecting better records (ones I bought, sought out, or that savvy promoters sent my way) in an idiom that I broadly respect and enjoy. Or it may just be that the left-shift is to be expected, just because the skillset jazz demands is so exceptional.

Taking all this into account, a few days back I proposed to shift my grade scale a bit leftward, combining A/A+ at 10 (still just the top 1% of rated albums), moving A- to 9 (10%, so the top decile), the B+ tiers to 8-7-6 (all records that will repay your interest), B to 5, B- to 4, C+ to 3, C or C- to 2, all D to 1. Of course, the latter ranks will be underrepresented. The only real reason for flagging a bad album is to warn consumers who might otherwise be tempted, but most bad records never tempt anyone -- they come from people you don't know or care about, and quickly vanish without a trace.

So I wrote my proposal up and sent it around to various critics, most of whom didn't like it. For example, Robert Christgau wrote back: "I definitely think everything shd be a notch down, with perhaps a somewhat lenient view of what constitutes an A plus than in my system." So I should shift some A records to 10, leave the rest at 9, peg A- at 8, and let everything else fall accordingly, combining various lower grades I rarely use anyway. Splitting out more bins on the left would provide a more even distribution, but keeping 9 and 10 reserved for less than 1% also suggests a fetish for perfection that hardly anything can achieve. I'm not sure that's either useful or achievable.

A couple others mentioned the Spin guide as a familiar model, with the implication that A- should be pegged at 8 (or maybe split between 7-8). However, my copy defines 10 as "an unimpeachable masterpiece or a flawed album of crucial historical importance" and 7-9 as "well worth buying, sure to provide you with sustained pleasure," and they even have kind words for 4-6 if you're "deeply interested in the artist or genre." I'm not sure what I'd be curious to see a histogram of those grades: how does the distribution line up with my own data? My mapping would put A- through B+(**) into the 7-9 range, as various degrees of records I recommend (indeed, that I store separately from recent jazz graded lower), while the 4-6 range gets B- to B+(*) -- the latter are records that I respect and sometimes even admire but don't much feel like playing again (those usually go to the basement, but thus far I haven't discarded any).

Of course, if one started from scratch, one could devise an elegant distribution curve (say 4-7-10-13-16-16-13-10-7-4, or 2-5-9-14-20-20-14-9-5-2) and sort everything accordingly. But that assumes you can rank everything before slicing it into tranches, something that based on no small experience I find impossible. But more importantly for me, I need some way to mechanically transcribe the letter grades I have into numerical grades. So while I might get a more pleasing curve if I could move the uper half of my A- records from 8 to 9 and the upper third of my B+(***) albums from 7 to 8 and slide some slice starting at B+(*) down a notch, it would be hell for me to try to figure out how to split my existing levels. (It's going to be bad enough just to divvy up the unsorted B+ records.)


Sorry to run on like that. I imagine everyone's eyes glazed over, but mapping it all out like that is helping me think it through. I'll let you know when I reach a conclusion. Meanwhile, feedback always welcome.

Minor discrepancy in the rated count, which only includes one of the three Made to Break albums below. I wrote up the others while working on this post, but thought it made more sense to keep them grouped together. The Beatles stuff was in response to the belated CD release of the Hollywood Bowl album. I also played 1962-1966, which I had previously rated at A and found every bit as great. I hadn't previously rated 1967-1970, but knew everything on it. Even so, better than I expected. I also meant to get the third Anthology in, but had some problems with Napster that locked me out for a couple days. Finally got to it tonight and, well, it's not very good. Might as well add it too.


New records rated this week:

  • Paolo Angeli/Robert Burke/Mirko Guerrini/Jordan Murray/Stephen Magnusson/Stefano Tamborrino: Sardinian Liturgy (2015 [2016], Jazzhead): [r]: B+(*)
  • Carol Bach-y-Rita: Minha Casa/My House (2016, Arugula): [cd]: B+(**)
  • Joshua Breakstone/The Cello Quartet: 88 (2016, Capri): [cd]: B+(**)
  • The Cookers: The Call of the Wild & Peaceful Heart (2016, Smoke Sessions): [r]: B+(*)
  • Dinosaur: Together, as One (2016, Edition): [r]: B+(**)
  • Barry Guy/Marilyn Crispell/Paul Lytton: Deep Memory (2015 [2016], Intakt): [cd]: B+(***)
  • Craig Hartley: Books on Tape Vol. II: Standard Edition (2015 [2016], self-released): [cd]: B+(***)
  • Hearts & Minds: Hearts & Minds (2014 [2016], Astral Spirits): [cd]: B+(***)
  • Honey Ear Trio: Swivel (2014 [2016], Little (i) Music): [cd]: A-
  • Christoph Irniger Pilgrim: Big Wheel Live (2015 [2016], Intakt): [cd]: B+(***)
  • Joëlle Léandre/Théo Ceccaldi: Elastic (2015 [2016], Cipsela): [r]: B+(**)
  • Made to Break: Before the Code: Live (2014 [2016], Audiographic): [bc]: B+(**)
  • Made to Break: N N N (2014 [2016], Audiographic): [bc]: A-
  • Made to Break: Dispatch to the Sea (2014 [2016], Audiographic): [bc]: A-
  • Joe McPhee: Flowers (2009 [2016], Cipsela): [cd]: B+(*)
  • MIA: AIM (2016, Interscope): [r]: B+(***)
  • Michelson Morley: Strange Courage (2016, Babel): [r]: B+(*)
  • Nils Petter Molvaer: Buoyancy (2016, Okeh): [r]: B+(*)
  • Tony Moreno: Short Stories (2015 [2016], Mayimba Jazz, 2CD): [cd]: B+(**)
  • Dominique Pifarély Quartet: Tracé Provisoire (2015 [2016], ECM): [dl]: B+(***)
  • Joshua Redman & Brad Mehldau: Nearness (2011 [2016], Nonesuch): [r]: B+(**)
  • Catherine Russell: Harlem on My Mind (2016, Jazz Village): [r]: A-
  • Naomi Moon Siegel: Shoebox View (2015 [2016], self-released): [r]: B+(*)
  • Edward Simon: Latin American Songbook (2016, Sunnyside): [r]: B+(**)
  • Ferenc Snétberger: In Concert (2013 [2016], ECM): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Eric St-Laurent: Planet (2016, Katzenmusik): [cd]: B+(*)
  • Glauco Venier: Miniatures: Music for Piano and Percussion (2013 [2016], ECM): [dl]: B+(**)
  • Nate Wooley: Argonautica (2016, Firehouse 12): [bc]: B+(**)

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries rated this week:

  • The Beatles: Live at the Hollywood Bowl (1964-65 [2016], Universal/Apple): [r]: A-

Old music rated this week:

  • The Beatles: 1967-1970 (1967-70 [2010], Apple, 2CD): [r]: A
  • The Beatles: Anthology 1 (1958-94 [1995], Capitol, 2CD): [r]: B+(**)
  • The Beatles: Anthology 2 (1965-95 [1996], Capitol, 2CD): [r]: B+(**)
  • The Beatles: Anthology 3 (1968-70 [1996], Apple/Capitol, 2CD): [r]: B


Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Jay Azzolina/Dino Govoni/Adam Nussbaum/Dave Zinno: Chance Meeting (Whaling City Sound)
  • Mili Bermejo/Dan Greenspan: Arte Del Duo (self-released): October 7
  • Joshua Breakstone/The Cello Quartet: 88 (Capri): October 21
  • Dim Lighting: Your Miniature Motion (Off): advance
  • Satoko Fujii/Joe Fonda: Duet (Long Song)
  • Billy Hart & the WDR Big Band: The Broader Picture (Enja/Yellowbird): advance, September 30
  • Rale Micic: Night Music (Whaling City Sound)
  • Moonbow: When the Sleeping Fish Turn Red and the Skies Start to Sing in C Major I Will Follow You to the End (ILK)
  • Richard Sussman: The Evolution Suite (Zoho)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Sunday, September 18, 2016


Weekend Roundup

Mostly writing this today because I have various tabs opened to possibly interesting articles, and it's only a matter of time before my antiquated browser crashes. Better, I think, to note them briefly than to lose them forever.

I wrote some on the campaign horserace a couple days ago (see Looks Like She Blew It), and nothing much has changed on that front -- TPM still has Trump ahead by 0.1%, but 538 shows Clinton with slightly better chance of winning (61.3%, up from 60.0%). So she may still pull this out, but if she does she'll still wind up with the lowest share of popular vote since 1992, when someone else named Clinton won.


Some scattered links this week:

  • David Dayen: How Democrats Can Overcome Their Self-Defeating Cynicism: By "pushing actual policies"? Dayen proposes adding a "public option" to Obamacare as a good place to start. That's actually fairly non-controversial, at least with mainstream Democrats. It was part of the original ACA, and was dropped mostly because the bill couldn't be passed without 60 votes in the Senate, and a couple of them were willing to wreck the whole thing to spare private insurance companies from competition. He notes that Sen. Jeff Merkley (Oregon) has a resolution backed by 27 other senators, and that Obama and Clinton favor it. As for "cynicism" the more apposite term Dayen uses is "defensive crouch" (although if you want an example of cynicism, there's the attempt to bundle gun control on top of the rather arbitrary, putatively anti-terror, "no fly list").

    In their defensive crouch, Democrats have forgotten to explain why they consider it important that "no family have the American dream ripped out from under them because they can't afford medical care," as Merkley said on the call. They forget to explain why health care ought to be a right for every American, not a privilege only available to those who can buy it at a high price.

    This was actually the logic of the Sanders campaign, and a reason for its unlikely success. Contrary to the political science pros, it was his ideas, and more to the point his willingness to say them, that animated his candidacy. It also pushed Clinton to outline a bolder agenda than she might have been comfortable with in Sanders's absence. When the Democratic primary pitted ideas against one another, rather than amplifying criticisms, it let Americans know what Democrats stand for.

    The bloodless technocracy that has ruled the Democratic Party has forgotten how to inspire the body politic. After riding a wave of enthusiasm to power in 2008, the last couple midterms and even Obama's 2012 campaign were nervy exercises in protecting the tentative gains Democrats had made -- and seemed half-embarrassed by. Democrats too often define themselves by who they oppose rather than their own principles. Not only is this self-defeating for a party that promises activist government, it makes governing itself harder down the road.

    Of course, it's not just the emergence of a bit of political backbone that's bringing the public option back into play. It's also that the insurance companies have been conspiring to prevent the competition that the ACA promised from eating into their profits -- most egregiously by trying to merge the four largest private health insurers into two companies (the first mergers I'm aware of the Obama administration actually opposing). Even short of that they're cutting back on plan availability, so many Americans will have no choices.

  • Eric Lichtblau: Hate Crimes Against American Muslims Most Since Post-9/11 Era: "up 78 percent over the course of 2015. Attacks on those perceived as Arab rose even more sharply. . . . That was the most since the record 481 documented hate crimes against Muslims in 2001, when the Sept. 11 attacks set off waves of crimes targeting Muslims and Middle Easterners, Mr. Levin said. The huge increase last year was also the biggest annual rise since 2001, he said." It's tempting to blame this on Trump, whose anti-Muslim positions are based on and seem to legitimize more blatant threats: "A number of experts in hate crimes said they were concerned that Mr. Trump's vitriol may have legitimized threatening or even violent conduct by a small fringe of his supporters. In a few cases, people accused of hate crimes against Muslims and others have even cited Mr. Trump." On the other hand, it's impossible to go to war against a people for fifteen years and not engender hatred -- something Bush and Obama have worked hard to cap because it so subverts their war aims, although Obama had a big disadvantage in that those most inclined to hate Muslims started off by hating him.

  • Derek Thompson: America's Monopoly Problem: As I noted above, the Obama administration has done a remarkably poor record of maintaining competitiveness within supposedly free markets, scarcely even bothering to use the rather antiquated antitrust laws that are still on the books. Those laws, dating to the 1880s, targeted absolute monopolies where a single company sought to gain complete control of a market. While such combines are still a threat, the bigger problem now is what we might call consensual monopoly blocks, where two or three large companies effectively divvy up a market, crowding out competitors and focusing more on growing their profit margins than cutting into one another's market share. The net effect looks like this:

    In the past few decades, however, the economy has come to resemble something more like a stagnant pool. Entrepreneurship, as measured by the rate of new-business formation, has declined in each decade since the 1970s, and adults under 35 (a/k/a Millennials) are on track to be the least entrepreneurial generation on record.

    This decline in dynamism has coincided with the rise of extraordinarily large and profitable firms that look discomfortingly like the monopolies and oligopolies of the 19th century. American strip malls and yellow pages used to brim with new small businesses. But today, in a lot where several mom-and-pop shops might once have opened, Walmart spawns another superstore. In almost every sector of the economy -- including manufacturing, construction, retail, and the entire service sector -- the big companies are getting bigger. The share of all businesses that are new firms, meanwhile, has fallen by 50 percent since 1978. According to the Roosevelt Institute, a liberal think tank dedicated to advancing the ideals of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, "markets are now more concentrated and less competitive than at any point since the Gilded Age."

    Even where there are entrepreneurs, as in high-tech, their typical business plans focus on building companies to the point where they be sold profitably to larger companies. For instance, have any of the biotech startups that were spun up in the 1990s not been sold off to pharmaceutical giants? Much of this is driven by financial firms, who can overpay for a startup knowing that it's worth more as part of a monopolistic conglommerate. Joseph Stiglitz cites monopoly rents as a major source of increasing inequality, and this is what he means. A big part of the reason inequality is spiraling out of control is that government, influenced (as you well know) by those profiting from monopoly rents, has abdicated its responsibility to ensure that markets are free, open, transparent, and therefore efficient. It is impossible to overstate the importance of this issue, so this piece is one you need to read.

  • Maggie Koerth-Baker: How the Oil and Gas Industry Awakened Oklahoma's Sleeping Fault Lines: The first recorded earthquake in Oklahoma occurred in 1882, before the first oil well was drilled in 1897. This piece has a map of the known fault lines crossing Oklahoma, and they are numerous, especially in the southeast corner of the state, home of what's left of the Ouchita Mountains (high point 2681 feet above sea level). Still, earthquakes remained rare until less than a decade ago, rising to more than 900 earthquakes (3.0 or stronger) in 2014 -- the most of any state in the nation. As another map shows, those earthquakes are located not where most of the faults are, but rather in the north-central part of the state: relatively flat prairie west of the Arkansas River, bisected by the Canadian River. This has been oil country since way before I was born -- indeed, the main tourist attractions in Ponca City are tours of the mansions of pioneering oil barons. The yields of those oil wells have long been declining -- a chart here shows that Oklahoma pumps up five barrels of wastewater for every barrel of oil (or equivalent natural gas, at this point 80% of Oklahoma's hydrocarbon production). That would have been uneconomical back when oil was cheap, but the high prices of the Bush years urged marginal producers to invest in injection wells -- there are now more than 4000 across the state -- as they seek to slurp up the last of their remaining oil. (By contrast, the water/fuel ratio in the newer fields of North Dakota is currently running just slightly above 1/1.) The injected wastewater, along with techniques like fracking, may help increase oil production, but it also lubricates often unseen faults, which then slip to produce earthquakes. The largest to date, a 5.8 centered between Pawnee and Ponca City, was felt as far away as Omaha and Austin. Here in Wichita, about 110 miles away, it woke us up as the house shook for nearly a minute. I've been following this story since it started to break -- oil geology is one of those subjects I read for pleasure -- and this is one of the better pieces on it. So now, in addition to anthropogenic climate change, the oil industry has brought us anthropogenic earthquakes. You'd think they'd be the least bit embarrassed, but even before they proved to be so ingenious at creating "natural" disasters, their sudden riches spawned many of America's most reactionary political entrepreneurs, from H.L. Hunt to the Kochs to Dick Cheney. The biggest mistake this country ever made was letting individuals own the nation's mineral resources.

  • Miscellaneous election links:

    • Charles V Bagli: A Trump Empire Built on Inside Connections and $885 Million in Tax Breaks: How to get ahead by starting there. Of course, Trump isn't the only businessman who taken advantage of "what he calls the pay-to-play culture of politics and a 'rigged' system of government." Pretty much everyone does it, a relationship so symbiotic neither side dares question it even though practically everyone else thinks it stinks to high hell. Long article with lots of details, mostly on New York real estate.

    • John Cassidy: Does Donald Trump Pay Any Income Taxes at All? Well, if he doesn't, that would be one reason he might have for withholding his tax returns. Cassidy quotes James Stewart: "No one should be surprised, though, if Donald J. Trump has paid far less -- perhaps even zero federal income tax in some years. Indeed, that's the expectation of numerous real estate and tax professionals I've interviewed in recent weeks." That just reflects the numerous loopholes that benefit real estate developers, just part of a crooked system. Also quotes David Cay Johnston, who "pointed out that Trump paid no income tax in 1978, 1979, 1992, and 1994" and "several times received a type of tax rebate that is restricted to property owners who report taxable income of less than half a million dollars."

      Also by Cassidy: Birtherism, Bombs, and Donald Trump's Weekend.

    • Russel Berman: Hillary Clinton Has a Lot of Money: She raised $143 million in August, and seems to have been more concerned with raking in contributions than with winning over voters. The good news there is that $81 million goes to the DNC and state parties. How successful she is as president depends on how successful the Democratic Party is in state and local elections, especially for Congress -- a point that neither her husband nor Obama learned as president. Still, she lost ground in the polls while catering to wealthy donors. We'll see if she can use their money to turn the election around.

    • Amy Davidson: Clinton's Sick Days: At least she got some help to make up for her down time -- from Obama, his wife, Biden, her husband. Still, Davidson's best line was parenthetical: "(Why, at this stage, her schedule includes so many travel-intensive fund-raisers, when she is suffering from a shortage not of funds but of voter rapport, is one of many side questions that her illness raised.)"

    • David A Graham: Just Why Does Hillary Clinton Want to Be President? First thought on seeing this is that it reminded me of the unhealthy obsession the press in 2000 had with Gore's supposed obsession with running for president, suggesting that if he failed he might as well kill himself because his whole life would have been wasted. In point of fact, after he lost he got a job as a venture capitalist, he got rid of his wife, he wrote a book that wasn't about himself, he made a movie about global warming, he won an Oscar for the movie, he won a Nobel Prize. If he was so obsessed with becoming president, why did he never run again? He's 68 now, but he's still a few months younger than Hillary Clinton. So I don't have much interest in psychological speculation about "what makes Hillary run?" -- I would, however, find a credible explanation for Trump interesting. Or maybe just amusing.

      Then there's Clare Foran: The Curse of Hillary Clinton's Ambition. Foran catches a lot of flying innuendo in her net, and seems willing to give credence to all of it. She quotes one "man" as saying, "This has been her entire life's work, it seems like, has been building up to this moment, so she doesn't have any shots left." Just like Gore in 2000, except she's even more of a crone. Foran adds, "But some voters also seem to distrust Clinton because they believe she wants to win at any cost." This is a journalist? She wouldn't have to search very hard to find Trump supporters who see that very same trait in their man and admire him for it.

    • Harry Enten: Why Clinton's Electoral Map Isn't as Good as Obama's: Had Obama and Romney received the same number of votes (basically, by moving 3.9% from D to R in every state), Obama would still have been elected president by the electoral college. The map this year looks to me to be much the same, but Enten argues that it has shifted in such a way that Trump has "a better shot of winning the Electoral College while losing the popular vote (at 6.1 percent) than Clinton (1.5 percent)." Of course, there's a chart, showing that 11 of 14 battleground states have "moved right relative to the country" --Iowa and Nevada enough to switch sides. Part of this is that Clinton is leading Obama in some states she'll still lose (Enten mentions Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming). But I also suspect part of this is that they're comparing Clinton's current polls to Obama's actual votes, so they haven't yet factored in the intense battleground state "ground game."

    • Todd S Purdum: What's Really Ailing Hillary: "A long time ago, Clinton was far more transparent, emotional and open than she is today. Then the media began slamming her -- and didn't stop."

    • Matt Taibbi: Stop Whining About 'False Balance': Mostly this is a rant about the overwhelming banality (not to mention stupidity) of the mass media, arguing that those are worse problems than bias which knowledgeable people can see through anyway. Also points out:

      The irony is, the Clinton Foundation thing is a rare example of an important story that is getting anything like the requisite attention. The nexus of elite connections that sits behind tales like Bill Clinton taking $1.5 million in speaking fees from a Swiss bank (and foundation donor) while that same bank is seeking relief from Hillary Clinton's State Department is exactly the kind of thing that requires the scrutiny of reporters.

      Yeah, sort of, but those reporters are often so wrapped up in their preconceived notions they wind up shilling for campaign narratives that don't clarify anything.

    • Brian Mittendorf: Clinton charities 101: What do they actual do and where does their money go? Fair amount of detail here on the structure and organization of Clinton's various foundations/charities. Much less on the direct involvement of the Clintons: they put some money in at one end, but that's dwarfed by money raised from others; they put their name out, which is both used for raising money and for whatever "good works" the Foundation ultimately does. Clearly, they must benefit somehow, if only in good will. The benefits to other donors are unclear, which is perhaps inevitable, and certainly open to suspicion. I've never been a fan of foundations, which even at best seem like arbitrary penance for lives of avarice and shoddy providers of social goods, but given the inequities of the present I also doubt that any of this would be suspect but for Hillary running for president, once again making her the target of people much more greedy and careless than herself.

    • Heather Digby Parton: The general of gossip: Colin Powell's leaked emails depict a juvenile busybody rather than an elder statesman: how devious of him to talk Hillary into using that private email server!

      Colin Powell has a long history of being in the middle of scandals and wriggling out of any responsibility for them. From his involvement in the My Lai massacre, to Iran Contra, to personally blocking President Bill Clinton's promise to allow gays to serve openly in the military, to his infamous testimony before the UN that led to the Iraq war, Powell's fingerprints are on the wrong side of history and the truth time and again and he's always got some excuse as to why it wasn't his fault.


Also, a few links for further study (briefly noted:

  • 'Hunting of Hillary' Author on Clinton Conspiracies and Conservative Attacks: Interview with Joe Conason, who has a new book on what Bill Clinton's been up to since leaving the White House: Man of the World: The Further Endeavors of Bill Clinton, following up on his 2001 book The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton. He's a reliable fan, eager to point out all the good the Clintons have done, as well as how shabbily they've been treated by that vast right-wing conspiracy thing.

  • Patrick Cockburn: The US and Russia Have Less Influence in Syria Than They Think: True, no doubt, as it's often the case that in what you think of as a proxy war the tail winds up wagging the dog. Russia can bring Assad a cease fire but getting his forces to stick with it has never been easy. And the US doesn't even have the luxury of backing a significant force on the ground. Rather, they have multiple enemies, making it possible to inadvertently help one at the expense of the other. Cockburn offers a good example here: the US misidentified a target as ISIS and bombed it, killing at least 62 Syrian soldiers, after which ISIS was able to capture the territory the US had cleared out.

  • Atul Gawande: Overkill: On how "an avalanche of unnecessary medical care is harming patients physically and financially." This is an old story, something whole books have been written on -- Shannon Brownlee's 2007 book Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker and Poorer is probably the classic -- but the author adds his usual insights and nostrums. He could be more explicit that the core cause is the focus on profits that turns it all into such a tug of war.

  • Greg Grandin: The Free-Marketeers Take Over in Brazil -- and the US Applauds:

    The Obama administration was less confrontational than its predecessor, but no less ideological in its preference for Latin America's free-marketeers. . . . But with a new round of economic shock therapy being applied in Latin America, Washington is preparing for the inevitable "social explosions" the way it does best: According to the Washington Office on Latin America, the Pentagon has, since 2007, tripled its special-ops training in the region.

  • Fred Kaplan: China Won't Stop Kim Jong-un. The US Must Stand Up to Both of Them: "Sanctions won't work. We can't destroy his nukes. We can rattle a few sabers, however." Really, very disappointing piece. We should remind Kim that if the North invades the South, even having some sort of "nuclear umbrella," we'll come to South Korea's defense and annihilate North Korea. Really? You think he somehow doesn't understand that already? You think rattling sabers will make him less touchy? Less defensive? Less desperate? What should happen is that the US needs to focus less on muscling North Korea around and more on figuring out a sane posture which would allow both Koreas and the US to coexist without threats. Once the US is willing to live with North Korea -- to formally end the 1950 war, to normalize relations, to open trade, to proportionately dial back military readiness -- we can worry about getting China, Japan, the South, and everyone else to buy in.

  • Mike Konczal: These Policies Could Move America Toward a Universal Basic Income: Three "simple policies": children's allowance, $12-an-hour minimum wage, 12 weeks' paid medical leave and 2 weeks' paid annual leave.

  • Peter Van Buren: Class of 2017 -- So Sorry!: Subtitle: "Apologizing to My Daughter for the Last 15 Years of War."

    Terrorism is a nearly nonexistent danger for Americans. You have a greater chance of being hit by lightning, but fear doesn't work that way. There's no 24/7 coverage of global lightning strikes or "if you see something, say something" signs that encourage you to report thunderstorms. So I felt no need to apologize for lightning.

    But terrorism? I really wanted to tell my daughter just how sorry I was that she would have to live in what 9/11 transformed into the most frightened country on Earth.

    Want the numbers? Some 40% of Americans believe the country is more vulnerable to terrorism than it was just after September 11, 2001 -- the highest percentage ever.

    But there is one difference between terrorism and lightning, which is that much terrorism can be prevented by eliminating the motivations. Both before and after 9/11 the US became a target by targeting the Middle East with injustice and violence.

    I read the introduction to Ira Katznelson's big book on the 1930s, Fear Itself: The New Deal and the Origins of Our Time, where he makes the point that FDR's famous line "we have nothing to fear but fear itself" was aimed to preserve democracy, which at the time was under attack from fearmongers who insisted we needed a strongman to run the country, Il Duce in Italy and Der Führer in Germany. Fear continues to be a potent cloak for the right. For example, see Daniel Politi: Trump Tells Crowd "Bomb" Went Off in New York, Proceeds to Brag About Polls. Trump quote: "We better get very tough, folks. We better get very, very tough."

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Friday, September 16, 2016


Looks Like She Blew It

Trump up 44.6% to Clinton's 44.5% in TPM's tracking poll together. Electoral college split 254-242 for Clinton, 42 "tossup" (need 270 to win). I tweeted:

Hillary Clinton trailing in TPM tracking poll today. Wasn't her campaign's whole premise inevitable victory? How'd she blow this? Trump?

I also replied to myself:

Maybe because she spent all last month schmoozing with the real "deplorables": rich donors and neocon warmongers?

Was tempted to add something to the effect that maybe Bernie Sanders could rescue her campaign. We saw him with Seth Myers last night and he made a totally coherent, credible pitch for Clinton, based not at all on personal characteristics but on real political issues and commitments made in the Democratic Party platform.

Still, my gut reaction was to swear off politics until November, then vote for Clinton so I could say "don't look at me" when Trump wins. The silver lining is that Clinton losing to Trump is pretty sure to destroy both major political parties, at least in the sense of discrediting their old controllers. Clinton's loss would be the end of her family control of the Democratic Party, creating a huge opening for new leaders to emerge, and those leaders would define themselves by how effective they are in opposing a certainly disastrous Trump regime.

As for the Republicans, the only thing that breathed life into the GOP these past eight years was rage against an administration that they scarcely bothered to understand, instead taking its very existence as some sort of personal affront. With Trump winning they will lose their drive. Rather, they'll be forced to backpeddle and make excuses for an administration that is virtually certain to make one stupid mistake after another, not least temporary "successes" because at this point all Republican agendas are based on defective ideology.

Sure, Trump winning will hurt lots of people -- in the long run I'd even say everyone -- and that's reason enough to vote against him. But if people can't see that now -- and it's really glaringly obvious, isn't it? -- then maybe they'll have to learn the hard way.


Laura retweeted this from Connor Kilpatrick:

Hillary Clinton: the safe bet. Good thing we didn't go with the socialist. Trump might've called him a "commie"!

On the other hand, Trump would have been hard pressed to charge that Sanders is crooked and a liar, which are the charges that are doing the real damage to Clinton -- even though, sure, she's a piker in both respects compared to Trump. Her own aura of culpability -- all those irresponsible innuendos about "shadows" and "questions raised" that major media never seem to get around to disposing of -- evidently makes it that much harder for her to challenge Trump on those same grounds. But Sanders suffers from no such taint, which would have made him a clear contrast to Trump.

I think that if there is any one thing that the American people overwhelmingly agree on -- much, much more than their "representative" politicians do (or more tellingly, are willing to do anything about) -- it's that Washington is a cesspool of corruption. Trump is tapping into that by claiming to be an outsider, a contrast that consummate insiders like the Clintons make easy, even for someone who freely admits to having bought influence (including from the Clintons -- recall the old joke that we know Iraq has WMD because we still have the receipts?) -- which should make him as big a part of the problem as the politicians (but, as with sex, we tend to go easier on those who buy than those who sell).

On the other hand, if Trump had to run against Sanders, sure he'd try to paint him as some far-out wild-eyed radical -- and no doubt Trump's more rabid supporters would add "Commie" to the charges, but red-baiting like that seems to have lost much of its punch (not least from overuse against Obama, although pre-Cold War it was also ineffective against FDR). That isn't to deny that such charges would resonate among the donor class: Trump would have a clear money advantage against Sanders that he doesn't have against Clinton. But turning the contest into a referendum on the 1% vs. the 99% won't necessarily work in the billionaire's favor. (And if Bloomberg entered, as he threatened, wouldn't that just have split the 1% vote?)


I got a response to my initial tweet from Robert Christgau:

Who said inevitable? Said better than the socialist Jew who lost big to HRC w/o one attack ad. Also, blow's your word not TPM's.

First point: "inevitable." Hillary Clinton locked up the Democratic Party donor money so early that no mainstream Democrat dared to run against her. OK, O'Malley, but he started on the assumption that she wouldn't run and tried to pass his lame campaign off as a fallback, in case, you know, she got sick and incapacitated, or got indicted, or ran afoul of those "2nd Amendment People." Sanders, on the other hand, had issues to run on, and wound up totally bypassing the party's donor network. But Biden, for instance, gave up a huge structural advantage -- the last four sitting VP's who ran (Nixon, Humphrey, Bush, Gore[1]) easily won their party's nomination -- rather than oppose Clinton. Maybe this inevitability wasn't explicit -- and, sure, it never extended to a guaranteed win over any Republican -- but before the Sanders campaign kicked in as a real possibility even I was pretty much reconciled to Hillary being the nominee. The clincher for me was reading that she expected to raise more than a billion dollars for the race. Not even the Kochs were promising that much.

I don't know what Bob's second sentence means -- seems like a victim of Twitter compression. I disagree that Sanders "lost big." Clinton won a solid 56% of the votes, a surprisingly lame showing given her initial advantages in recognition, money, and party organization, and over time she had to move notably toward Sanders' positions to stay competitive. As for attack ads, sure, neither candidate waged a scorched earth campaign, with Sanders being especially generous in waving off any concerns about her email controversy. Clearly, neither candidate wanted to split or weaken the party against the Republican nominee, but also both realized that the sort of gross slanders the Republicans use were unlikely to gain any traction among Democratic voters.

Still, I don't see any point about the general election one can draw from this. We don't know whether Sanders would have been buried under a full-throated "red smear" attack, but we do know that Clinton has suffered a great deal from endlessly repeated attacks on her honesty and integrity, and that those issues have made it harder for her to gain from Trump's same (in many ways more blatant) faults. Back during the primaries many Clinton supporters argued that she was more electable than Sanders -- that she had been "vetted," having withstood the very worst the Republicans could do to her -- whereas they feared that Sanders would be ground to dust like Henry Wallace in 1948. All Sanders supporters could counter with were actual polls showing him doing better against most Republicans (but especially Trump) than she would do. All I can say is that she's turned out to be more compromised and more vulnerable than any of us expected.

Sure, "blow" is my word, and true, she's only blown her lead (about 5-6 points at post-convention peak), not the whole race. Even today she might still win, and there's still way too much time left until votes are cast. She's sitting on a lot of money, which has yet to blanket the airwaves, and perhaps more importantly organize that "ground game." The election will ultimately hinge on how many people (and who) show up and vote. Obama excelled at that in 2012, while he let the Democrats flail in 2010 and 2014 -- an instance of selfishness at the top of the ticket that her husband practically invented.

But what's different this time is Americans' Distaste for Both Trump and Clinton Is Record-Breaking. Motivation to vote this year largely hinges on who you detest the most. As the chart shows, back in March/April Trump was significantly more disliked than Clinton (looks like about 54% vs. 37%, the two highest figures going back to 1980). In The race is tightening for a painfully simple reason, Matthew Yglesias notes that her favorable/unfavorable poll split is now 42-56% ("truly, freakishly bad" -- chart here). Sure, Trump's is even worse, 38-59% (chart here), but has been relatively steady while her ratings have dipped, and being the "hate" candidate he's uniquely positioned to take advantage of her disapproval.

Still, steering the campaign toward personal character issues isn't very smart when only 3% of the electorate view you less unfavorably. Of course, they're doing it because they realize how shady and shabby a candidate Trump is, but also because they don't understand how exposed Clinton appears to an electorate that is so sick of and disgusted by Washington's culture of corrupt insider favors. If they keep going down this path they're going to wind up reprising Edwin Edwards' winning campaign slogan when he ran for governor of Louisiana and was fortunate enough to draw KKK honcho David Duke as his opponent: "Elect the crook. It's important."

But there is an alternative, which is to refocus the campaign on left-right economic issues, and appeal to the vast majority's sense of economic justice (and pocketbooks). There's so much mud in the water people will believe whatever they want about character issues, but there's no way to spin Trump's policies into something that helps a popular majority. Still, more important than persuade the occasional Trump fan to switch sides is to convince everyone else that they have much more at stake than stroking Hillary's vanity.


FiveThirtyEight still gives Hillary a 60% chance of winning, wtih slim leads both in popular vote (46.5-44.3%) and electoral votes (289-249). They show Trump having gained the lead in four states that had previously been in the Democratic column: Florida (51.6%), North Carolina (54.6%), Ohio (57.6%), and Iowa (61.8%). Trump would have to hang on to those four, plus pick up Nevada (48.5%) and/or New Hampshire (36.1%) to win. Trump's next closest states are Colorado (34.5%), Pennsylvania (30.6%) and Wisconsin (30.4%). The actual percentage spreads are much closer, with Clinton leading by 3.7% in Wisconsin, 3.4% in Pennsylvania, 2.8% in Colorado, 2.8% in New Hampshire, and 0.3% in Nevada, whereas Trump leads by 0.2% in Florida, 0.7% in North Carolina, 1.3% in Ohio, and 2.2% in Iowa.

It's also worth noting that she runs worse in four-way polls (i.e., the real world) than head-to-head against Trump, which is to say that when restricted to an either-or choice, more people who dislike both see Trump as the lesser evil. Johnson is polling about 9%, and Stein 2.7% -- as Yglesias notes Stein is actually doing better than Nader did in 2000. Clinton has had a problem all year long in that even when she had a big lead she was never able to crack 50% nationwide.


[1] Before Biden, the only sitting VP since 1952 who didn't run for his party's nomination under the circumstances was Cheney, who took a rather perverse pride in his unelectability, and whose favorable ratings as the 2008 election approached were down around 9%, about half of Bush's. (In 1952 Truman VP Alben Barkley briefly ran, but withdrew due to considerations about his age [74] and failing health.) Sure, three of the four lost, but by very close margins. Offhand, I can't recall an open Democratic primary with less than five candidates. This year, the Republicans came up with sixteen -- evidently nearly every billionaire in the party felt entitled to field his own jockey, with Trump somehow gaining extra street cred for running himself. The Democratic Party may be at a disadvantage, but they're not that short of billionaires, but they all made a calculated decision not to cross the Clintons -- even though they saw eight years ago that she could be beat, and should have known that she'd be even more vulnerable this time.

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Monday, September 12, 2016


Music Week

Music: Current count 27128 [27090] rated (+38), 374 [369] unrated (+5).

Fairly ordinary week here. I've mostly been looking for recent jazz beyond what's come in the mail. I don't think there's any non-jazz this week (aside from a Haitian comp that has Jazz in the title). Wound up playing many of the downloads I had been sitting on, including ECM's Peter Erskine (really John Taylor) box, and grabbed some older records while failing to find newer ones. Most turned out to be fairly unremarkable, but I did turn up two A- records fronted by saxophonists I've long enjoyed, one retro and one avant.

I suppose the focus on jazz has been a side effect of starting a project to turn my old Jazz Consumer Guide columns into some sort of, well, I call it Recorded Jazz in the Early 21st Century: A Consumer Guide. I wrote 26 Jazz Consumer Guide columns for the Village Voice from April 2004 to May 2011 (archived here), self-published a 27th column in December 2011, and had a draft file open for a 28th. I managed to squeeze a little more than 1000 records into those columns, and I've collected all that writing in a Libre Office Writer file -- using default page and style formats it comes to 144 pages. Probably the best way to view it is as a PDF file, so I've set up a page you can use to download it (make sure you check the enable box -- my quick and dirty alternative to a captcha).

The page has a form which asks for some questions before you download. I thought it might be nice to keep a count of how many times the file has been downloaded, and to collect some basic information, but the latter is strictly voluntary. I'm not sure, even, that I'll use any collected email addresses, but they would make it possible to interact more in the future. At 144 pages, the book is far from realizing the ambitions of its title. But I still have a lot more writing I can slide into the manuscript: starting with the 7th column in December 2005 I kept two extra files with extensive working notes ("Prospects" and "Surplus"), covering everything I listened to but didn't include in JCG. After that I posted Jazz Prospecting and Streamnotes, so I've done a fairly good job of covering new jazz from 2004 to present. There are also reviews in Recycled Goods columns from 2003 through 2013, and a few other scattered reviews (in Static Multimedia and the Village Voice).

Thus far I've collected about half of the Prospects/Surplus files, some 330,000 words. Maybe half of that is redundant either with itself or with the published drafts, and what's left needs to be edited more compactly. Still, I expect that when I've done that -- what I call "stage two" -- the manuscript will more than double in size. Then on to "stage three" picking up the post-2011 drafts, which will almost certainly add a like amount.

I'm less sure about "stage four," which involves trying to fill in important albums I missed -- most obviously from 2000-04 but also later. Perhaps that's why I've been focusing more on jazz lately. It's beginning to seem like I may have something tangible to show for what in recent years has often felt like a colossal waste of time.

Not that I'm looking for sheer bulk, but any attempt to cover even just the highlights of jazz records since 2000 is bound to be massive: a quick check of my Music Database shows that I have listings for 9920 jazz albums where my earliest recording or release dats is 2000 or later. Some of those I haven't heard or rated -- about 10% of post-2000 artists (369/3773) -- so I could wind up expanding the current 144 pages by a factor of something like eight (to 1152 pages). I'm not sure I'm up for all that, but the hard part of the job has already been done.

Would appreciate any feedback on the book project.


New records rated this week:

  • Anthony Branker & Imagine: Beauty Within (2016, Origin): [r]: B+(**)
  • Peter Brotzmann/Heather Leigh: Ears Are Filled With Wonder (2015 [2016], Not Two): [r]: B
  • Burning Ghosts: Burning Ghosts (2015 [2016], Orenda): [r]: B+(**)
  • Ron Carter Quartet & Vitoria Maldonado: Brasil L.I.K.E. (2016, Summit): [r]: B+(*)
  • Chris Cheek: Saturday Songs (2016, Sunnyside): [r]: B
  • The Roger Chong Quartet: Funkalicious (2016, self-released): [cd]: B+(*)
  • Tim Davies Big Band: The Expensive Train Set (2013-15 [2016], Origin): [cd]: B
  • Paolo Fresu/Richard Gallliano/Jan Lundgren: Mare Nostrum II (2014 [2016], ACT): [r]: B+(**)
  • Generations Quartet: Flow (2015 [2016], Not Two): [r]: A-
  • Ricardo Grilli: 1954 (2016, Tone Rogue): [cd]: B+(**)
  • Scott Hamilton/Harry Allen: Live! (2014 [2016], GAC): [r]: A-
  • Darrell Katz and OddSong: Jailhouse Doc With Holes in Her Socks (2015 [2016], JCA): [cd]: B
  • Sinikka Langeland: The Magical Forest (2015 [2016], ECM): [dl]: B+(**)
  • Shawn Maxwell: Shawn Maxwell's New Tomorrow (2016, OA2): [cd]: B+(**)
  • Francisco Mela: Fe (2016, self-released): [r]: B+(**)
  • Naima: Bye (2015 [2016], Cuneiform): [dl]: B+(*)
  • The Phil Norman Tentet: Then & Now: Classic Sounds & Variations of 12 Jazz Legends (2015 [2016], Summit): [cd]: B+(***)
  • Mark Solborg & Herb Robertson: Tuesday Prayers (2016, ILK): [r]: B
  • Vinnie Sperrazza/Jacob Sacks/Masa Kamaguchi: Play Tadd Dameron (2015 [2016], Fresh Sound New Talent): [r]: B+(**)
  • Michael Jefry Stevens: Brass Tactics (2008 [2016], Konnex): [r]: B+(**)
  • Al Strong: Love Strong Volume 1 (2016, Al Strong Music): [cd]: B+(**)
  • The U.S. Army Blues: Swamp Romp: Voodoo Boogaloo (2008 [2016], self-released): [cd]: B
  • Peter Van Huffel/Alex Maksymiw: Kronix (2015 [2016], Fresh Sound New Talent): [r]: B+(*)
  • The Doug Webb Quartet: Sets the Standard (2016, VSOP): [r]: B+(*)
  • Nate Wooley: Seven Storey Mountain V (2015 [2016], Pleasure of the Text): [r]: B+(*)
  • Denny Zeitlin: Early Wayne: Explorations of Classic Wayne Shorter Compositions (2014 [2016], Sunnyside): [r]: B+(*)

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries rated this week:

  • Harry Beckett: Still Happy (1974 [2016], My Only Desire, EP): [r]: B
  • Peter Erskine Trio/John Taylor/Palle Danielsson: As It Was (1992-97 [2016], ECM, 4CD): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Tanbou Toujou Lou: Merenge Kompa Kreyou Vodou Jazz & Electric Folklore From Haiti (1960-1981) (1960-81 [2016], Ostinato): [r]: B+(***)

Old music rated this week:

  • Ray Anderson/Han Bennink/Christy Doran: A B D (1994-95 [2011], Hatology): [r]: B+(**)
  • Harry Beckett's Flugelhorn 4+3: All Four One (1991, Spotlite): [r]: B
  • Christy Doran: What a Band (1991 [1992], Hat Art): [r]: B+(***)
  • Pierre Dørge & New Jungle Orchestra: Live at Birdland (1999 [2003], Stunt): [r]: B+(***)
  • Peter Erskine/Palle Danielsson/John Taylor: You Never Know (1992 [1993], ECM): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Peter Erskine/Palle Danielsson/John Taylor: Time Being (1993 [1994], ECM): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Peter Erskine/Palle Danielsson/John Taylor: As It Is (1995 [1996], ECM): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Peter Erskine/Palle Danielsson/John Taylor: Juni (1997 [1999], ECM): [dl]: B+(*)
  • Marco von Orelli 6: Close Ties on Hidden Lanes (2010 [2012], Hatology): [r]: B
  • Marco von Orelli 5: Alluring Prospect (2015, Hatology): [r]: B+(*)


Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

  • Carol Bach-Y-Rita: Minha Casa/My House (2016, self-released): September 23
  • Lou Caimano/Eric Olsen: Dyad Plays Jazz Arias (self-released): September 14
  • Gene Ess: Absurdist Theater (SIMP): September 26
  • Ricardo Grilli: 1954 (Tone Rogue): October 7
  • Barry Guy/Marilyn Crispell/Paul Lytton: Deep Memory (Intakt): advance
  • Hearts & Minds (Astral Spirits)
  • Honey Ear Trio: Swivel (Little (i) Music)
  • Christoph Irniger Pilgrim: Big Wheel Live (Intakt): advance
  • Joëlle Léandre/Theo Ceccaldi: Elastic (Cipsela)
  • Joe McPhee: Flowers (Cipsela)
  • Tony Moreno: Short Stories (Mayimba Jazz, 2CD): October 7
  • Eric St-Laurent: Planet (Katzenmusik): September 23
  • Rik Wright's Fundamental Forces: Subtle Energy (Hipsync): October 1

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Sunday, September 11, 2016


Weekend Roundup

When I woke up this morning, I didn't have the slightest notion that today was the 15th anniversary of the Al-Qaeda hijackings that brought down the World Trade Center. It's not that I don't remember waking up in a Brooklyn apartment fifteen years ago, looking out the window to see blue skies with a toxic white streak across the middle, emanating from the still-standing towers. I looked down and watched tired people trekking east with the subway system shut down. We watched the towers fall on TV. We saw interviews with John Major and Shimon Peres about how Americans now know what terrorism feels like, barely containing their gloating. We went out for lunch in an Arab restaurant not yet covered in American flags. That was a bad day, but also one of the last days before we went to war. For make no mistake: Bin Laden may have wanted to provoke the US into an act of war, but Al-Qaeda didn't start the war. That was George W. Bush, with the nearly unanimous support of Congress, to the celebration of vast swathes of American media. They made a very rash and stupid decision back then, and much of the world has been suffering for it ever since. Indeed, Americans less than many other people, as was shown by my ability to wake up this morning without thinking of the date.


OK, so this is a typical day's news cycle in this election: Hillary Clinton commits a run-of-the-mill gaffe: Clinton Describes Half of Trump Supporters as 'Basket of Deplorables', by which she means "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it." Sort of true, but you're always on shaky ground when you start making generalizations about arbitrary groups of people, but that didn't stop her from making an appeal to the other half: "people who feel that government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures . . . Those are people who we have to understand and empathize with as well." Of course, coming from her that all sounds smug and condescending and, let's be realistic here, pretty hollow.

Of course, the Trump campaign tried to make what they could of this, partly because they don't have anything real to offer. Still, what did they focus on: well, putting people into baskets, of course. First, there was Pence Blasts Clinton: Trump Backers 'Are Not a Basket of Anything', then there's Trump Campaign Goes After Clinton for 'Basket of Deplorables' Remark. One thing for certain, you can't slip a metaphor past these guys. But they also have a point, which is that when you start dividing people into arbitrary groups and making gross generalizations about them you dehumanize and disrespect them -- and that is as true of the "other half" as it is of the "deplorables." (Contrast Trump's own description of his supporters: "millions of amazing, hard working people.")

Of course, in the Kabuki theater of American politics, every insult demands an apology, so whether she would or should not became the next anticipated story. Josh Marshall fired off This Is Critical: Hillary Can't Back Down, arguing:

Donald Trump has not only brought haters into the mainstream, he has normalized hate for a much broader swathe of the population who were perhaps already disaffected but had their grievances and latent prejudices held in check by social norms. . . . This election has become a battle to combat the moral and civic cancer Trump has [been] injecting into the body politic. (I know that sounds like florid language but it is the only fitting and valid way to describe it.) Backing down would make Clinton appear weak, accomplish nothing of value and confuse what is actually at stake in the election.

Clinton, of course, immediately apologized; see Clinton Regrets Saying 'Half' of Trump Backers Are in 'Basket of Deplorables', where she conceded, "Last night I was 'grossly generalistic,' and that's never a good idea. I regret saying 'half' -- that was wrong." In other words, she admitted to a math error, realizing (unlike Marshall) that it doesn't matter how many Trump supporters are racist, sexist, etc. -- a point she made clear enough by repeating "deplorable" a many times in the next paragraph, all directed squarely where they belong, at Donald Trump. She also said, "I also meant what I said last night about empathy, and the very real challenges we face as a country where so many people have been left out and left behind. As I said, many of Trump's supporters are hard-working Americans who just don't feel like the economy or our political system are working for them."

She still needs to find an effective way to communicate that, especially to people who are conditioned not to believe a single thing she says, who view her as deeply corrupt, part of a status quo system that is rigged against everyday people. Needless to say, these are problems that Bernie Sanders wouldn't be having.

PS: Just when Trump was enjoying this news cycle, this story pops up: Crazed Trumper Assaults Muslim Women in Brooklyn. I guess there are some Trump supporters who are . . . well, isn't "deplorable" a bit more polite than they deserve? Also note: Trump: Clinton Could 'Shoot Somebody' and Not Be Prosecuted. Trump previously said, "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" What's this obsession he has with shooting people?


Five-Thirty-Eight currently gives Clinton a 70.0% chance of winning, with a 3.5% edge in the popular vote and 310-227 in electoral votes. Iowa, which had a recent poll showing Trump leading, has inched back into Clinton's column, and she's less than a 60% favorite in North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, and Nevada. Meanwhile, the only red states where Trump is less than an 80% favorite are Arizona (65.7%), Georgia (73.0%), and Alaska (79.9%).


Some scattered links this week:

  • Chuck Collins: Long Live the Estate Tax: Wallace Stegner referred to the National Park Service as the nation's best idea. Collins argues that the estate tax (what Republicans like to call the "death tax") is a close second: "The estate tax is a fundamentally American notion, an absolutely democratic intervention against a drift toward plutocracy and extreme wealth imbalances." Of course, it would work better if it was stricter and stiffer -- if, for instance, the wealthy couldn't hide money in foundations. (Ever wonder why one-percenters down to the level of Bill Clinton have all those foundations? "For example, casino mogul Sheldon Adelson dodged over $2.3 billion in estate taxes using a complicated trust called a GRAT to transfer $8 billion in wealth to his heirs in 2013.") Reason enough to vote against him is that Trump has made abolishing the estate tax the centerpiece of his tax agenda. After all, he has billions, and three children who have proved unable to hold a job not on his payroll. How can you not feel for them?

  • John Judis: The US Treasury should be cheering the EU Case against Apple. It's not. The basic fact of the matter is that Apple cut a deal to run its European market operation out of Ireland, which claims several thousand jobs there, in exchange for Ireland capping Apple's tax liability to 2%, way below the going tax rate anywhere in Europe. In doing so Ireland violated EU regulations which prohibit special deals with individual companies like that, so the EU wants to collect the taxes Apple has thus far avoided paying. The Obama administration is backing the guys at Apple who contributed to their poilitical campaigns -- not necessarily "quid pro quo" but the sort of chummy alliances America's system of campaign finance breeds. However, we should be happy that Apple's scam is up, because for years now they've been cooking their books to make profits that should be taxed in the US vanish into their Irish tax haven. Judis doesn't mention this, but we should also similar regulations here in the US, to keep companies from auctioning their plants and to whichever state/local government gives them the sweetest tax deal. We run into this problem all the time here, and companies have gotten so spoiled that they never invest without first shaking down the local politicians. The most notorious case was Boeing, long the largest employer in Wichita but totally gone now that they've gotten more lucrative deals in Texas, Oklahoma, and South Carolina (after, by the way, shaking down Kansas for over a billion dollars, not counting the Feds building their main plant and an Air Force Base next door).

    Dean Baker has a different approach to the same problem: The Simple Way to Crack Down on Apple's Tax Games.

  • David E Sanger/William J Broad: Obama Unlikely to Vow No First Use of Nuclear Weapons: US foreign policy is wrapped in a cloak of tone-deafness and hypocrisy as transparent yet as desperately clung to as the proverbial emperor's new clothes. By not disavowing first use of nuclear weapons, Obama is practicing exactly the same nuclear blackmail that American fears used as excuses for invading Iraq and sanctioning Iran and North Korea. America's foreign policy mandarins are incapable of seeing themselves as others see us.

    The United States dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan at the end of World War II in 1945 -- the only example in history of a first use, or any use, of nuclear weapons in warfare. Almost every president since Harry S. Truman has made it clear that nuclear weapons would be used only as a last resort, so the pledge would have largely ratified unwritten policy.

    Administration officials confirmed that the question of changing the policy on first use had come up repeatedly this summer as a way for Mr. Obama to show that his commitment to reducing the role of nuclear weapons in American strategy -- and thus the risk of nuclear exchanges -- was more than rhetorical.

    But the arguments in front of the president himself were relatively brief, officials said, apparently because so many senior aides objected. Mr. [Ashton] Carter argued that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, could interpret a promise of no first use as a sign of American weakness, even though that was not the intent.

    Of course, Putin and Kim could just as well view "no first use" as a sign of sanity, one that encourages the notion that they might resolve their differences with the US through rational dialogue instead of macho posturing. But the "madman theory" has been a cornerstone of American foreign policy since Nixon, and no subsequent American emperor wants to be viewed as less crazed. It is, after all, a theory of self defense that has been proved to work against subway muggers. What further proof of its efficacy do you need?

    By the way, Obama is missing a nice political play here. If he made "no first use" official policy -- he should also end the current "launch under attack" policy and adopt some sort of checklist where key subordinates can veto a presidential decision to use nuclear arms -- Trump would throw a fit and vow to reverse Obama's policies, revealing himself as a dangerous maniac. Sounds like win-win to me.

  • Matt Taibbi: How Donald Trump Lost His Mojo: It's that teleprompter:

    The primary-season Donald Trump would never have been able to remember five things. Even more revealing is his rhetorical dismount: "But these examples," he shouts, "are only the tip of the Clinton-corruption iceberg!"

    The real Donald Trump does not speak in metaphors, let alone un-mixed ones. The man who once famously pronounced "I know words, I have the best words" scorched through the primaries using the vocabulary of a signing gorilla ("China - money - bad!").

    The funny thing is despite "losing his mojo" Trump's poll numbers have actually inched up. This is mostly because the "Clinton = corrupt" meme isn't something most people can dismiss out of hand -- unlike, say, his "what do you have to lose?" pitch to African-Americans, a people who through supporting politicians unlike Trump have escaped from slavery, Jim Crow laws, and ad hoc lynching. But it also helps that Trump set the bar so low all he has to do to "look presidential" is read from a teleprompter -- indeed, he's becoming almost Reaganesque.

  • Miscellaneous election links:

    • Katherine Krueger: NYT Scrambles to Rewrite Botched Story on Trump's Immigration Speech: Evidently the New York Times decided to get a jump on Trump's Phoenix "immigration speech" and report what they expected (or wanted) to hear: they "hailed Trump's address as 'an audacious attempt' to transform his image and reported that he shelved his proposal for a massive effort to deport immigrants who are in the country illegally." Of course, the actual speech baldly reiterated Trump's previous hard-line stands, suggesting that the rumors of a "softening" were nothing more than hype for the speech.

    • Annie Rees: In NYT's Hillary Clinton Coverage, An Obsession With 'Clouds' and 'Shadows': Not sure whether this is just blatant anti-Clinton prejudice or just really hackneyed writing -- Adam Nagourney, who made it to the round-of-four in Matt Taibbi's 2004 Wimblehack, was one of the writers called out here, as was Maureen Dowd. But casting every rumor as a "shadow" suggests an explanation as to why Clinton is continually dogged by "scandals" that never seem to afflict other politicians.

    • Paul Krugman: Hillary Clinton Gets Gored: Given a choice between reporting on a Trump scandal or a Clinton scandal, much of the press jumps at the latter, even though time and again there's been virtually nothing to it. Same for "lies." And as for innuendo, why tar Hillary as a self-seeking, egomaniacal greedhead when she's running against Donald Trump? Krugman's seen this kind of media bias before, in 2000:

      You see, one candidate, George W. Bush, was dishonest in a way that was unprecedented in U.S. politics. Most notably, he proposed big tax cuts for the rich while insisting, in raw denial of arithmetic, that they were targeted for the middle class. These campaign lies presaged what would happen during his administration -- an administration that, let us not forget, took America to war on false pretenses.

      Yet throughout the campaign most media coverage gave the impression that Mr. Bush was a bluff, straightforward guy, while portraying Al Gore -- whose policy proposals added up, and whose critiques of the Bush plan were completely accurate -- as slippery and dishonest.

      Of course, there are big differences between Bush and Trump, just not important ones. Bush at least worked hard to conceal his agenda, describing his conservatism as "compassionate" and disavowing any efforts at "nation building." Indeed, many of the programs he got passed were clever cons, like "no child left behind." On the other hand, Trump makes so little effort to gloss over the sheer meanness of his policy bullet points that many people can't imagine how awful life under him would be. He's like the Douglas Adams concept of the SEP ("someone else's problem," a thing so hideous the only way you can cope is to pretend it doesn't exist). Or the mantra of a guy I used to work with: "if you can't dazzle them with logic, baffle them with bullshit."

    • Paul Krugman cited this piece, adding:

      Matt Lauer may have done us all a favor with his catastrophically bad performance. By devoting so much time to emails and rushing through Clinton on ISIS, on one side, while letting Trump's Iraq lie slide by unchallenged, on the other, Lauer offered a demonstration of the prevailing double standard so graphic that it was hard to ignore. But it wasn't just Lauer: I think the accumulation of really bad examples, of failing to cover the Bondi bribe, of making an unsuccessful request for passports -- to rescue imprisoned journalists! -- a supposed scandal, even some of the botched initial reaction to the Lauer debacle, may have finally reached a critical mass.

      Maybe I'm just cynical, but I doubt that collective embarrassment has had any effect on how the media covers Trump and Clinton. More likely is that when Clinton surged so far ahead, they feared they might lose their horse race coverage so tried to even things up. Now that the race is more even they be having second thoughts. I mean, they can't be so stupid they want Trump to win?

    • Paul Waldman: Trump's history of corruption is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one? Without reading the article, I'm tempted to say it's the same reason prostitutes are more likely to be busted than Johns. Or that we expect our politicians to be selfless public servants, while we expect our businessmen to be voracious wolves, whose greed is part of their charm. Still, markets for influence, like sex, only exist because there are both buyers and sellers. The article includes the usual list of Trump's scandalous behavior. It's hard to tell whether he's exceptionally vile or just par for the course, because we don't usually look that closely at how the rich got on top. Otherwise we might have second thoughts about what kind of people they are.

    • Michelle Goldberg: Why Isn't It a Bigger Deal That Trump Is Being Advised by Sadistic Pervert Roger Ailes? Well, there are so many "big deals" about Trump that they all sort of diminish proportionately, if not in some objective measure of import at least in our ability to get worked up about them. "Perhaps the involvement of a disgraced sexual sadist is low on the list of things that are wrong with the Trump campaign. That's not a reason to ignore it."

    • Jamelle Bouie: What Trump's Black Church Appearance Is Really About: "A leaked script reveals his intended audience: white Republicans."

    • Peter Beinart: Fear of a Female President: This makes me wonder how a more overtly racist Republican would have fared against Obama -- at least with Trump we can't say that prejudice isn't getting its chance:

      Why is this relevant to Hillary Clinton? It's relevant because the Americans who dislike her most are those who most fear emasculation. According to the Public Religion Research Institute, Americans who "completely agree" that society is becoming "too soft and feminine" were more than four times as likely to have a "very unfavorable" view of Clinton as those who "completely disagree." And the presidential-primary candidate whose supporters were most likely to believe that America is becoming feminized -- more likely by double digits than supporters of Ted Cruz -- was Donald Trump.

      The gender backlash against Clinton's candidacy may not defeat her. But neither is it likely to subside if she wins.

      Indeed, one might argue that America has become more overtly racist after two terms of a black president, and that a female president is likely to produce a similar backlash. I doubt that will be true in the long run. Right now it seems to mostly be the result of the right-wing media, which deliberately or not has encouraged blind partisan hatred among small numbers already so inclined. On the other hand, maybe having a candidate as repugnant as Trump will discredit such backlash.

    • Adam Davidson: Trump and the Truth: The Unemployment-Rate Hoax: "A few of Donald Trump's claims about the labor force might generously be considered gross exaggerations, but the unemployment numbers he cites appear to be wholesale inventions." The latest in a series that include Eyal Press: Immigration and Crime, and David Remnick's Introducing a New Series: Trump and the Truth.

    • Steve Chapman: The worst case for Republicans: Donald Trump wins: Well, sure. For example, when Barry Goldwater lost in 1964, Republicans could forget about him practically forever instead of having to live with his legacy, as the Democrats did with Lyndon Johnson's stupid war. But the people who nominated him didn't disappear: they kept coming back in other guises, supporting Reagan, Bush, some even Trump (e.g., Phyllis Schlafly, who died last week at 92). Orthodox conservatives, through their donor network, think tanks, and media outlets, thought they had the Republican Party in their pocket before Trump roused their sheepish followers to revolt. If Trump loses they figure they'll resume control, their own dysfunctional ideology still untested so not yet discredited. On the other hand, if Trump wins, he'll turn their dream agenda into a flaming disaster, either by rejecting it or by implementing it (hard to know which would be worse for them). On the other hand, one could write pretty much the same piece about the Democrats. If Clinton loses (to Trump no less!) the dynasty is finished, the enemy becomes crystal clear, and the Democrats sweep Congress in 2018, which frankly I find a lot more exciting than slogging through eight years of an ineffective, powerless Hillary Clinton as president saddled with Republicans in control of Congress, holding the whole country hostage.

    • Zaid Jilani/Alex Emmons/Naomi LaChance: Hillary Clinton's National Security Advisers Are a "Who's Who" of the Warfare State: Despite which, they are on average markedly saner than Trump adviser Gen. Michael Flynn.

    • Andrew Kaczynski/Christopher Massie: Trump Claims He Didn't Support Libya Intervention -- But He Did, on Video: Makes me wonder if there has ever been an instance when the hawks tried to lure the US into a foreign war that Trump didn't buy into? What makes Trump so representative of today's Republican Party is how readily he falls for any crazy scam the party's propagandists put out. He isn't any sort of leader because that would require independent, critical thought. He's a follower, and you never know who's yanking his chain, or where they're dragging him.


  • Also, a few links for further study (briefly noted:

    • Patrick Cockburn: Turkey May Be Overplaying Its Hand with Syria Ground Offensive: One side-effect of the failed coup in Turkey is that it's allowed Erdogan to purge the army not only of plotters but of officers who might resist his designs on Syria. Hence, Turkey has escalated its interference with Syria, like the United States choosing to fight both Assad and Assad's enemies, although not necessarily the same anti-Assad forces the US is schizophrenically warring. As usual, Turkey's primary consideration is their own domestic Kurdish problem, which their warmaking is only likely to exacerbate. And as usual, the US is too caught up in weighing pluses and minuses to confront a nominal ally on the principle of the thing, or what blowback it's likely to cause.

    • Tom Engelhardt: A 9/11 Retrospective: Washington's 15-Year Air War: "Perhaps this September 11th, it's finally time for Americans to begin to focus on our endless air war in the Greater Middle East, our very own disastrous Fifteen Years' War. Otherwise, the first explosions from the Thirty Years' version of the same will be on the horizon before we know it in a world possibly more destabilized and terrorizing than we can at present imagine."

    • Robert Fares: The Price of Solar Is Declining to Unprecedented Lows: "Despite already low costs, the installed price of solar bell by 5 to 12 percent in 2015." Indeed, it's been doing that pretty regularly, as is clear from the chart (2010-15). Furthermore, there is no reason to think this trend won't continue for decades. The result will be that solar will take an ever larger chunk of the energy market, diminishing the demand for fossil fuels. Another consequence is that oil and coal companies will become even more desperate to exercise political power to hang on to their declining market shares and stock prices -- indeed, Trump's emphatic support for coal companies seems to be their final great white hope. Political influence may nudge the trend a bit up or down, but it won't change it. The article sees a "tipping point where [solar] becomes more economical than conventional forms of electricity generation."

    • Rebecca Gordon: Making Sense of Trump and His National Security State Critics: Background on many of those 50 prominent Republicans who signed a letter declaring Trump unfit to be president, by a writer who's been studying them and their friends for years, researching her book American Nuremberg: The U.S. Officials Who Should Stand Trial for Post-9/11 War Crimes.

    • Corey Robin: Phyllis Schlafly, 1924-2016: I suppose if I wanted to read anything on the late, "longtime conservative anti-feminist," I'd start with the author of The Reactionary Mind. Just not ready to yet.

    • Ron Unz: Did the US Plan a Nuclear First Strike Against Russia in the Early 1960s? Uh, yes, specifically in July 1961. James Galbraith, who has written about this before, adds a comment here that President Kennedy "would have never considered accepting the nuclear strike plan presented to him" and that Lyndon Johnson later held as "a first consideration . . . to prevent any situation from arising -- in Vietnam especially -- that might force the use of nuclear weapons." Of course, neither nor any subsequent US president has publicly disavowed first use of nuclear weapons -- evidently preferring to keep possible enemies wondering whether or not we're really insane.

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    Monday, September 5, 2016


    Enough Already

    I didn't get around to writing up a Weekend Roundup yesterday. I was working on something else (more below) and, as I tweeted last night, I've really gotten sick and tired of this election and its dominance of the news cycle. At least we had a fairly serious earthquake to distract us: about 100 miles south of Wichita, in near Pawnee OK, a town I've occasionally driven through, noting the red sandstone building in the center of town that is now ruined. We were woken with about a minute of ominous shaking, but aside from a few knick-knacks tumbling we were spared any damage. Oklahoma's state government responded to the 5.6 earthquake, the worst in the state's history, by ordering that 37 waste water injection wells be shut down (out of 4200 in the state).

    In case you haven't been following the story, up until around 2006 Oklahoma suffered an average of two small (3.0) earthquakes per year. Since then the numbers have increased astronomically, to over 900 (3.0 and higher) last year. These directly correlate with waste water injection -- not the same thing as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which also injects toxic fluids deep into the earth -- a practice which has increased dramatically over the last decade. (Probably due to Obama's coddling of the oil and gas industry, not something he gets credit for nor that he brags about, but his administration has reversed decades of declining oil production, mostly by increasing the yields of older, largely depleted oil patches like Oklahoma's.)

    No earthquake this morning (at least nothing above 4.0 -- I've arranged to get USGS notices whenever one strikes in Oklahoma or Kansas). Instead, when I got up today, my wife told me that Twitter was all abuzz about recent pieces claiming that Hillary Clinton was being done dirty by the New York Times -- notably, Paul Krugman: Hillary Clinton Gets Gored, and Josh Marshall: You Failed, Chumps. As it happens, I had already flagged two precursor pieces for Weekend Roundup: Katherine Krueger: NYT Scrambles to Rewrite Botched Story on Trump's Immigration Speech, and Annie Rees: In NYT's Hillary Clinton Coverage, An Obsession With 'Clouds' and 'Shadows'. As someone who's never been a fan of the New York Times, I don't find any of this surprising. It's inevitable that reporters will shade their limited view of the facts with prejudices, including desire to please the corporate hierarchy above them, and the editors who assign and select and (let's face it) edit their stories are one step closer to the moneyed power that runs their world. So with Trump flailing, of course they'll cut him slack on scandals that dwarf any hints of Clinton wrongdoing. And they certainly won't point out the more basic difference: that while Clinton stands accused of using her influence to help other people ("pay to play") the only person Trump has ever sought to help was himself.

    Still, I wouldn't get all that gloomy about the Times' double standards. The right has made hay for decades by attacking the biases of the "liberal media" -- the New York Times serving double duty, first as an icon of the former, then as a source of legitimacy and validation when they cower to the right (e.g., in their promotion of the Iraq War, or more recently in their adoption of the Clinton Cash book). In doing so they've stolen a page from the Earl Weaver management handbook: always argue with the umpires; even when you lose today it makes a bit more likely to give you the next call. In retrospect it was crsystal clear that the mainstream media spun story after story for Bush and against Gore in 2000. I think that's a tendency that is inherent in their trade, and you see it happening all over again for Trump and against Clinton. So I can't blame Krugman, Marshall, et al., for raising a stink -- Earl Weaver would do no less.

    But what I do blame Krugman, Marshall, et al., for is their earlier claims that Clinton has already "been vetted" -- that, unlike Bernie Sanders, she has already faced the worst smear campaigns the right can throw up, and has overcome them. Really? If she had really withstood them, she wouldn't be stuck with negative favorability ratings all year long, and she wouldn't be unable to crack 50% against Donald Trump in any nationwide poll. Moreover, she's not just facing the old Whitewater and Benghazi charges, which were whipped up from practically nothing. Her problem today is relatively new stuff, things a smart person running for president should have known better than. While I think her private email server is utter crap, the basic thrust of Peter Schweizer's lurid bestseller -- Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, published with the New York Times' blessing in May 2015 -- is basically true. Indeed, the Clintons themselves validated it when they released their tax returns, showing a $12 million annual income from a skill set consisting of little more than shaking hands and giving speeches.

    Sure, you can argue that the Clinton Foundation isn't doing anything different than, say, GW Bush's Foundation -- both are basically receptacles for delayed graft for the many favors both presidents showered on their backers -- but one difference is that Laura Bush isn't running for president (and Jeb, not that he ever came close, isn't obviously connected), so only the Clintons have set themselves up for selling graft futures. Maybe that wasn't the intent, but her decision to run made the Foundation inevitably look like a giant political slush fund, and she's never had the credibility to overcome that. That fact is, having set up the Foundation, she shouldn't have run. Too bad the 22nd Amendment didn't also bar the spouses and children of presidents from running. After all, wasn't a major point of the Revolution of 1776 to put an end to aristocratic rule?

    To give you an idea of how bad a candidate Hillary Clinton is, see Barry Blitt's Polls: If the Election Were Held Today . . . cartoon. I'm not denying that we're stuck with her. The alternative is Donald Trump, and he is clearly the greater evil in every respect I can reckon, including measures of personal character and integrity that I think are overrated. I wouldn't even say that she's the "lesser evil" -- I'd say she's objectively 'not bad" in a good many respects (admittedly a big one, war, is not one of those). I'll be pleased if she wins, and saddened if she doesn't. But one thing I don't need is another 90 days of wealth-squandering least-common-denominator campaigning to sway my mind. Like, I think, most sentient Americans, I'm settled. Now, please, shut up.

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    Monday, September 5, 2016


    Music Week

    Music: Current count 27090 [27056] rated (+34), 369 [370] unrated (-1).


    I've been having a lot of trouble thinking of things to listen to, although the list below is still pretty substantial. I finished looking up all the new jazz albums in Downbeat's Readers Poll ballot. Final tally is that I've listened to and rated 165 of 186 (88.71%) nominated albums, adding 53 albums since filling out the ballot. The remaining 21 by label: High Note/Savant: 7, CAM Jazz: 2, 1 each for 12 other labels (notably Anzic, ArtistShare, Cuneiform, Dark Key, Destiny, Fuzzy Music, Nessa -- at least those are the ones I've heard of). I should probably see whether Joe Fields is willing to turn service back on. The final grade tally: [A-] 18, [***] 31, [**] 47, [*] 41, [B] 16, [B-] 8, [C+] 1, [C] 1, [C-] 1. The grade curve bent slightly lower as I added more records, but last week's batch did reveal one more A- record, by Omar Sosa.

    Done with that, I scrounged around a few other lists. I checked out several Scandinavian jazz releases that Chris Monsen likes: Anna Högberg, Moskus, Hanna Paulsberg, Rønnings Jazzmaskin; also, less impressively, Monsen's non-jazz favorites: Bent Shapes, Cobalt, White Denim. I checked out a couple of well-regarded recent rap albums -- De La Soul, Young Thug -- the former is a favorite of my nephew, but I had trouble focusing on it. Also liked Britney Spears, recommended by Robert Christgau -- his other pick, Tegan and Sara's Love You to Death, was an A- here back in July.

    Still boycotting All Music Guide. For all its problems, that's taking a toll on my ability to find information necessary for reviewing records off streaming services. One thing I did use last week, for the first time in several years, was Spotify. Hard to search, and I rather hate the user interface, but I found two records there that had eluded me on Napster (Rhapsody): Anna Högberg: Attack and Waco Brothers: Going Down in History. Both came highly recommended, got two plays, and wound up high-B+. But by and large I'm not finding much there that's not already available on Napster, so I'm not convinced I need to pay up yet.

    That project I mentioned above: I've started assembling all of my old Jazz Consumer Guide columns into reference book form, using a wysiwyg word processor (Libre Office) instead of my usual hand-coded HTML. I've finished sorting the 27 columns (26 from the Village Voice), a little more than 1000 records from 2004-11, which with default formats runs 120 pages -- looks a lot like this index. A few decisions to date: I've decided to separate the individual artist and group records, and to pull the pre-2000 archival material out into an appendix at the end. I've changed the grade scale to 1-10, with A- at 8 (but I've generally nudged pick hits up to 9), so B is at 4 and the lower grades are mushed together.

    This is part of a broader project to collect my writings and recast them as a series of books -- this is the third I've opened, but the only one so far I've put much writing into. Working title is Recorded Jazz in the Early 21st Century: A Consumer Guide. Like the Jazz Consumer Guide, it mostly consists of nugget-sized reviews and one-liners. I expect to add a brief biographical intro to each artist/group, which will allow me to cut some redundancies out of the reviews. Then the much larger task will be to go through my thousands of other reviews -- the oldest prospect and surplus notes, Jazz Prospecting, Recycled Goods, and Rhapsody Streamnotes -- and pick out records worth mentioning and recast them into form. Then there's the question of what's missing and should be added. I'm thinking it would be nice for the project to span two decades, 2000-2019, although obviously I'm missing a few year fore and aft. Also not sure how much more work I want to put into this, so I may consider the option of recruiting a collaborator to finish it off. But it's pretty clear from looking at what I got so far that I've already put in most of the work, and that I can offer a wider-ranging survey of contemporary jazz than pretty much anyone.

    When I clean things up a bit, I figure the next step will be to post a PDF and solicit comments. More on that later.


    By the way, Michael Tatum's latest brilliant A Downloader's Diary is archived here. I'm pleased to provide an archive and indexing for all of his columns.


    New records rated this week:

    • The Bad Plus: It's Hard (2016, Okeh): [r]: B+(*)
    • Shirantha Beddage: Momentum (2014 [2016], Factor): [cd]: B+(***)
    • Bent Shapes: Wolves of Want (2015 [2016], Slumberland): [r]: B+(**)
    • Seamus Blake: Superconductor (2015 [2016], 5Passion): [r]: B-
    • Seamus Blake/Chris Cheek: Let's Call the Whole Thing Off (2015 [2016], Criss Cross): [r]: B+(**)
    • Will Calhoun: Celebrating Elvin Jones (2016, Motéma): [r]: B
    • Cobalt: Slow Forever (2016, Profound Lore, 2CD): [r]: B
    • De La Soul: And the Anonymous Nobody (2016, AOI): [r]: B+(**)
    • Lajos Dudas Quartet: Brückenschlag (2015 [2016], Jazz Sick): [cd]: B+(**)
    • Mats Eilertsen: Rubicon (2015 [2016], ECM): [dl]: B+(***)
    • Anna Högberg: Attack (2016, Omlott): [sp]: B+(***)
    • Franklin Kiermyer: Closer to the Sun (2015 [2016], Mobility Music): [cd]: A-
    • Raymond MacDonald & Marilyn Crispell: Parallel Moments (2010 [2014], Babel): [bc]: B+(**)
    • Moskus: Ulv Ulv (2015 [2016], Hubro): [r]: B+(**)
    • Bob Mould: Patch the Sky (2016, Merge): [r]: B+(*)
    • Ray Obiedo: Latin Jazz Project Vol. 1 (2016, Rhythmus): [cd]: B+(**)
    • Opaluna: Opaluna (2016, Ridgeway): [cd]: B
    • Hanna Paulsberg Concept: Eastern Smiles (2015 [2016], Odin): [r]: A-
    • Rønnings Jazzmaskin: Jazzmaskin (2014 [2016], Losen): [r]: B+(***)
    • Arturo Sandoval: Live at Yoshi's (2015, ALFI): [r]: B+(*)
    • Little Johnny Rivero: Music in Me (2016, Truth Revolution): [r]: B+(***)
    • Sonic Liberation 8: Bombogenic (2015 [2016], High Two): [cd]: A-
    • Omar Sosa/Joo Kraus/Gustavo Ovalle: JOG (2015 [2016], Otá): [r]: A-
    • Britney Spears: Glory (2016, RCA): [r]: A-
    • Matthew Stevens: Woodwork (2014 [2015], Whirlwind): [r]: B+(*)
    • Dave Stryker: Eight Track II (2016, Strikezone): [cd]: B+(***)
    • Steve Turre: Colors for the Masters (2016, Smoke Sessions): [r]: B+(**)
    • Waco Brothers: Going Down in History (2016, Bloodshot): [sp]: B+(***)
    • White Denim: Stiff (2016, Downtown): [r]: B+(*)
    • Anthony Wilson: Frogtown (2016, Goat Hill): [r]: B+(*)
    • Florian Wittenburg: Eagle Prayer (2014-15 [2016], NurNichtNur): [cd]: B+(**)
    • Lizz Wright: Freedom & Surrender (2015, Concord): [r]: B+(*)
    • Yellowjackets: Cohearence (2016, Mack Avenue): [r]: B+(**)
    • Young Thug: No My Name Is Jeffery (2016, 300 Entertainment/Atlantic): [r]: B+(***)
    • Brandee Younger: Wax & Wane (2016, Revive, EP): [r]: B+(*)

    Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries rated this week:

    • Born to Be Blue: Music From the Motion Picture ([2016], Rhino): [r]: B+(*)
    • Miles Ahead [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] ([2016], Columbia/Legacy): [r]: B+(*)
    • Revive Music Presents Supreme Sonacy, Vol. 1 (2015, Revive Music/Blue Note): [r]: B-


    Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

    • Tim Davies Big Band: The Expensive Train Set (Origin): September 16
    • Craig Hartley: Books on Tape Vol. II: Standard Edition (self-released): October 7
    • Lionel Loueke/Eric Harland: Aziza (Dare2): advance, October 14
    • Shawn Maxwell: Shawn Maxwell's New Tomorrow (OA2): September 16
    • Al Strong: Love Strong Volume 1 (Al Strong Music)

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    Monday, August 29, 2016


    Music Week

    Music: Current count 27056 [27020] rated (+36), 370 [359] unrated (+11).

    Published Streamnotes last week, so most of the finds (4 of 5 pictured albums) are already known to you. I wrote there about catching up with the Downbeat Readers Poll albums ballot, and I've continued doing that -- only eleven more that I haven't looked up, so I'll probably finish this week, even if that means listening to Yellowjackets. Of course, that leaves 20 records I tried finding on Rhapsody (and often on Bandcamp) but failed. Of those, the ones I most miss are the HighNotes/Savants (JD Allen, Kenny Burrell, George Cables, Joey DeFrancesco, Tom Harrell, Jeremy Pelt, The Power Quintet) and Roscoe Mitchell's Celebrating Fred Anderson (Nessa). I'll publish a revised grade breakdown when I hit the bottom of the list. Needless to say, the curve has been edging down, with only the George Coleman and David Murray records (ones I picked off on the first day) joining the A-list.

    I got a letter from Oliver Weinding, who runs Babel Label and the Vortex Jazz Club in London, a while back, noting he's putting on a series of showcases for Intakt artists and mentioning my review of "the Lucas Niggli album" -- that would be Kalo-Yele, which I filed under the first name, Aly Keita, a balafon player from Côte D'Ivoire. That, by the way, is still my top-rated record this year. Don't know whether this will result in me getting any physical mail, but I'll point out that Babel's catalog is pretty much all on Bandcamp, and I think their material is well represented on Napster. I've long associated the label with guitarist Billy Jenkins, who I credit with five A- records and one full A: 1998's True Love Collection. I wanted to give you the Bandcamp link, but there doesn't seem to be one, and to top that it's out of print. Basically '60s cheese ("Mellow Yellow," "Everybody's Talking," "Feelin' Groovy," "Sunny," "Dancing in the Streets," with avant twists connecting it all together, including terrific work by Django Bates and Iain Ballamy. It's on my all-time list. Meanwhile, the Paul Dunmall record is here.

    I stopped using All Music Guide this week. Recently they added some JavaScript that broke on my browser, so whenever I went to a page they printed a message about something horrible happening then looped forever. I could still see their pages on a Chromebook I keep open on the desk nearby, but they decided to escalate their anti-Ad Blocker campaign and make their site unavailable unless users either allow ads, pay them money, or something else I don't understand (seems to be some kind of scam to sell your name to other advertisers). I'm not unsympathetic to people who'd like to make some money off their hard work, and I could probably afford to pay them something as much as I use their site, but I'm also retired, have no income to speak of, make all of my web work available gratis, and have contributed numerous corrections to their site, but mostly I don't like the way this has gone down. It does, however, mean that I have less access to information -- mostly using Discogs a lot, and should find a way to better use MusicBrainz, which is more dependably free, and which I contributed to for a while -- and that's bound to hurt my reviews (main frustrations to date: verifying dates and credits).

    More bad web news: I gather that Spin is shutting down its review section, starting by firing staff reviewers including Dan Weiss (check him out here). Back when I followed webzines better, Spin had one of the more reliable and adventurous review sections anywhere, including more hip-hop than any other non-specialist source. Supposedly Spin will limp on doing news and features, but even when I bought whole copies of their print magazine I rarely read anything but reviews -- I really don't know what else they have to offer. Weiss is so knowledgeable and so prolific I expect he'll land somewhere else, but those opportunities are vanishing -- and not just because people like me are too cheap to pay for professional work ("content-providers" get squeezed from both directions).

    Unpacking picked up this week with nearly everything I received actually scheduled for September or October release. But part of the reason for the uptick is that I went ahead and added six releases I received today -- I usually hold Monday's mail for the following week.

    PS: Just noticed Michael Tatum has a new Downloader's Diary.


    New records rated this week:

    • Lucian Ban Elevation: Songs From Afar (2014 [2016], Sunnyside): [r]: B+(*)
    • Black Top: #Two (2014 [2015], Babel): [bc]: B+(***)
    • Brian Bromberg: Full Circle (2016, Artistry): [r]: B
    • Larry Coryell: Heavy Feel (2014 [2015], Wide Hive): [r]: B+(*)
    • Ian William Craig: Centres (2016, 130701): [r]: B
    • Elysia Crampton: Demon City (2016, Break World, EP): [r]: B+(***)
    • Kris Davis: Duopoly (2015 [2016], Pyroclastic): [cd]: B+(***)
    • Paul Dunmall/Matthew Bourne/Steve Davis/Dave Kane: Mandalas in the Sky (2013 [2015], Babel): [bc]: A-
    • David Gilmore: Energies of Change (2015 [2016], Evolutionary Music): [r]: B+(**)
    • Mark Guiliana Jazz Quartet: Family First (2015, Beat Music Productions): [r]: B+(**)
    • Joel Harrison 5: Spirit House (2013 [2015], Whirlwind): [r]: B+(*)
    • Gilad Hekselman: Homes (2014 [2015], Jazz Village): [r]: B+(*)
    • Cory Henry: The Revival (2016, Ground Up): [r]: B-
    • Hiromi: Spark (2016, Telarc): [r]: B+(*)
    • Dylan Howe: Subterranean: New Designs on Bowie's Berlin (2014, Motorik): [r]: B+(**)
    • Lydia Loveless: Real (2016, Bloodshot): [r]: B
    • Romero Lubambo: Setembro: A Brazilian Under the Jazz Influence (2015, Sunnyside): [r]: B+(*)
    • Jon Lundbom & Big Five Chord: Make the Changes (2016, Hot Cup, EP): [cdr]: A-
    • Tom McCormick: South Beat (2016, Manatee): [cd]: B+(*)
    • Pat Metheny: The Unity Sessions (2014 [2016], Nonesuch, 2CD): [r]: B
    • Northern Winds and Voices: Inside/Outside (Sisällä/Ulkona) (2016, Edgetone): [cd]: B+(*)
    • Lina Nyberg: Aerials (2016, Hoob Jazz, 2CD): [r]: B+(**)
    • Ralph Peterson/Zaccai Curtis/Luques Curtis: Triangular III (2016, Truth Revolution/Onyx Music): [r]: B+(**)
    • Enrico Pieranunzi: Proximity (2013 [2015], CAM Jazz): [r]: B+(**)
    • Enrico Pieranunzi with Simona Severini: My Songbook (2014 [2016], Via Veneto): [r]: B+(*)
    • John Pizzarelli: Midnight McCartney (2015, Concord): [r]: B
    • Gregory Porter: Take Me to the Alley (2016, Blue Note): [r]: B-
    • Herlin Riley: New Direction (2016, Mack Avenue): [r]: B+(*)
    • Jamison Ross: Jamison (2015, Concord): [r]: B
    • Luciana Souza: Speaking in Tongues (2015, Sunnyside): [r]: B
    • Marcus Strickland's Twi-Life: Nihil Novi (2016, Blue Note): [r]: B-
    • Marlene VerPlanck: The Mood I'm In (2015, Audiophile): [r]: B+(***)
    • Cuong Vu/Pat Metheny: Cuong Vu Trio Meets Pat Metheny (2016, Nonesuch): [r]: B+(*)

    Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries rated this week:

    • Close to the Noise Floor: Formative UK Electronica 1975-1984 (1975-84 [2016], Cherry Red, 4CD): [r]: B+(*)
    • Shirley Horn: Live at the 4 Queens (1988 [2016], Resonance): [cd]: A-
    • Joi: Joi Sound System (1999-2007 [2015], RealWorld, 2CD): [r]: A-
    • Senegambia Rebel (2016, Voodoo Rebel): [dl]: A-
    • Sunburst: Ave Africa: The Complete Recordings 1973-1976 (1973-76 [2016], Strut, 2CD): [r]: B+(*)


    Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

    • Shirantha Beddage: Momentum (Factor): September 9
    • Ron Carter Quartet & Vitoria Maldonado: Brasil L.I.K.E. (Summit)
    • The Roger Chong Quartet: Funkalicious (self-released)
    • Lajos Dudas Quartet: Brückenschlag (Jazz Sick)
    • Shirley Horn: Live at the 4 Queens (1988, Resonance): September 16
    • Franklin Kiermyer: Closer to the Sun (Mobility Music)
    • Cameron Mizell: Negative Spaces (Destiny): October 7
    • The Phil Norman Tentet: Then & Now: Classic Sounds & Variations of 12 Jazz Legends (Summit)
    • Ray Obiedo: Latin Jazz Project Vol. 1 (Rhythmus): October 7
    • Oddsong: Jailhouse Doc With Holes in Her Socks (JCA): September 30
    • Opaluna: Opaluna (Ridgeway)
    • Little Johnny Rivero: Music in Me (Truth Revolution): September 29
    • Dave Stryker: Eight Track II (Strikezone): September 2
    • The U.S. Army Blues: Swamp Romp: Voodoo Boogaloo (self-released)

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    Sunday, August 28, 2016


    Weekend Roundup

    Not very happy with all that follows, let alone all that I haven't gotten to, but it looks like there's enough to chew on for now. Latest odds at 538 show Clinton as having slipped to a 80.9% chance of winning as Georgia and Arizona have tilted back in Trump's favor. Clinton's big problem is that she's still unable to crack 50% of the popular vote -- seems like an awfully flawed, weak candidate given that all she has to beat is Trump, and he's pretty handily beating himself. I suspect the media deserves much of the blame for normalizing and legitimizing Trump, and also for tarring Clinton with an endless series of silly scandals -- the biggest eye-opener for me was to discover that GW Bush's Foundation, even with no prospects of future dynasty, has been raking in even more money than the Clinton Foundation. While I don't doubt the corruption inherent in the latter, I find it curious that no one ever mentions the former. Matt Taibbi attacked the media this year in a piece called The Summer of the Shill, lamenting especially the partisanship of news channels like Fox and MSNBC, where one airs nothing but Hillary "scandals" and the other little but Trump "gaffes." Still, it's not clear to me that the quality has dropped much since Taibbi wrote up his brilliant Wimblehack series in 2004 (cf. his book Spanking the Monkey), and at least there's more parity now. Still, I guess you have to make do with the candidates you got.

    Some scattered links this week:


    • Michelle Goldberg: Hillary Clinton's Alt-Right Speech Isolated and Destroyed Donald Trump: Trump's hiring of Steve Bannon has brought the "alt-right" brand to the mainstream media's attention, making it possible for centrists to draw a line between Trump and run-of-the-mill conservatives, neocons, and/or Republicans -- letting the latter off the hook if they can somehow see clear to cut themselves loose from Trump.

      But the killer in Hillary came out on Thursday, delivering a devastating indictment of Donald Trump's associations with the far-right fringe, one meant to permanently delegitimize him among decent people. "A man with a long history of racial discrimination, who traffics in dark conspiracy theories drawn from the pages of supermarket tabloids and the far reaches of the internet, should never run our government or command our military," she said, daring Republican officials to disagree.

      With Trump already trailing badly in most polls, Clinton could have tried to yoke him to the Republican Party so he would drag it down with him. Instead, she sought to isolate and personally destroy him.

      Let me interject here that I would much prefer that she "yoke him," since I personally find mainstream Republican apparatchiks even more odious than fringe personalities like Trump, and since her ability to do anything positive as president depends on beating the Republicans down in both houses of Congress. Continuing:

      First came her campaign's Twitter video earlier today about Trump's white-supremacist admirers. Usually, a politician trying to link her opponent to the KKK would come dangerously close to the Godwin's Law line, but Clinton appears to have calculated that few Republicans would rally to their nominee's defense. Her speech, in Reno, further painted Trump as a creature from the fever swamps, one who has nothing to do with legitimate conservatism. It was able to briskly explain some of the crazier figures and theories Trump has associated with, without getting bogged down in obscure detail. Her list of Breitbart headlines, including "Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy" and "Gabby Giffords: The Gun Control Movement's Human Shield," tells you much of what you need to know about Trump's new campaign CEO, Steve Bannon, the former head of the site.

      Given such a ripe target, Clinton's pitch can get yucky, as when she said (quoted in this article):

      Twenty years ago, when Bob Dole accepted the Republican nomination, he pointed to the exits and told any racists in the party to get out. . . . The week after 9/11, George W. Bush went to a mosque and declared for everyone to hear that Muslims "love America just as much as I do." . . . We need that kind of leadership again.

      Uh, no, we don't need or want that kind of leadership again, and if that were all Hillary has to offer we'd be having second thoughts about her, too. Goldberg obviously considers that a stinging rebuke to Trump (else why quote it?), and she admires the way Hillary strung so many of Trump's outrages together, without noticing that in doing so Hillary is making her move on high center ground, intent on establishing herself as the blandest, most conventional establishment candidate ever. That will probably work for her, and given her other handicaps that may be her safest route to the presidency. But in her self-conceit, she's also missing a golden opportunity to help her party and her people.

      For more, see: Lincoln Blades: Call the 'Alt-Right' Movement What It Is: Racist as Hell; Nancy LeTourneau: Quick Takes: Clinton's Speech in Reno.

    • Rochelle Gurstein: How Obama Helped Lay the Groundwork for Trump's Thuggery: "His refusal to prosecute torturers and his Wild West assassination of bin Laden show how moral complacency can all too easily degenerate into full-blown corruption." I would shift the focus a bit here: by failing to end America's involvement in the wars in the Middle East, and by failing to embrace a consistent doctrine of democracy and justice in the region, Obama has kept those wars and their side effects -- like Guantanamo and the plight of Syrian refugees -- central to American political discourse. So now we're forced to choose between Trump's incoherent bluster and Clinton's bumbling continuity. Still, it's flat-out wrong to say that Obama was the one responsible for laying this groundwork. He inherited that entire foundation from GW Bush, who actually was in a position where he could have ordered the military and CIA to stand down and seek justice for 9/11 through international law. He pointedly did not do that, leading to one disaster after another, many only becoming obvious after he left his mess to Obama.

    • Adam H Johnson: Pundits, Decrying the Horrors of War in Aleppo, Demand Expanded War: Nicholas Kristof, Joe Scarborough, presumably many others unnamed, but you know the types as America's punditocracy is rife with them:

      This is part of the broader problem of moral ADD afflicting our pundit class -- jumping from one outrage in urgent need of US bombs to the next, without much follow-through. Kristof, for example, was just as passionate about NATO intervention in Libya in 2011, writing several op-eds that called for bombing in equally moralistic terms. Yet as Libya descended into chaos, the country faded into the background for him. His last post on the subject? September 2011. The plight of Libyans was urgent for the Times columnist when it involved selling war to weary liberals, but once the smoke cleared, his bleeding heart dried up and he moved on to the next cause.

      OK, let's think about this for a moment. Civil Wars, such as Libya in 2011 and Syria from then to now, and you could throw in dozens more (including our own in 1861-65), occur when you have two (or more) groups fighting to seize power and to dominate the other. Civil Wars end two ways: one side "wins" exacting its toll on the others, the "losers" bearing grudges for generations, so in some sense those wars never really end -- they just become relatively quiescent; or both sides agree to share power somehow. The latter is vastly preferable -- in fact, arguably the only thing that works. (The Soviets, for instance, clearly "won" the Russian Civil War by 1922, but the repression they instituted crippled the country for generations. Franco clearly "won" the Spanish Civil War, but was troubled by Basque "terrorists" until his death, when the king he installed allowed democratic elections to move the country far to the left.)

      When outside nations intervene in civil wars, they invariably tilt the tables one way or another, allowing their favored groups to escalate the violence and making them less inclined to compromise. Intervention also resupplies the war, usually extending it, and may cause it to lap into neighboring countries and/or draw in others -- the US intervention in Vietnam's civil war extended the war by ten years, cost millions of lives, destroyed Cambodia and Laos, and led to Nixon's "madman" nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union; the Soviet Union's insertion of troops into Afghanistan to support a friendly coup led the US and Saudi Arabia to recruit and arm a jihadist insurgency that is still active more than 35 years later, having lapped into Pakistan and inspired acts of terror around the globe.

      One thing that has made recent civil wars in the Middle East especially destructive is that opposition groups have often been fractured and divisive. We saw this in Afghanistan, where following the Soviet withdrawal the jihadist groups continued to fight each other for over a decade, with the Northern Alliance still holding territory from the Taliban when the US invaded in 2001. Again, in Libya the NATO intervention degraded forces loyal to Ghadaffi but left the spoils to be fought over by numerous clans and schisms. Syria is even worse, with dozens of anti-Assad groups unable to unite into a coherent opposition, not least because foreign powers have chosen to intervent in often contradictory ways. For instance, the US is funneling weapons to so-called moderate groups to fight against Assad (weapons that are quickly resold to less friendly groups) while at the same time the US bombs ISIS, perhaps the most formidable of the anti-Assad groups. Turkey too is opposed to Assad, also to ISIS, and even more so to the anti-Assad, anti-ISIS Kurdish militia.

      Recent calls by Kristof and others mostly focus on "establishing a no-fly zone" over Syria -- a tactic which short and shallow memories recall as working so well in Iraq and Libya -- although the task is rather more complicated in Syria. For one thing, would the US also guard against anti-Assad forces flying over Syria (not just NATO allies but also Turkey, Jordan, and Israel). Moreover, Syria's air force is augmented by Russian planes and pilots, and those forces at least occasionally attack ISIS. I don't see how the US can negotiate this, but even if it works you're left with something like Libya but many times as much firepower left on the ground, with Assad weakened to where he cannot win but no other group strong enough to prevail except locally. A subsequent ground assault on ISIS might break it up, with splinters retreating into Iraq or going underground -- but the idea that an Islamic caliphate is needed to save the Muslim world isn't going away anytime soon.

      Seems like it would be easier to negotiate a truce, if not between the local warlords then between the foreign powers, and much better for all in the long run. I could even imagine a military intervention helping here, but only if it was done by a neutral party with the sole interest of disarming all parties, with preference or malice toward none (even ISIS, even Assad, even everyone) -- by disarming I'm not just talking about the big stuff like mortars and RPGs; I'm talking about total NRA nightmare. As areas are cleared of arms, another international group can move in and organize local elections and aid. Over time this would lead to a loose federalism, but most power would remain local and representative. Both the military and the international group would have to rigorously police themselves against corruption, and function with the scrutiny of a free press. No foreign power would have any claim to local property or privilege. All foreign powers have to agree to let Syria manage itself, except for three restrictions: no guns; corruption to be prosecuted in international courts; and prisoners have the right to appeal to insure no discrimination against minorities (needless to say, this also means no capital punishment).

      It should be obvious that the US cannot intervene like this -- it's simply not in the military or political culture to go into a country and not pursue some probably misguided sense of national interests (usually the military's own interest, above all in their own survival). One indication of the problem is that when the US had the opportunity to stand up governments in Afghanistan and Iraq -- two countries with distinct local ethnic and religious communities with longstanding grudges -- US politicians insisted on setting up very centralized governments that would inevitably run up against local dissent, and to arm those governments against the people they may or may not represent. That immediately labeled the natives put into nominal positions of power as Quislings and made the Americans foreign occupiers. That proved disastrous yet the US never wavered from that model: it simply kept training and arming more police and buying friends through calculated corruption, and that, too, never worked, no matter how much "hearts and minds" gibberish was added.

      The best choice for the ground disarmament force is probably the Chinese because they have no hidden agenda -- indeed, they would have to be well-paid mercenaries, barred from plunder -- supplemented by Arabic speakers (also hired from abroad so they have no clan ties). The ground force can be supplemented by US and Russian surveillance and air power which can be called in to pulverize any armed resistance to the ground troops. They would, of course, commit the occasional atrocity -- that is what they do, and why they should be feared. But they won't attack anyone who is not firing back, and should vanish as areas are disarmed.

      The international relief groups should be organized by the UN. Once they organize local governments, they should step back and function as resources for those governments. They may initially depend on ground forces for security, but as security is met the ground forces should move on and out of the country. Border control will probably be their last role, as, alas, the rest of the neighborhood is awash in guns and corruption.

      Americans need to realize that their true national interest is in a peaceful world where all people are respected and treated fairly. This isn't a new idea -- Franklin Roosevelt sketched it out in his "Four Freedoms" speech, and it was the basis for the United Nations, but it got lost in America's post-WWII pursuit of profit and empire. But for now the United States military is only good at one thing: killing. Better to focus that skill set on other people killing than to give the military missions it cannot possibly fulfill, like "winning hearts and minds" and projecting US power as anything other than the terror it is. Of course, better still to set an example and stop the killing altogether. Until we learn better the one thing the US shouldn't be doing is entering into wars. Of course, if we knew better we wouldn't be doing it anyway.

    • Paul Krugman: No, Donald Trump, America Isn't a Hellhole:

      Back when the Trump campaign was ostensibly about the loss of middle-class jobs, it was at least pretending to be about a real issue: Employment in manufacturing really is way down; real wages of blue-collar workers have fallen. You could say that Trumpism isn't the answer (it isn't), but not that the issue was a figment of the candidate's imagination.

      But when Mr. Trump portrays America's cities as hellholes of runaway crime and social collapse, what on earth is he talking about?

      Krugman answers "race" -- indeed, for Trump's followers, all it takes to constitute a hellhole is non-white skin and/or non-American accents. Krugman explains "Trump's racial 'outreach'" as meant "to reassure squeamish whites that he isn't as racist as he seems." I think it's more like he wants to reassure whites that blacks will welcome his draconian law enforcement fantasy once they see how much safer it makes them (the "good ones," anyhow). And besides, living in the hellholes of their own skin, what do they have left to lose?

      Still, it's a pretty ridiculous pitch, but even sympathetic white people tend to underestimate how much progress blacks have made over the last 50-70 years, and therefore how much they stand to lose if white supremacists like Trump regain power. (One is tempted to credit the civil rights acts of the 1960s for those gains, but to some extent they simply codified and consolidated gains made in the early postwar era.

    • Jim Newell: Why Is the Trumpish Right Inept at Hardball Politics? Case study is "making stuff up about their opponents' health," as in claims by Rudy Giuliani and other Trumpsters that Hillary Clinton is covering up a secret debilitating illness (presumably somewhere under a blanket of traitorous emails and Clinton foundation favors). Newell spends much too much time investigating a similar line of attack used by Sen. John McCain's primary opponent, Tea Party partisan Kelli Ward, and probably not enough on everything else -- after all, didn't "the big lie" work just fine for Goebbels (although I guess it was never really tested in a general election)?

      Conservative media has been the lifeblood of Ward's campaign, and with Trump's hiring of Steve Bannon, it is in direct operational control of the Republican presidential nominee's campaign. And so crappy attacks, workshopped inside the conservative tabloid media bubble, get greenlit even if they confuse 70 percent of the electorate. Trump was able to say a lot of stupid things and get away with them in the Republican primary, but the lesson from that shouldn't have been that the idea was replicable: He was in a 17-person field, against a group of mostly undefined opponents, depriving them of oxygen. And he could at least be funny. John McCain and Hillary Clinton have total name recognition and well-known histories. It doesn't convert anyone new to suggest, sans evidence, that they're near death. It just hastens the death of the campaigns suggesting it.

    • Ben Norton: No, they don't support Trump: Smeared left-wing writers debunk the myth: "Clinton-supporting neoconservative pundit James Kirchick published an article in the Daily Beast this week titled "Beware the Hillary Clinton-Loathing, Donald Trump-Loving Useful Idiots of the Left." Norton did some checking and none of the named writers, no matter how much they loathed Hillary, supported Trump. OK, one writer -- all fifteen are quoted here, making for entertaining reading -- somename I had never heard of named Christopher Ketcham, said he would vote for Trump, who he described as "an ignorant, vicious, narcissistic, racist, capitalist scumbag, and thus an accurate representative of the United States." There have always been a tiny number of leftists who hold a romantic idea of revolution erupting as conditions deteriorate unbearably. I think those people are out of touch, especially with the people they think their revolution would help, but they're also very marginal -- "idiots," perhaps, but not useful to anyone. I'm tempted to retort that the real "useful idiots" are the neocons supporting Hillary (like Kirchik, although he's small fry compared to Max Boot and the Kagans) as they actually represent a faction with real money and clout and they give her an air of legitimacy in a domain Republicans like to think they own, but for the most part they at least are making rational choices to advance their most cherished goals -- not so much that Hillary will plunge the country into more wars than Trump but that she will more reliably parrot the neocon line, which in turn legitimizes the neocons. Kirchik, on the other hand, is merely doing what he habitually does: slandering the left, which is still America's best hope for peace.

    • Mark Oppenheimer: 'Blood in the Water,' a Gripping Account of the Attica Prison Uprising: A review of Heather Ann Thompson's new book, Blood in the Water: The Attica Prison Uprising of 1971 and Its Legacy (Pantheon) -- easily the most definitive history of the famous prison revolt, the brutal assault on the prison ordered by Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, and the long legal struggle that ensued. I'll also add that what made this picture so clear was the trove of documents and testimony elicited by defense lawyers, especially the late Elizabeth Fink. Also, that the one underlying theme from each step of the history -- the reason the revolt started, and the reason the state protracted the legal fight so long -- was the state's dogged refusal to grant or acknowledge even basic human rights to prisoners; in short, to see prisoners as people. Rather, the state felt free to punish prisoners virtually without limit. For more on this, including how little has changed, also see: Michael Winerip/Tom Robbins/Michael Schwirtz: Revisiting Attica Shows How New York State Failed to Fulfill Promises.

    • Scott Shane: Saudis and Extremism: 'Both the Arsonists and the Firefighters': The al-Saud clan made a deal with al-Wahhab back in the late 18th century where the latter would bless the Saudis' expansion from the Arabian Desert into the Holy Cities and the Wahhabis would control religious doctrine in the Kingdom. I'm not sure when the Saudis started proselytizing Wahhabism outside of Saudi Arabia: probably in the 1960s when they bankrolled a war with Egypt over Yemen and coincidentally adopted Egyptian Sayyid Qutb -- the subject of the first chapter of Lawrence Wright's 9/11 pre-history, The Looming Tower. [Shane dates this from 1964, when King Faisal ascended to the Saudi throne.] But the Saudis spent more in the 1970s and more still in the 1980s when the US decided that militant Islamist Jihadis would be useful against the Soviets in Afghanistan. And they've kept it up, even as virtually every Sunni terrorist you can think of traces religious doctrine back through the Saudi-Wahhabis to the medieval Salafists. As Shane explains, in the 1980s the US was completely complicit in this:

      Throughout the 1980s, Saudi Arabia and the United States worked together to finance the mujahedeen in this great Afghan war, which would revive the notion of noble armed jihad for Muslims worldwide. President Ronald Reagan famously welcomed to the Oval Office a delegation of bearded "Afghan freedom fighters" whose social and theological views were hardly distinguishable from those later embraced by the Taliban.

      In fact, the United States spent $50 million from 1986 to 1992 on what was called a "jihad literacy" project -- printing books for Afghan children and adults to encourage violence against non-Muslim "infidels" like Soviet troops. A first-grade language textbook for Pashto speakers, for example, according to a study by Dana Burde, an associate professor at New York University, used "Mujahid," or fighter of jihad, as the illustration: "My brother is a Mujahid. Afghan Muslims are Mujahedeen. I do jihad together with them. Doing jihad against infidels is our duty."

      The US government still loves the Saudis: they are big business, especially to the oil, defense, and banking sectors which have so much clout over American foreign policy. On the other hand, large segments of the American public are beginning to wonder about Saudi Arabia, especially since King Salman was crowned last year and immediately attacked Yemen (with America's tacit blessing). Those segments include the Islamophobes which have been a predictable result of 15 years of American wars targeting Muslims (or 25 or 35 years, pick your starting date), but they also include, well, me: it looks to me like Saudi Arabia is the real Islamic State ISIS wants to grow up to be, the differences mostly explained by ISIS having been created in a war zone with the US, NATO, Russia, and Iran joining the attack (despite all their various differences). As Shane notes, Saudi Arabia's cleric Saad bin Nasser al-Shethri has condemned ISIS as "more infidel than Jews and Christians," but, you know, he would say that -- doing so protects the Saudi's exclusive claim to rightful jihad, but it perpetuates the Salafi habit of declaring their enemies takfir (impure, false Muslims).

      I'm afraid that the instinctive American response to ISIS is tantamount to genocide -- and it's not just the Islamophobic right that insists that ISIS must be crushed and destroyed. On the other hand, the US has proved that we can live with an Islamic State, even one that insists on dismembering or even beheading subjects it deems to be criminals, one that joins in foreign wars just to assert its religious dogma (the Saudis like to describe their opponents in Yemen as proxies of Iran, but the real problem is that they're Shiites). Of course, it helps that the Saudis have huge oil reserves and a deep appetite for American arms, but even if ISIS can never become as lucrative as Saudi Arabia, that still suggests that the US should be willing to make some sort of accommodation to ISIS, especially one established by votes as opposed to arms.

      As it is, the US insistence on destroying ISIS makes it impossible to negotiate an end to the Syrian Civil War, as does other irrational American impulses, such as simultaneous opposition to Assad. On the other hand, uncritical support for Saudi Arabia creates and deepens regional conflicts, including Syria and Yemen, in ways that have and will continue to blow back on America. The fact is that American support for Saudi jihad was never just a shortsighted policy. It was from the beginning a schizophrenic assault on world piece, order, and justice.

      For more on the Saudi assault on Yemen, see: Daniel Larison: 'The Administration Must Stop Enabling This Madness' in Yemen, and Mohamad Bazzi: Why Is the United States Abetting Saudi War Crimes in Yemen? Note how US arms sales to Saudi Arabia have continued and even increased even though Clinton is no longer in the State Department:

      On August 9, the State Department approved the latest major US weapons sale to Saudi Arabia, mainly to replace tanks that the kingdom has lost in its war in Yemen against Houthi rebels and allies of the former president. The $1.15 billion deal highlights the Obama administration's deepening involvement in the Saudi-led war, which has escalated after four months of peace talks broke down on August 6. Since then, warplanes from the Saudi-led coalition have bombed a Yemeni school, a hospital run by Doctors Without Borders, and a potato-chip factory, killing more than 40 civilians, including at least 10 children.

      Also note Trita Parsi's tweet: "Fun fact: When ISIS established its school system, it adopted official Saudi textbooks for its schools."

    • David Sirota/Andrew Perez: Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department: At some point I should look for a good article by a reputable investigative journalist to explain what the Clinton Foundation does and where all the money went -- looks like a big chunk went into the Clinton's own pockets (their personal income was $11.2 million last year; if memory serves about 2/3 of that came from the Foundation) which is a funny way to run a non-profit charitable institution. Actually, it looks more like a political slush fund, one that's even more free of regulation than Clinton's PAC. I wonder, for instance, whether having the ability to launder so much corporate and foreign money through the Foundation wasn't a big part of the reason virtually no other mainstream Democrats ran against Hillary for president this year.

      Sirota and Perez plumb the more obvious question, which is where the money came from and whether it maps to political favors, and they conclude that at least in the area of American arms sales to foreign countries -- something that the State Department, headed by Hillary from 2009-13, has to sign off on -- lots of things look suspicious. Clinton (and Obama) sure approved a lot of weapons deals. I suppose it's possible that Obama, like presidents going back to Truman and Eisenhower, saw foreign arms sales as a cheap, politically safe jobs program (and following the financial meltdown of 2008 Obama desperately needed one of those). Or maybe you can just chalk it up to Hillary's notorious hawkishness. None of those explanations are really very calming.

      Still, see, for instance, Kent Cooper: 16 Donors Gave $122 Million to George W. Bush Foundation, which notes among other things that Bush's Foundation raised $341 million in 2006-2011, a period that overlaps Bush's presidency. Maybe the Clintons weren't so unique in monetizing their political "service"?

      As for all those weapons sales, see: CJ Chivers: How Many Guns Did the US Lose Track of in Iraq and Afghanistan? Hundreds of Thousands. It's been absurd to listen to Trump claim that Obama and Clinton "founded ISIS," especially given that most of ISIS's guns were delivered to the region by the Bush administration. For example:

      One point is inarguable: Many of these weapons did not remain long in government possession after arriving in their respective countries. In one of many examples, a 2007 Government Accountability Office report found that 110,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles and 80,000 pistols bought by the United States for Iraq's security forces could not be accounted for -- more than one firearm for every member of the entire American military force in Iraq at any time during the war. Those documented lapses of accountability were before entire Iraqi divisions simply vanished from the battlefield, as four of them did after the Islamic State seized Mosul and Tikrit in 2014, according to a 2015 Army budget request to buy more firearms for the Iraqi forces to replace what was lost.

    • Sean Wilentz: Hillary's New Deal: How a Clinton Presidency Could Transform America: A distinguished historian -- I learned a lot from his The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln -- but less than reliable when it comes to putting recent political movements into historical perspective (e.g., The Age of Reagan: A History 1974-2008). A historian should be able to bring some perspective to a campaign, but Wilentz does little more than regurgitate campaign hype:

      Hillary Clinton has already indicated what she would pursue in her first 100 days in office: launching her infrastructure program; investing in renewable energy; tightening regulation of health-insurance and pharmaceutical companies; and expanding protection of voting rights. She has also said that she will nominate women for half of her Cabinet positions. And not far behind these initiatives are several others, including immigration reform and raising the minimum wage.

      Even without a unifying title, it is a sweeping agenda, the latest updating of Democratic reformism. Democratic politics at their most fruitful have always been more improvisational than programmatic, more empirical than doctrinaire, taking on an array of issues, old and new, bound by the politics of Hope pressing against the politics of Nostalgia. So it was with FDR and Truman, so it has been with Barack Obama, and so it would be with Hillary Clinton.

      Still, a historian should recall that FDR's remarkable first 100 days -- the since-unequaled model for that concept -- was accomplished mostly due to conditions Clinton, even if she scores a personal landslide, will not enjoy: Roosevelt had an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress (and for that matter a large percentage of surviving Republicans were progressives), and in throwing out Hoover and Mellon the voters had sent a clear message that the new administration should do something about desperate times. Clinton has yet to do anything significant to elect a Democratic Congress -- indeed, she seems preoccupied with capturing anti-Trump Republicans for her campaign only. Moreover, historians should recognize that the last two Democratic presidents -- Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, for whom she represents nothing if no continuity -- delivered very few of their campaign promises, even when they had Democratic majorities before they squandered them away through inaction. Hillary may think she wants to do wonders as president, but unless Congress changes she won't be able to. Indeed, if the Republicans hold onto the Senate, she may have trouble even getting those women confirmed to cabinet posts.

      For a more serious example of a historian looking at present politics, see Corey Robin: Donald Trump is the least of the GOP's problems, where he argues that it's not just Trump's gaffes that are dragging the party and the conservative movement down: both are also "victims of their success." Robin argues that reactionary movements lose their "raison d'être" as they become successful. I'd argue that success leads to them overshooting their goals in ways that turn destabilizing and self-destructive. On the other hand, I don't really believe that there is some sort of left-right equilibrium that needs to be periodically recentered. Rather, I believe that there is a long-term liberalizing drift to American politics, which is occasionally perverted by the corruption of business groups. We are overdue for a course correction now, but it's only happening fitfully due to the Republican focus on rigging the system and the generous amnesia of Democrats.

    • Miscellaneous election tidbits:

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    Thursday, August 25, 2016


    Streamnotes (August 2016)

    Mostly jazz records this month, plus a few Christgau picks (Konono No. 1, The Kropotkins, Leland Sundries, Lori McKenna, Dawn Oberg, Walter Salas-Humara, Mestre Cupijó, Joi, Pylon, Senegambia Rebel). I only count two new records that are exceptions: Atmosphere and Hieroglyphic Being -- artists I somehow noticed and checked out based on previous reputation. (Had I done more scouting Dan Weiss might have scared me off Atmosphere, but having played the record twice before finding his review, all he accomplished was to get me to do an extra sanity check spin -- as far as I'm concerned the record passed.)

    The new jazz is probably more mainstream than usual. My own mail queue continues to dwindle (or perhaps the seasonal lull in August is just exceptionally severe this year) so probably for the first time since I folded Jazz Prospecting into Streamnotes most of the new jazz records below were downloaded or streamed. But what makes them more mainstream than usual is that I spent most of my time looking for records on Downbeat's Readers Poll ballot that I hadn't heard (74/186 at the time, or 39.79%). I've knocked more than a third of that list off (27 by my running count), and I'll probably get close to 50% before I run out of records available on my streaming service (Napster, formerly Rhapsody). That list did get me to two of the best jazz releases of the year -- tenor saxophonists George Coleman and David Murray -- records I wasn't previously aware of but gravitated to the first day I started scouring that list. Still, in the month since nothing else has proven even remotely as good -- my other streamed A- new jazz records (by Paul Dunmall and Paal Nilssen-Love) weren't on the Downbeat ballot.

    The recent compilations section has a couple sets I hadn't heard about but looked interesting: some Africana (Penny Penny, Sunburst), proto-electronica (Close to the Noise Floor). The new Lovano record got slotted there because the tape is 10+ years old. Senegambia Rebel is probably all new, but I decided to file all various artist compilations there -- not sure that's been a consistent standard, but it's one for now.

    Old music is mostly tangential to new music. The Peter Kuhn was a belated discovery after I reviewed his old and new music last month. Ellery Eskelin is on the new Stephan Crump album, and he has a new album on Hatology I couldn't find -- instead I came up with an old one I had missed. Barbara Dane and Lori McKenna have good new albums. I didn't get very far with Chucho Valdés, but at least knocked off one of my ungraded CDs -- probably just a bookkeeping error since it wasn't on an ungraded shelf.


    Most of these are short notes/reviews based on streaming records from Rhapsody (other sources are noted in brackets). They are snap judgments based on one or two plays, accumulated since my last post along these lines, back on July 30. Past reviews and more information are available here (8483 records).


    Recent Releases

    Greg Abate & Phil Woods with the Tim Ray Trio: Kindred Spirits: Live At Chan's (2014 [2016], Whaling City Sound, 2CD): Two alto saxophonists, backed by pianist Ray's trio with John Lockwood (bass) and Mark Walker (drums). Woods, who died at 83 thirteen months after these sets, got his start running errands for Charlie Parker, but the 16-years-younger Abate may be the even more resolute bebopper. B+(**)

    Joey Alexander: My Favorite Things (2014 [2015], Motéma): Pianist, born Josiah Alexander Sila in Bali, Indonesia in 2003, so that makes him like eleven years old when he recorded this debut, starting with 10:15 of "Giant Steps," 8:13 of "Lush Life," and 4:15-6:50 takes of six other standards plus an original named "Ma Blues" ("inspired" by "Moanin'"). He's joined by adults on bass and drums, and a bit of trumpet on one piece. I'm little inclined to credit prodigies, but this is a pretty enjoyable set of mainstream jazz. B+(**)

    Karrin Allyson: Many a New Day: Karrin Allyson Sings Rodgers & Hammerstein (2015, Motéma): Jazz singer from Kansas, has been working the songbook hard since 1992. Blandly sung, backed rather sparely by Kenny Barron on piano and John Patitucci on bass. B

    Livio Almeida: Action and Reaction (2014 [2016], self-released): Tenor saxophonist from Brazil, studied (and presumably lives) in New York, part of Arturo O'Farrill's sextet. This taut, professional postbop was produced by O'Farrill, with sons Adam (trumpet) and Zack (drums), plus Vitor Gonçalves (piano), and Eduardo Belo (bass). B+(*) [cd]

    Atmosphere: Fishing Blues (2016, Rhymesayers Entertainment): Underground rap duo from Minneapolis, nothing fancy in the beats, just enough to move it along; nothing fancy anywhere else either, just slice-of-life shit that may be him or may be some other fictional dude, but one no more exciting than he be. Typical lines: "I'm not perfect but I try"; "I might be unprepared but I still be here." And yeah, a song about fishing. A-

    Audio One: The Midwest School (2014, Audiographic): Another large Ken Vandermark ensemble -- 10 pieces, Chicago locals, sax heavy (Vandermark, Mars Williams, Dave Rempis, Nick Mazzarella), with cornet (Josh Berman), trombone (Jeb Bishop), viola (Jen Paulson), vibes (Jason Adasiewicz), bass (Mick Macri), and drums (Tim Daisy). Pieces by Julius Hemphill, Anthony Braxton, Henry Threadgill, and (best of all) AEC's "Theme De Yoyo." B+(**) [bc]

    Karlis Auzins/Lucas Leidinger/Tomo Jacobson/Thomas Sauerborn: Mount Meander (2015 [2016], Clean Feed): Of course, the group name is Mount Meander -- nothing else on the spine, and the individual names are barely legible on the cover. Respectively: tenor/soprano sax, piano, double bass, drums. Recorded in Denmark. Ambitious compositions, pushing limits, they don't always pay off but produce more than a few fine moments. B+(***) [cd]

    Lucian Ban Elevation: Songs From Afar (2014 [2016], Sunnyside): Pianist from Transylvania (modern day Romania), home of three trad songs here (one "sorrow" and two "wedding"), sung with much drama by Gavril Tarmure. The band members merit their front cover billing: Abraham Burton (tenor sax), John Hébert (bass), and Eric McPherson (drums), with Mat Maneri (viola) added on 5 (of 9) tracks. The 7:02 solo piano piece in the middle is only one of several things that slow this down. B+(*)

    Peter Bernstein: Let Loose (2016, Smoke Sessions): Guitarist, been recording since the early 1990s, his sweet tone and long-lined grooves always a nice touch on other people's albums, but maybe not quite enough to carry his own. With Gerald Clayton on piano, Doug Weiss on bass, and Bill Stewart on drums, a good example of what he's good at. B+(*)

    Jim Black Trio: The Constant (2015 [2016], Intakt): Terrific drummer, has played in numerous important groups -- just to pick a couple, Dave Douglas's Tiny Bell Trio, Ellery Eskelin's Trio, Tim Berne's Bloodcount -- has a dozen or so albums on his own. This is a piano trio, his songs, Elias Stemeseder on piano, Thomas Morgan on bass. Snappy material, especially around the edges. B+(***) [cd]

    Black Top: #Two (2014 [2015], Babel): Avant-jazz duo with Pat Thomas on piano and Orphy Robinson on drums, either likely to switch to a wide range of electronic gadgets. On their first album they were joined by saxophonist Steve Williamson, so here they go with another guest, saxophinst Evan Parker. Recorded live. The electronics are sketchy, but the piano breaks up time in interesting ways, and it doesn't take Parker long to jump ahead of the learing curve. B+(***) [bc]

    Carate Urio Orchestra: Ljubljana (2015 [2016], Clean Feed): Seven-piece group based in Antwerp, Belgium, probably led by Sean Carpio (drums, guitar, voice), with several musicians I've run across before -- Joachim Badenhorst (clarinets, sax), Pascal Niggenkemper (bass), Frantz Loriot (viola). Complex, some voice (which doesn't help), passages that fade into ambience and others that rise up grandly. B+(*) [cd]

    Teri Lyne Carrington: The Mosaic Project: Love and Soul (2015, Concord): Drummer, has a wide range of jazz credits going back to 1984 but she veered into R&B for her 2011 Mosaic Project album, and returned here. Very long credits list, but nearly all of the voices and musicians are female (I see one cut with Billy Dee Williams listed as narrator). The ever-changing guest vocalists give this an air of anonymity. B+(**)

    George Coleman: A Master Speaks (2015 [2016], Smoke Sessions): Tenor saxophonist, still remembered primarily as the guy who preceded Wayne Shorter in the Miles Davis Quintet, but he was a master -- his 1991 album My Horns of Plenty is an all-time favorite -- and at 80, recording his first album since 2002, he still is. Classic sax quartet, with Mike LeDonne pacing him splendidly on piano, Bob Cranshaw on bass, and George Coleman Jr. on drums. A-

    Cortex: Live in New York (2015 [2016], Clean Feed): Norwegian avant-jazz quartet -- Thomas Johansson (trumpet), Kristoffer Alberts (saxophones), Ola Høyer (bass), Gard Nilssen (drums) -- second album on Clean Feed, may have more but share no relationship I can find with the 1975-79 French avant band Cortex. They can really kick up a storm, making this relatively short live album (35:38) pretty huge. A- [cd]

    Larry Coryell: Heavy Feel (2014 [2015], Wide Hive): Guitarist, a fusion pioneer with more than one hundred albums since Chico Hamilton introduced him in 1966. Quartet, produced by Gregory Howe (who has a hand in 4/9 songs), with soprano sax (George Brooks), electric bass (Matt Montgomery -- also credits for 4/9 songs), and drums (Mike Hughes). Fusion, wouldn't call it heavy but not light either. B+(*)

    Stephan Crump: Stephan Crump's Rhombal (2016, Papillon): Bassist, ten or so albums since 1997, I especially like his knack for mixing the bass up so it balances evenly with the other instruments -- harder to do here in a two-horn quartet, but he manages it nonetheless. With Adam O'Farrill (trumpet), Ellery Eskelin (tenor sax), and Tyshawn Sorey (drums). A- [cd]

    Barbara Dane with Tammy Hall: Throw It Away . . . (2016, Dreadnaught Music): Folksinger, born in Detroit in 1927 of parents who migrated north from Arkansas, moved to San Francisco in the 1950s. I've long regarded her 1959 Anthology of American Folk Songs as a classic, and vaguely recall her longstanding political activism -- her recording career petered out in the early 1970s with FTA! Songs of the GI Resistance and I Hate the Capitalist System -- but wasn't aware she wrote songs with Lu Watters, cut albums with Lightnin' Hopkins and the Chambers Brothers, or one called Livin' With the Blues (with Earl Hines, Benny Carter, and Shelly Manne). She's 88 now, thanks Mose Allison's "My Brain" for getting hers back to work, and her voice has aged fine. Hall's piano trio turns her into a jazz singer, guest harmonica and sax flesh out the blues. Starts with Memphis Minnie, then Leonard Cohen, Abbey Lincoln, Paul Simon, then gets more personal, and political, and/or corny. When she sketches out her dream society and asks "What Kind of Country" that would be, "socialism" is so obviously the answer she doesn't need to mention it (or Bernie). A- [cd]

    Kris Davis: Duopoly (2015 [2016], Pyroclastic): Avant-pianist, from Canada, has a dozen or more albums since 2003 establishing herself as a major figure. Duets here with eight partners -- guitarists Bill Frisell and Julian Lage, pianists Craig Taborn and Angelica Sanchez, drummers Billy Drummond and Marcus Gilmore, also Don Byron (clarinet) and Tim Berne (alto sax) -- one tune and one shorter free improv each. All interesting, but Byron and especially Berne are most compelling. Comes with a DVD encrypted so I can't play it on my computer (may be my problem, but not one I feel up to dealing with). B+(***) [cd]

    Whit Dickey/Kirk Knuffke: Fierce Silence (2015 [2016], Clean Feed): Drums and trumpet duo, Dickey mostly associated with Matthew Shipp since the late 1980s. Usual caveats about avant duos apply, but hard to fault the interplay. B+(***) [cd]

    Paquito D'Rivera: Jazz Meets the Classics (2012 [2014], Paquito/Sunnyside): Cuban-born clarinetist, played in the famous group Irakere there but fled in 1981 to US, recording 55+ albums since then. I passed on this one for obvious reasons -- not least the cover image of six guys dressed up like 19th century plantation owners and martinets. Those are presumably the band, with Diego Urcola (trumpet), Alex Brown (piano), electric bass, drums, and percussion (Arturo Stable). The repertoire is mostly Beethoven, Mozart, and Chopin with one piece from Ernesto Lecouna, all served con clavé, which helps. B

    Paquito D'Rivera & Quinteto Cimarron: Aires Tropicales (2012 [2015], Paquito/Sunnyside): Another trawl through classical music Cuban style. The Quinteto Cimarron is a group of Cuban expats based in Spain, a classical string quintet (adds contrabass to the usual two violins, viola, and cello), with only the leader's clarinet to spice things up. Starts with five of D'Rivera's pieces then wanders off through more or less obscure Cuban composers (I assume -- I only see one piece by a member of the Quintet). B-

    Paquito D'Rivera/Armando Manzanero: Paquito & Manzanero (2016, Paquito/Sunnyside): Manzanero is a Mexican pianist and singer, composer of some 400 songs, now 80. These are his songs, played by the clarinetist's sextet, and he adds his fragile but romantic croon to a few. B+(*)

    Paul Dunmall/Matthew Bourne/Steve Davis/Dave Kane: Mandalas in the Sky (2013 [2015], Babel): Avant-sax quartet, with the leader on tenor and flute, plus piano, drums, and bass respectively. Dunmall remains focused throughout, and the stretch where he sits back and lets the piano take over demands our attention too. A- [bc]

    Oran Etkin: What's New? Reimagining Benny Goodman (2015, Motéma): Clarinetist (regular and bass), so of course he's been thinking about Goodman. But he starts with a "Prelude" that doesn't allow any measure of swing, and only sporadically rectifies that -- even his cheery, bouncy "King Porter Stomp" only swings in passing. With Sullivan Fortner (piano), Steve Nelson (vibes), Matt Wilson (drums), and Charenee Wade singing two tunes. B+(***)

    Sullivan Fortner: Aria (2014 [2015], Impulse!): New Orleans pianist, won a prize and jumped straight to the big leagues for his debut -- not that Universal's Verve group (mostly dba Impulse! these days) actually releases enough, in the US anyhow, to still qualify. The operatic title spooked me away, but turns out this is a very solid sax quartet, with Tivon Penticott on tenor (and soprano), Aidan Carroll on bass, and Joe Dyson on drums. B+(***)

    Kenny Garrett: Do Your Dance! (2016, Mack Avenue): Alto saxophonist, one of the major mainstream figures of the 1990s, with Coltrane the obvious influence. Tries for funky here, but no matter how upbeat he keeps it, he can't shake postbop convention, even when he brings in those hippity-hop rappers. B+(*)

    Wycliffe Gordon: Somebody New (2015, Blues Back): Mainstream trombonist, more than two dozen albums since 1996, leads the Lexington, Kentucky-based DiMartino/Osland Big Band here -- founded by Miles Osland (alto sax) and Vince DiMartino (trumpet, but I don't see a credit for him here). The band swings, and Gordon turns out to be a pretty fair singer (e.g., "Basin Street Blues"). B+(**)

    Mark Guiliana Jazz Quartet: Family First (2015, Beat Music Productions): Drummer-led sax quartet, all members fairly well known: Jason Rigby (sax), Shai Maestro (piano), Chris Morrissey (bass). Postbop, fast ones hold up pretty well, slow ones less commanding. B+(**)

    Joel Harrison 5: Spirit House (2013 [2015], Whirlwind): Filed on Napster by "Joel Harrison Octet," but I only count the expected five musicians: Harrison (guitar), Cuong Vu (trumpet), Paul Hanson (bassoon), Kermit Driscoll (bass), and Brian Blade (drums) -- Harrison and Blade also credited for voice, so presumably they're responsible for "Some Thoughts on Kenny Kirkland." MVP is the trumpeter. B+(*)

    Cory Henry: The Revival (2016, Ground Up): Organ player, first album, live, sings a bit and has a drummer backing but that's it. Reminds me how ugly solo organ can be, but every now and then comes up with something to make me forget. B-

    Hieroglyphic Being: The Disco's of Imhotep (2016, Technicolour): Chicago house producer Jamal Ross, has a real flair for beats, strong again here until he fizzles a bit near the short end. Nine tracks, 33:56. B+(***)

    Charlie Hunter: Everybody Has a Plan Until They Get Punched in the Mouth (2016, Ground Up/Decca): Seven-string guitarist, has close to twenty albums since 1995, some with even longer titles, offers a fair approximation of Scofield groove but is more likely to deviate into avant and/or rockish territory. Here he leads a quartet more dominated by horns -- cornet (Kirk Knuffke) and trombone (Curtis Fowlkes) -- with frequent collaborator Bobby Previte on drums. Fave piece is a bit of smeared trombone funk. B+(***)

    Grace Kelly: Trying To Figure It Out (2016, Pazz Productions): Alto saxophonist, born Grace Chung in 1992, I first noticed her as a 15-year-old co-leading a pretty good album with Lee Konitz, and recently in Jon Batiste's Late Show band. This one is all over the map with guests who help and some who don't, but she mostly seems to be aiming for something in Terri Lyne Carrington's Mosaic Project's bailiwick. B+(*)

    Stacey Kent: Tenderly (2015 [2016], OKeh): Singer, originally from New Jersey but based in England, has close to twenty albums since 1997, sings standards here (including one from Brazil), backed primarily by Roberto Menescal's guitar, with Jeremy Brown on bass and husband Jim Tomlinson on flute and tenor sax. Her voice is well suited to this low key approach. B+(***)

    Masabumi Kikuchi: Black Orpheus (2012 [2016], ECM): Japanese pianist, Discogs lists 19 albums since 1970, died in 2015 leaving this solo set as his final testament. B+(*) [dl]

    Kirk Knuffke: Lamplighter (2014 [2015], Fresh Sound New Talent): Cornet player, has been prolific since 2008, including six records on Steeplechase I haven't heard. Avant, but rather thin, sketchy, slippery, with Stomu Takeishi on bass and two percussionists. B+(**)

    Konono No. 1/Batida: Konono No. 1 Meets Batida (2016, Crammed Discs): Batida is Pedro Coquenão, a DJ born in Angola and based in Lisbon, Portugal, with two albums on Soundway (I recommend the eponymous 2012 Batida). He probably adds something here, but the band's home-brewed Congotronics rule. A-

    The Kropotkins: Portents of Love (2015, Mulatta): Named for the Russian anarchist, fourth album since 1996 if we count the eponymous debut, credited at the time to avant-violinist (and sometime banjoist) Dave Soldier. Current lineup includes co-founder Jonathan Kane (snare drum), Lorette Velvette (vocals), Charles Burnham (violin), and Moe Tucker (drums), doing a hillbilly/blues thing several times removed. B+(**)

    Steffen Kuehn: Leap of Faith (2015-16 [2016], Stefrecords): Trumpet player, fourth album, funky little thing although the band, with four horns, guitar/keyboards, extra percussion, and various guest stars (best known Bob Mintzer) is more than ample. B+(*)

    Zach Larmer Elektrik Band: Inner Circle (2016, self-released): Guitarist, based in Miami, first album, electric keyboards and bass leaning toward funk, but his guest spots for horns up his game -- John Daversa on trumpet and EWI, even more so Brian Lynch on trumpet and Aldo Salvent on tenor sax. B+(*) [cd]

    Le Boeuf Brothers + JACK Quartet: Imaginist (2014 [2016], Panoramic/New Focus): The brothers are Pascal (alto sax) and Remy (keyboards), their group including Ben Wendel (tenor sax) and bass and drums. JACK is a string quartet. The first three cuts show some slippery promise, but then comes the long "A Dream" where the strings go classical and Paul Whitworth narrates something about "Josef K." Closes with another extended instrumental set in much the same vein. B- [cd]

    Steve Lehman: Sélébéyone (2016, Pi): Alto saxophonist, Anthony Braxton student, has had a couple records of the year (and not just in my book: Mise en Abime topped the Jazz Critics Poll). Goes for something else here, with HPrizm rapping and Gaston Bandimic singing in Wolof, rhythms borrowed from hip-hop and mbalax then freed up some more by drummer Damion Reid. I really don't know what to make of it, but I do love the shifty in-between music, with Maciek Lasserre's soprano bouncing off the alto, Carlos Homs' keyboards, and Drew Gress holding it all together on bass. A- [cd]

    Leland Sundries: Music for Outcasts (2016, L'Echiquier): Brooklyn band led by singer-songwriter Nick Loss-Eaton -- thought the name sounded familiar but couldn't find any further discography until AMG credited him with publicity on a Bruce Springsteen album, and I found some saved mail from him hawking albums by artists I don't recall at all. First album after a couple EPs, will appeal to Americana fans but strikes me as much bigger and bolder, though I'm not sure that adds up to better. B+(***) [bc]

    Joey Locascio: Meets the Legend (2016, Blujazz): No hype sheet, promo doesn't identify any credits. When I got it, I assumed this must be pianist Joe LoCascio, but I have my doubts now: websites don't indicate any previous records and no one but me seems to have filed this under the pianist. He sings here, and I've seen a picture of him playing guitar. "The Legend" seems to be organ player Joey DeFrancesco. He starts with a parody called "Joey's a Tramp" and rarely strays far from caricature. B+(*) [cd]

    Mack Avenue Superband: Live From the 2015 Detroit Jazz Festival (2015 [2016], Mack Avenue): The Detroit-based jazz label has been showcasing their roster at their hometown festival since 2012. The lineups vary from year to year, this one featuring Freddie Hendrix (trumpet), Tia Fuller (alto/soprano sax), Kirk Whallum (tenor sax), Christian Sands (piano), Christian McBride (bass), Gary Burton (vibes), and Carl Allen (drums). Hotter than average mainstream, main takeaway is to be reminded of how much talent Whallum wastes on his own albums. B

    Christian McBride Trio: Live at the Village Vanguard (2014 [2015], Mack Avenue): Bassist, earned his headline credentials in the hard bop revival of the early 1990s, leads a trio with Christian Sands on piano and Ulysses Owens Jr. on drums. Sands is fast, flashy, boppish -- put his name on this group and he'd be more famous, but if he had to hire another bassist his group wouldn't be as good. B+(**)

    Lori McKenna: The Bird & the Rifle (2016, CN/Thirty Tigers): Singer-songwriter from the country side of Massachusetts, writes good songs and sings them right. Title cut sounds like a case for gun control and an explanation why it isn't happening. A-

    Merzbow/Keiji Haino/Balasz Pandi: An Untroublesome Defencelessness (2016, RareNoise): Electronics, guitar and more electronics, drums, resulting in better than average fusion thrash. B+(**) [cdr]

    Camila Meza: Traces (2016, Sunnyside): Singer and guitarist from Chile, based in New York, band has jazz credentials -- Shai Maestro (piano, keyboards), Matt Penma (bass), Kendrick Scott (drums), Jody Redhage (cello), Bashin Johnson (percussion) -- but the songs, most in Spanish but some in English, don't swing much. B

    Allison Miller's Boom Tic Boom: Otis Was a Polar Bear (2016, Royal Potato Family): Drummer-led sextet, built around the brilliant quartet from her first album -- Myra Melford (piano), Jenny Scheinman (violin), Todd Sickafoose (bass) -- with the addition of two horns: Kirk Knuffke (cornet) and Ben Goldberg (clarinet). Terrific group, with spots of dazzle but also patches that don't. B+(**)

    Modular String Trio: Ants, Bees and Butterflies (2014 [2016], Clean Feed): Sergiy Okhrimchuk (violin), Robert Jedrzejewski (cello), Jacek Mazurkiewicz (contrabass, electronics), but there's also a less obvious, unexplained credit: Lukasz Kacperczyk (modular synth). I'm not all that fond of chamber jazz, for for that matter string ensembles, but these plucky abstractions hold my interest. B+(***) [cd]

    Murray, Allen & Carrington Power Trio: Perfection (2015 [2016], Motéma): That's David Murray (tenor sax, bass clarinet), Geri Allen (piano), and Terri Lyne Carrington (drums) -- "Power Trio" would have been redundant had they just spelled out those names. I missed this, and passed up Murray on my latest ballot because I hadn't heard anything by him since 2013. My bad. A-

    Quinsin Nachoff: Flux (2012 [2016], Mythology): Tenor saxophonist, has a couple albums, this one adds a second sax (David Binney on alto), plus piano (Matt Mitchell) and drums (Kenny Wolleson) but no bass. Jittery postbop, impressive as far as it goes. B+(**) [cd]

    Aaron Neville: Apache (2016, Tell It): Unmistakable voice, a New Orleans legend and then some, still mostly generic songs -- exception is the closer, "Fragile World," which I'm tempted to call cosmic but it's actually so down to earth. B+(**)

    Paal Nilssen-Love Large Unit: Ana (2015 [2016], PNL): Fourteen-piece ensemble, short on horns (two reeds, one trumpet, one trombone, two tubas), long on percussion including Latin and African specialists, electronics, guitar, two basses, no piano. Three longish pieces, many remarkable passages with blaring horns over electronic squiggles and all sorts of complex rhythm. A- [bc]

    Nine Live: Sonus Inenarribilis: Nine Live Plays the Music of John Clark (2016, Mulatta): Clark is a French horn player with a handful of albums from 1980-2003, his side credits including four Gil Evans albums. He wrote the music here, conducted by Thomas Carlo Bo, and is credited with "horn." Group leans toward classical instrumentation, with strings (violin-viola-cello), clarinet, bassoon, keyboards, and 7-string electric bass. B [cd]

    Northern Winds and Voices: Inside/Outside (Sisällä/Ulkona) (2016, Edgetone): Sub: "Finnish music imagines in new ways." The other name on the cover is Heikki Koskinen, who plays piano, flutes, kantele, and electric trumpet ("e-tpt"). Steve Heckman and Rent Romus play various reed instruments, Noah Schenker bass, and Kati Pienimaki Schenker sings (mostly in Finnish). Despite the jazzbos, still pivots on folk/classical foundation, often lovely, sometimes arch. B+(*) [cd]

    Dawn Oberg: Bring (2015, Blossom Theory): Christgau split an EW post between her catalog and rapper DejLoaf's, no doubt relishing the contrast. I gave a respectful nod to her 2012 album Rye but not a second spin, so missed whatever literary quirks sold him on the album. I note here big words and twisty melodies -- Wikipedia lists her genres as "cabaret, jazz" -- but the only songs I get are the one hooked with "suck" and the super-obvious "Republican Jesus" -- sharpest political song I've heard in years. Nine songs, 27:38. B+(***)

    Adam O'Farrill: Stranger Days (2016, Sunnyside): Trumpet player, son of pianist Arturo O'Farrill, grandson of arranger Chico O'Farrill, has a couple albums as The O'Farrill Brothers with brother Zack O'Farrill (drummer here), but this is the first under his own name. Quartet with Chad Lefkowitz-Brown (tenor sax) and Walter Stinson (bass), moving formidably away from the family's Afro-Cuban roots, leaning slightly to the avant side of postbop. B+(**)

    Arturo O'Farrill Sextet: Boss Level (2013 [2016], Zoho): Cuban-American pianist, actually born in 1960 in Mexico in between countries, but grew up in the family trade -- his father was a famed big band arranger -- and has two sonns in his group: Adam on trumpet and Zack on drums. Also Livio Almeida (tenor sax), Travis Reuter (guitar), and Shawn Conley (bass). Seems intent on pushing boundaries here, no matter how often they trip him up. B+(*)

    Nils Økland Band: Kjølvatn (2012 [2016], ECM): Norwegian violinist, also plays viola d'amore and hardanger fiddle, has a dozen or so albums since 1986. Backed by saxophone, harmonium, double bass (Mats Eilertsen), and percussion/vibraphone, none adding more than tinges to the brooding strings. B+(**)

    Francisco Pais Lotus Project: Verde (2016, Product of Imagination): Guitarist from Portugal, has a couple previous albums. This one has Myron Walden (tenor sax), Godwin Louis (alto sax), Julian Shore (piano), Connor Schultz (bass), and Ferenc Nemeth (drums). Mixed bag, including some shifting rhythmic interest but also a couple of rather ordinary Pais vocals. B+(*) [cd]

    Aaron Parks/Thomas Fonnesbaek/Karsten Bagge: Groovements (2014 [2016], Stunt): Pianist from Seattle, was kind of a big deal in 2008 when his debut album, after work with Terrence Blanchard, landed on Blue Note. Picked up this bassist and drummer in Copenhagen, and they fit like a glove. B+(**)

    Sergio Pereira: Swingando (2016, self-released): Brazilian guitarist, based in US after a decade in the Netherlands, sings some, band includes some top names: Helio Alves (piano), Nilson Matta (bass), Duduka de Fonseca (drums). B+(*) [cd]

    Gregory Porter: Take Me to the Alley (2016, Blue Note): Jazz singer, songwriter too I presume, fourth album since 2011, highly regarded if you believe the polls. Has a nice rich baritone and doesn't indulge in the tics and idiosyncrasies that I find so annoying in male singers, yet he always strikes me as an empty shell, puffed up and vacuous. So again and again, just when I think this isn't so bad I notice that it's still pretty dumb. B-

    Herlin Riley: New Direction (2016, Mack Avenue): Drummer from New Orleans, only his third album although he has dozens of side credits since 1985, especially with Ahmad Jamal and Wynton Marsalis. With Bruce Harris (trumpet), Godwin Louis (alto/soprano sax), Emmet Cohen (piano), Mark Whitfield (guitar), Russell Hall (bass), Pedro Martinez (congas). Often flashy, but the thing I most related to was the leader's home town vocal at the end. B+(*)

    Jason Roebke Octet: Cinema Spiral (2014 [2016], NoBusiness): Chicago avant-bassist, has a few albums of his own and more with other Chicago players, many of whom he rounded up for his octet: Josh Berman (trumpet), Jeb Bishop (trombone), Keefe Jackson (tenor/soprano sax, contrabass clarinet), Greg Ward (alto sax), Jason Stein (bass clarinet), Jason Adasiewicz (vibes), Mike Reed (drums). The rhythmic foundation is always shifting, and the horns sway to and fro or just shoot out in odd directions, a universe in perpetual turmoil. B+(***) [cd]

    Roji: The Hundred Headed Woman (2016, Shhpuma/Clean Feed): Basically a duo, with Gonçalo Almeida (bass and loops) and Jörg A. Schneider (drums) laying down an avant-noise foundation, and guests Susana Santos Silva (trumpet) and Colin Webster (baritone sax) joining for three tracks each (out of seven). B+(***) [cd]

    Jim Rotondi: Dark Blue (2015 [2016], Smoke Sessions): Mainstream trumpet player, sixteen albums since 1997, all on labels that specialize in that sort of thing. With Joe Locke (vibes), David Hazeltine (piano), David Wong (bass), and Carl Allen (drums). B+(*)

    Jerome Sabbagh/Simon Jermyn/Allison Miller: Lean (2014 [2016], Music Wizards): Tenor sax trio, Sabbagh also plays soprano, with Jermyn on electric bass and effects, Miller on drums and more effects. Sabbagh, originally from France, has a half-dozen albums, started postbop but never got too comfortable there. B+(**) [cd]

    Walter Salas-Humara: Work: Part One (2015, Sonic Pyramid): Singer-songwriter, has mostly worked in the long-running alt-indie band the Silos, also associated with a band I remember more fondly, the Vulgar Boatmen, but he's kicked out a couple solo albums -- one in 1988, another in 1995, more recently. This seems to be new "acoustic" versions of old 1980s-vintage songs, with Richard Brotherton's guitar/dobro/banjo/mandolin, Mary Rowell's violin/viola, and Amy Allison's "supporting voice." B+(**)

    Walter Salas-Humara: Explodes and Disappears (2016, Sonic Pyramid): New songs, clear and straightforward, easy-going and catchy. B+(***)

    Susana Santos Silva/Lotte Anker/Sten Sandell/Torbjörn Zetterberg/Jon Fält: Life and Other Transient Storms (2015 [2016], Clean Feed): Trumpet player from Portugal, saxophonist from Denmark, piano-bass-drums from somewhere in Scandinavia. Two long pieces, joint improvs at Tampere Jazz Happening in Finland, pretty much an ordinary day in the life of the European jazz avant-garde, including no short amount of complex and exhilarating. B+(***) [cd]

    Ches Smith: The Bell (2015 [2016], ECM): Drummer, with Craig Taborn (piano) and Mat Maneri (viola) also listed on the cover but after the title, hence my parsing. Smith wrote all the pieces. ECM's Manfred Eicher has a knack for making free jazz sound like easy listening: no sharp edges here, the viola sounding typically weepy, but occasional patches sound compelling. B+(*) [dl]

    Luciana Souza: Speaking in Tongues (2015, Sunnyside): Brazilian jazz singer, dozen albums since 1998, this one backed by Lionel Loueke (guitar), Gregoire Maret (harmonica), Massimo Biolcati (bass), and Kendrick Scott (drums), her tongues Portuguese, English, and scat -- I suspect mostly the latter. B

    Bill Stewart: Space Squid (2014 [2016], Pirouet): Drummer, close to a dozen albums since 1995. With Seamus Blake (tenor/soprano sax), Bill Carrothers (piano), Ben Street (bass). Surprisingly soft for Blake, but the piano has some bite. B+(*)

    Stirrup: Cut (2016, Clean Feed): String-driven avant trio: Fred Lonberg-Holm (cello, guitar), Nick Maori (double bass), Charles Rumback (drums). Seems pretty straightforward: propulsive beat, string drone, easier on guitar but the cello has more bite. A- [cd]

    Markus Stockhausen/Florian Weber: Alba (2015 [2016], ECM): Trumpet player, son of famed avant-garde composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, leads with flugelhorn here, in duets with the pianist. Eloquent, serene, very lovely. B+(***) [dl]

    John Stowell/Michael Zilber Quartet: Basement Blues (2012-15 [2016], Origin): Guitar and alto sax (plus some piano), backed by bass (John Shifflett) and drums (Jason Lewis). Pair have had several albums together, and Stowell has a long career in jazz guitar. Flows easy, lyrical and tasteful. B+(**) [cd]

    Marcus Strickland's Twi-Life: Nihil Novi (2016, Blue Note): Saxophonist, initially a tenor who also played a pretty mean soprano but he spreads out here to alto and bass clarinet, and sings some too. His group has spread out too, starting as a power trio and now up to five or six plus guests including singers and narrators and producer (and sometime bassist) Meshel Ndegeocello. Jean Baylor's songs rarely rise above nu soul, the band favoring soft funk, with the saxophone rarely rising above the groove. B-

    Sundae + Mr. Goessl: Makes My Heart Sway (2016, self-released): Goessl is guitarist Jason, who provides minimal but adequate backing for standards singer Kate Voss, who treats songs like "Young at Heart" and "After You've Gone" with respect, as if they're fragile. (Exception: "Pretty Little Thing.") B+(**) [cd]

    Chucho Valdés: Tribute to Irakere (Live in Marciac) (2015, Jazz Village): Phenomenal Cuban pianist, founder in 1973 of the popular group Irakere, which continues to be led by his son, Chuchito, while he's moved on, but here takes a reflective look back. Hard to judge on limited tracks and info, but it's hard to top his piano solos. [NB: based on 3/6 cuts, 23:17/69:38] B+(**)

    Marlene VerPlanck: The Mood I'm In (2015, Audiophile): Standards singer from Newark (née Pampinella, married trombonist Billy VerPlanck for fifty-some years until his death in 2009), has recorded since 1955 with one of her best 2014's I Give Up, I'm in Love. She's past 80 now, though the only indication I hear of that is that she's picking more obscure songs, bringing them vibrantly to life. With Andy Panayi (sax/flute), Mark Nightingale (trombone), John Pearce (piano), Paul Morgan (bass), and Bobby Worth (drums). B+(***)

    Miroslav Vitous: Music of Weather Report (2010-11 [2016], ECM): Czech bassist, a beneficiary of that good old Communist focus on classical music, finagled a scholarship to Berklee in 1966, dropped out and headed for New York where he was toasted as a jazz prodigy, falling in with the crowd that turned into fusion supergroup Weather Report -- a group I must admit I've never developed any real fondness for, but which, given his age, he could easily recall as the high point of his life. He looked back in 2009's Remembering Weather Report, and again here, although he also wants to nudge the music in directions both more avant and classical, in effect to rewrite history in his own image. He doubles up at soprano/tenor sax (Gary Campbell and Roberto Bonisolo) and drums (Gerald Cleaver and Nasheet Waits), and he occasionally sets aside his bass to help Aydin Esen out on keyboards. B+(**) [dl]

    Charenée Wade: Offering: The Music of Gil Scott-Heron and Brian Jackson (2015, Motéma): Jazz vocalist, first album, bites off a group of songs with lyrical, political power and more than a little quirk. Perhaps a bit too respectful, but worth rehearing this way. B+(***)

    Recent Reissues, Compilations, Vault Discoveries

    Joe Castro: Lush Life: A Musical Journey (1954-66 [2015], Sunnyside, 6CD): Bebop pianist (1927-2009), born in Arizona, grew up in Bay Area and worked there and in Hawaii before moving to New York in 1956, recorded three albums there before moving back west. Doesn't seem like an especially significant figure -- my only prior reference to him was Zoot Sims with the Joe Castro Trio Live at the Falcon Lair, recorded in 1956 but released on Pablo much later. Lacking the booklet, I have to wonder why Castro doesn't play on one full disc ("Joe Castro's Friends: The Teddy Wilson Jam Sessions") and 4 (of 12) cuts on another (an previously unreleased album by the Teddy Edwards Tentet). High points include fine small group sessions with Stan Getz, Lucky Thompson, Sims, and/or Edwards. B+(**)

    Don Cherry/John Tchicai/Irène Schweizer/Léon Francioli/Pierre Favre: Musical Monsters (1980 [2016], Intakt): Recorded at Willisau in north-central Switzerland, hence the all-Swiss rhythm section, the headliners playing trumpet and alto sax. Danish-born Tchicai joined the New York avant-garde in the mid-'60s, picking up a pronounced Ayler influence (and shout), while Cherry started out with Ornette Coleman and went global. Impressive piano too, and terrific work from Favre. A- [cd]

    Close to the Noise Floor: Formative UK Electronica 1975-1984 (1975-84 [2016], Cherry Red, 4CD): Mostly obscure -- I recognize maybe 10 names out of 61, and only a couple of those count as famous -- this runs closer to what we used to call new wave, with side glances into industrial and proto-noise, than to what later emerged as electronica, and not just due to minimal danceability. Booklet probably adds some historical value, and this may provide a starting point for exploring various paths. B+(*)

    Mestre Cupijó E Seu Ritmo: Siriá (1973-78 [2014], Analog Africa): Brazilian band led by an alto saxophonist, hails from somewhere in Brazil's Amazonian backwaters (Cametá), far enough from the coastal cities that the music here bears more likeness to Colombian cumbia (or even salsa) than to bossa nova or even forró, and better than average cumbia at that. I don't see where anyone says so, but this looks to have been compiled from four 1973-78 albums, including one called Siriá and another Siriá Siriá. A-

    Joi: Joi Sound System (1999-2007 [2016], RealWorld, 2CD): Originally two British brothers, Farook and Haroon Shamsher (mother from India, father from Bangladesh), mixed strong electronic dance beats with occasional Bengali spices on their 1999 debut album, released the year Haroon died. A second album in 2001 started with field recordings Haroon had made before his death, and a third album appeared in 2007. This compilation is a "best-of," although at this length they couldn't have left much out. A-

    Daunik Lazro/Joëlle Léandre/George Lewis: Enfances 8 Janv. 1984 (1984 [2016], Fou): Alto sax, bass, trombone (and toys), all very rough, with Léandre singing some, if that's what you want to call it -- operatic screech is more like it, but at least it blends into the general chaos rather than towering above it. B+(*) [cd]

    Joe Lovano Quartet: Classic! Live at Newport (2005 [2016], Blue Note): Major tenor saxophonist, the reigning guy in Downbeat's polls, his annual albums have slowed down a bit lately with nothing from the studio since 2012, and now this vault item. With Hank Jones (piano), George Mraz (bass), and Lewis Nash (drums), doing three originals, two songs by the pianist's brother Thad, and one from Oliver Nelson. Solid outing, of course, especially strong finish, and it's nice to hear the late pianist again. B+(***)

    Joe McPhee/Paal Nilssen-Love: Candy (2007-14 [2015], PNL, 7CD): Sax-drum duets, McPhee often switching off to pocket trumpet. The first was previously released in 2008 as Tomorrow Came Today: I gave it an A- at the time, and still find it remarkable, but I don't really have the patience to sort out the rest -- three from Norway 2007-08, two Milwaukee 2012-14, one Chicago 2012, and one Japan 2013. Suffice it to say that the closer you pay attention, the more you'll be dazzled. [Available individually as downloads.] B+(***) [bc]

    Penny Penny: Shaka Bundu (1994 [2013], Awesome Tapes From Africa): First album from the Shangaan star, a Tsonga from northeast South Africa, near the Mozambique border, recorded just after the Apartheid regime fell. Bouncy enough, the chorus packed behind the singer, but not exactly awesome. B+(**) [bc]

    Pylon: Live (1983 [2016], Chunklet): Athens GA band, not as much fun as the B-52s nor as tuneful as R.E.M. but a proximate missing link, issued their best album (Chomp) the same year as this live set. Don't recall it clearly enough to compare, but this strikes me as leaner, common in live recordings of the period. B+(***)

    Senegambia Rebel (2016, Voodoo Rebel): Filed this under African VA compilations, which it is at first glance, but the various artists are mostly European remixers, the African input limited to field samples that are given beats so primitive and so very complex they belong to Africa, and could only really be at home there. A- [dl]

    Sunburst: Ave Africa: The Complete Recordings 1973-1976 (1973-76 [2016], Strut): Tanzanian group, lead singer from Zambia, issued their only LP in 1973 (Ave Africa), collected here with various singles and radio tapes -- there also seems to be a "limited cassette" with early demos. Key instrument is organ, which gives it something of garage rock feel. B+(*)

    Old Music

    The Chambers Brothers: Time Has Come: The Best of the Chamber Brothers (1966-71 [1996], Columbia/Legacy): Soul group, started out in a Baptist choir in Mississippi, relocated to Los Angeles in the 1950s, finally put an album out in 1965 and scored their only top-20 hit in 1968 ("Time Has Come Today"). Nothing essential here: two singles edits of their hit, a better one called "Funky," a 10:25 live "Wade in the Water." More rock than soul, more limited but similar to the Isley Brothers. B+(**)

    Barbara Dane: Trouble in Mind (1957 [2011], Stardust): First album, all blues -- six (of ten) so titled -- backed by San Francisco Dixielanders, with trumpet (Pete Stanton), trombone (Bob Mielke), clarinet (Darnell Howard), piano (Don Ewell), and bass (Pops Foster) but no drums. Seems slightly off, although Maria Muldaur later built a career along these lines -- more jug band, no clarinet, but it's the latter I like best. B+(*)

    Barbara Dane/Earl 'Fatha' Hines and His Orchestra: Livin' With the Blues (1959 [2013], Fresh Sound): Not the famous big band Hines had given up but a septet of all stars (except for the two trombonists): Benny Carter (trumpet), Plas Johnson (tenor sax), Leroy Vinnegar (bass), Shelly Manne (drums). The pianist is hard to mistake, but the band plays tight behind a singer who only adds something beyond a fine voice to the songs -- "Why Don't You Do Right" is the standout. B+(**)

    Barbara Dane: On My Way (1962 [2013, Fresh Sound): The original Capitol cover adds: "soul, shoutin' and the blues . . . the exciting voice of Barbara Dane." Another jazz group, this one led by cornetist Kenny Whitson, with piano, bass, guitar, bass, drums, and congas -- no one I've heard of -- with background vocals by the Andrews Sisters ("of Berkeley"). Kind of splits the difference between the Dixielanders and the All-Stars. Helps that the songs are more varied, although "The Hammer Song" and "Mama Don't Allow No Twistin'" go a bit too far. B+(***)

    Barbara Dane & Lightning Hopkins: Sometimes I Believe She Loves Me (1961-65 [1996], Arhoolie): Five cuts previously released on the back side of a 1966 Hopkins album, fifteen more that had to wait three decades for the CD era. Includes some solo Dane in her folkie mode, but the best cuts are balanced with Hopkins' sly drawl. B+(**)

    Barbara Dane/The Chambers Brothers: Barbara Dane and the Chambers Brothers (1966, Folkways): Soul group, started out in a Baptist church choir in Mississippi before moving to Los Angeles, and would have a minor hit in 1968 and fade by 1972. A church singer herself, she finds common ground in gospels and civil rights anthems. B+(*)

    Barbara Dane: FTA! Songs of the GI Resistance (1970, Paredon): Dane and husband Irwin Silber started their own label in 1970, putting aside all political inhibitions. She recorded this in coffee houses near army bases in Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina, eliciting a fair amount of sing-along, even for the line about "Viva Che Guevara." B+(***)

    Barbara Dane: I Hate the Capitalist System (1973, Paredon): Politically abrasive folk music, singer and guitar, augmented by guests on a few cuts which hardly change the tone. The title song, written by Sara Ogan Gunning, is awkward as you'd expect. Moves on to more conventional folk themes, including two songs with "Massacre" in the title. B+(*)

    Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: Arcanum Moderne (2002 [2003], Hatology): Tenor sax trio, one of several albums they put together from 1996-2009 establishing Eskelin as one of the finest avant saxophonists of the time. Parkins plays accordion as well as piano, and is credited with sampler, many options for filling out the sound. A-

    Don Ewell Quartet: Man Here Plays Fine Piano (1957, Good Time Jazz): A stride pianist, played with many trad jazz bands including a stint with Jack Teagarden from 1956 to 1962. Quartet adds Darnell Howard (clarinet), Pops Foster (bass), and Minor Hall (drums). Songs are good ole good uns, from "Everybody Loves My Baby" to "Keepin' Out of Mischief Now." B+(**)

    Don Ewell: Denver Concert (1966 [2004], Storyville): Singer Barbara Dane featured on the cover, but the original album was built around three medleys with just piano and bass: one each from Jelly Roll Morton, Earl Hines, and Fats Waller. Barbara Dane joins in for songs like "Nobody Knows You When You're Down and Out" and "Wild Women Don't Have the Blues" -- the extra cuts added to the CD all feature her. B+(**)

    Irakere: The Best of Irakere (1978-79 [1994], Columbia/Legacy): Cuban band, a pioneer in Afro-Cuban folkloric/jazz fusion, founded in 1973 by pianist Chucho Valdés, they managed to get two US albums released on Columbia before Paquito D'Rivera and Arturo Sandoval defected. They are combined here, minus one song from Irakere and two songs from 2 -- at least the first one a live concert tape. They showcase a wide range of looks, some quite remarkable. B+(***)

    Peter Kuhn Quartet: The Kill (1981 [1982], Soul Note): Clarinetist (B flat, bass), the last of several albums Kuhn recorded before his long hiatus (ended in 2015), with Wayne Horvitz (piano, synthesizer), William Parker (bass), and Denis Charles (drums). Four pieces, the 22:59 title cut filling the second side, a tour de force. A-

    Leland Sundries: The Foundry EP (2012, L'Echiquier, EP): Six songs, 24:38, lacks the big sound of the new album, but that lets the singer-songwriter come through clearer. B+(**)

    Lori McKenna: Paper Wings and Halo (2000, Orchard): Folkie debut, girl with guitar and fifteen songs, an austere sound that burrows into your brain because her words and voice have a rough-hewn eloquence. B+(**)

    Lori McKenna: The Kitchen Tapes (2001 [2004], Gyrox): Demos recorded in her kitchen on a minidisc recorder with "a cheap little microphone and my notebook, filled with a writing binge." B+(*)

    Lori McKenna: Pieces of Me (2001, Signature Sounds): Second album, bigger label, evidently more budget as I hear some piano, but the key thing is the songwriting, real and vivid. Not sure more listening wouldn't bump this a notch. B+(***) [bc]

    Lori McKenna: Bittertown (2004, Signature Sounds): Seems like a step back to a harsher sound, but maybe that's just playing up the whole bitter thing. B+(**)

    Lori McKenna: Massachusetts (2013, Liz Rose Music): Christgau counts six "fairly astonishing" and six "more country-generic" songs, and offhand I'd say that's about right. B+(***)

    Chucho Valdés: Live at the Village Vanguard (1999 [2000], Blue Note): Quartet, which for the Cuban pianist means you get an extra percussionist, Roberto Vizcaino Guillot, on conga and bata drums, as if the piano wasn't percussion enough. Also credits Marya Caridad Valdés with "vocalization" -- she sings one number, impressively. A- [cd]

    Revised Grades

    Sometimes further listening leads me to change an initial grade, usually either because I move on to a real copy, or because someone else's review or list makes me want to check it again:


    Dawn Oberg: Rye (2012, Blossom Theory): Still cannot credit her singer-songwriter fare as jazz, but the writing is sharp (if bookish), her piano strong, her voice kind of odd, which fans may come to celebrate. [was: B+(*)] B+(***)

    Additional Consumer News:

    Previous grades on artists in the old music section.

    • Barbara Dane: Anthology of American Folk Songs (1959 [2006], Empire Music Group): A-
    • Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: One Great Day . . . (1996 [1997], Hatology): A-
    • Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: Kulak 29 and 30 (1997 [1998], Hatology): B+(***)
    • Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: Five Other Pieces (+2) (1998 [1999], Hatology): B+(***)
    • Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: 12 (+1) Imaginary Views (2001 [2002], Hatology): A-
    • Ellery Eskelin/Andrea Parkins/Jim Black: One Great Night . . . Live (2007 [2009], Hatology): B+(***)
    • Ellery Eskelin: 13 other albums
    • Irakere: La Collección Cubana ([1998], Music Club): B-
    • Lori McKenna: Unglamorous (2007, Warner Brothers): B+(***)
    • Lori McKenna: Lorraine (2011, Signature Sounds): B+(*)
    • Chucho Valdés: Bele Bele En La Habana (1998, Blue Note): B+
    • Chucho Valdés: Briyumba Palo Congo (1998 [1999], Blue Note): A-
    • Chucho Valdés: Chucho's Steps (2009 [2010], Jazz Village): B+(***)
    • Chucho Valdés: Border-Free (2013, Jazz Village): B+(*)

    Notes:

    Notes

    Everything streamed from Napster (ex Rhapsody), except as noted in brackets following the grade:

    • [cd] based on physical cd
    • [cdr] based on an advance or promo cd or cdr
    • [bc] available at bandcamp.com
    • [sc] available at soundcloud.com
    • [os] some other stream source
    • [dl] something I was able to download from the web; may be freely available, may be a bootleg someone made available, or may be a publicist promo

    Ask a question, or send a comment.

    prev -- next