excited & scared

from David Byrne's Journal:

[excerpt 1]

I started thinking a few days ago about how the digitization and networking of so much of what we hold dear has changed things. I see that in my lifetime I will witness the end of books, or most of them, physical copies of recorded music and probably physical newspapers too. Stuff that’s been around for a thousand years will be gone in my lifetime! Film based photography is pretty much a remnant, an art form, an artisanal craft used by fine artists and high-end fashion photographers. And writing letters to one another? On paper? And dropping them in the mailbox? When was the last time I wrote and mailed a physical letter? All those academic books filled with Auden’s or Jane Austen’s letters — it’s hard to imagine a collection of someone’s text messages, tweets and e-mails. I suspect that television as we know it will be gone soon as well. All right, film and recorded music have only been around a hundred or so years, but books! All of which led me back to wondering — how did this get started?


meanwhile...

Little Red Riding Hood:

Mother said, 'straight ahead,
Not to delay, or be mislead.'
I should have heeded her advice.
But he seemed so nice.

And he showed me things, many beautiful things,
That I hadn't thought to explore.
They were off my path, so I never had dared.
I had been so careful, I never had cared.
And he made me feel excited...
Well, excited and scared.

When he said, 'Come in,' with that sickening grin,
How could I know what was in store?
Once his teeth were bared, though, I really got scared.
Well, excited and scared...

But he drew me close, and he swallowed me down,
Down a dark, slimy path, where lie secrets that I never want to know,
And when everything familiar seemed to disappear forever,

At the end of the path, was Granny once again,
So we wait in the dark, until someone sets us free,
And we're brought into the light,
And we're back at the start...

And I know things now, many valuable things,
That I hadn't known before.
Do not put your faith in a cape and a hood.
They will not protect you the way that they should.
And take extra care with strangers, even flowers have their dangers,
And though scary is exciting,
Nice is different than good.

Now I know, don't be scared. Granny is right, just be prepared.
Isn't it nice to know a lot?

...And a little bit... not.

"I Know Things Now" by Stephen Sondheim
Into the Woods (1986)


back to David Byrne:

[excerpt 2]

The end of privacy in parts of the world is near. It will be traumatic for some, and a comfort for others — for to relinquish one’s privacy is to become a part of the hive and the herd, and there is a certain reassurance there. How our corporate culture and its twin, the government, make use of this process and this massive change in society leads one to imagine something closer to a paranoid Phillip K. Dick scenario than a return to the nurturing tribe (or the Global Village) that it will be for some. I suspect it will be both — liberating and restrictive. Conflicting and opposite tendencies, operating simultaneously.

much, much more:
Internet Antichrist





  • Fast Flip


  • Maggwire


  • new month, new playlist


    Radio DavidByrne

    digby:

    . . . I'm skeptical about the prospects of eliminating the filibuster. But there is one thing that can be done: the Democrats can get over this nostalgia for the good old days when Democrats and Republicans all slept together in one big cozy pile and start acting like a real political party.

    The argument for abolition of the filibuster falls apart when you see that the Dems have the 60 votes— and it doesn't make any difference. And that's because there is always some pampered little prince or princess who thinks he or she should be running everything and they will hold up the process regardless. That 50th Senator for the vote would be as hard to get as the 60th for the filibuster unless the Democratic party starts to require some partisan loyalty.

    In the days when legislation was cobbled together on a bipartisan basis, you didn't want too much discipline or you couldn't get the other side to cross lines when you needed them. But the realignment has solidified the partisan divide on the basis of ideology, philosophy and region. The Republicans have adapted already and understand that their job is to obstruct when in the minority and steam roll when in the majority. The Democrats are still living in the past.

    We are a politically polarized country with very different views of how to govern this country. We have regular elections to determine if people are happy with what the majority party is doing. That system will work just fine if only the politicians will enact their agendas and then let the country ratify it or reject it. I don't see what's so wrong with that. It sounds like representative democracy to me.

    This fetish for bipartisanship seems more and more like a social construct to allow the ruling class to live happily together.

    Californication

    Matt Taibbi:

    . . . when the excesses of business interests and their political proteges in Washington leave the regular guy broke and screwed, the response is always for the lower and middle classes to split down the middle and find reasons to get pissed off not at their greedy bosses but at each other.

    - - - - -

    But actual rich people can’t ever be the target. It’s a classic peasant mentality: going into fits of groveling and bowing whenever the master’s carriage rides by, then fuming against the Turks in Crimea or the Jews in the Pale or whoever after spending fifteen hard hours in the fields. You know you’re a peasant when you worship the very people who are right now, this minute, conning you and taking your shit. Whatever the master does, you’re on board. When you get frisky, he sticks a big cross in the middle of your village, and you spend the rest of your life praying to it with big googly eyes. Or he puts out newspapers full of innuendo about this or that faraway group and you immediately salute and rush off to join the hate squad. A good peasant is loyal, simpleminded, and full of misdirected anger. And that’s what we’ve got now, a lot of misdirected anger searching around for a non-target to mis-punish… can’t be mad at AIG, can’t be mad at Citi or Goldman Sachs. The real villains have to be the anti-AIG protesters! After all, those people earned those bonuses! If ever there was a textbook case of peasant thinking, it’s struggling middle-class Americans burned up in defense of taxpayer-funded bonuses to millionaires. It’s really weird stuff. And bound to get weirder, I imagine, as this crisis gets worse and more complicated.

    The peasant mentality lives on in America