Sunday, December 23, 2012

Another review of 'Charlie Is My Darling' - Ireland in 1965.

While the television special on the Rolling Stones in Ireland (Belfast and Dublin tour in 1965 – “Charlie Is My Darling”) has appeared a number of times on television lately when I have turned on the set, the footage as edited, produced and presented about the music of these five, very talented people (Mick Jagger, Brian Jones, Charlie Watts, Ron Wood, and Bill Wyman,) who waited significantly behind “The Beatles” to arrive on the music scene in America, shows all the musical and iconic power of the captivating stuff they produced when they were young and playing smaller venues.  These five young people, when they started out were completely healthy, and were very solid people built up to stand the test of time in the tenacious and tough world of what was then the modern media and the world of music; and this in view of a much tougher media climate today.  In the rough world where this musical group was built, the musicians that made up the “Rolling Stones” were unlikely to ever have had problems, past, present and future, and in fact, even those among their detractors would be hard – pressed to propose whenever these people had any trouble whatsoever; people refrain even from wondering about it due to the stature of the group and what they represent as greater personal, even revolutionary, freedoms for their audiences, including the rights of women who apparently swarmed around them at their events and in life as well.  Never a problem, and despite the idea as proposed at the time that the “Stones” had little better possibility given “The Beatles” act than being a broken record in England and Belgium, they excelled in their performances and caught the attention of listeners in America and Europe everywhere, and probably even in places where their music was taboo, like the Far East or South America, etc. 
 
What went into the level of success of “The Rolling Stones” might have to do with the social upheavals and chaos of their early years on, and somehow this rock group’s handling of its issues:  It is possible, if not probable all the main characters in a sketch of this group, especially after the unfortunate passing of Brian Jones as replaced by Ron Wood, understood in depth and were informed of the issues of the day – including even things like abortion and taxes.  Unlike “The Beatles,” the “Stones” probably read the papers and /or listened to events over the radio and watched them on television.  They have had an image as businesslike and responsible radicals if anything, whereas “The Beatles” were always diving into deep water with the latest artistic, societal, social, moral and ethical, and other avant – garde themes, including world popular movements and politics.  “The Beatles” and other musical groups of the day quite often took on large themes and questions beyond the scope of popular music that dulled their lyrics and in the end might have caused their album sales to fall, and the group itself then lost its cohesion, artistically and legally.  On the other hand, there is an invaluable picture of “The Rolling Stones” in the mind of every one of their generation of taking on the challenges of youth along with its strengths and dilemmas, answering to society for the kinds of upsetting new thinking that marks their age, the arrival of show business in every room of one’s house and the related influences of the mass media, publicity, radically changing modern tastes and the finances related to this.   “The Rolling Stones” were perhaps better at the recipes of music in the media cookbook than other groups, especially with the range of themes in their music that could make a deep impression on admirers of folk music, to classical and blues or harder rock lovers whereas “The Beatles,” who were as well very good at music and possibly better on their instruments, maybe just liked the warm – fuzzies in their own act, for example, and pursued that to its end.  The recent “Stones” special in its tone reminds one of some of the older footage of Bob Dylan and his entourage, though where Dylan sang to his audiences, the “Stones” spoke and speak to them, and this perhaps as well has been what is so risky for them and their fans, and what has made the group, again, so entirely successful.  One might also remember the “Stones” were and are an outstanding live act.  With all this going for them, it is still quite difficult to define the band as either part of the entertainment establishment these days, as might have been their goal at one time, or as one group still on a tear for their fans in places.  All in all, seeing this footage about these boys from more years ago than many people would like to count back was a little strange in the presentation of images and recordings – the footage and related pieces played in their 1965 Ireland tour show again the mass upheaval in society and the turning of its elders toward young people who were in their own way still too young to shoulder the responsibilities and worries of the world, especially in Europe (first) and America (second) and the musical pieces in this feature bring that out completely.  It can be difficult to see a feature such as that on their 1965 Ireland tour, and listening to the music, without being really musical must be for some of their fans at least a little haunting and powerfully and humanly reaching to everyone at the same time.  Otherwise, one might mention the guys in this film just looked hazed at the time.  Many of their musical pieces are happy and uplifting, even jazzy nonetheless. 

In Newtown, Connecticut - Not Just Another Crime.

Media Photo
That the U.S. president has himself formally announced within the past few days a demand for the U.S. federal legislature to propose new guidelines for the control on the issue of firearms, specifically small arms and assault weapons, by the middle of January 2013 indicates that the executive branch at least has eyes and ears focused on tragedies such as that at Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and now that of a few days ago at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school.  The attitude (now that this business has to stop) of most federal officials to date about the banning or control of different types of firearms to date has seemed to be one of deferral of any definitive, collective (even familial among the bureaucrats we all know,) or more well – mediated and well – advised rules and guidelines around small arms and their sale and use, probably due to the clash of public influences over gun control dating back many years.  The issue against new and further controls, whatever their overall guidelines and / or provisions might be, must have to do with the ease with which gun rules overall anywhere are circumvented and violated; something that needs to be acknowledged and with the federal community identifying related systemic responsibilities, indeed an impossible task, for the overall lack of efficacy of present gun rules with respect to violent crime.  This is called for even though at this modern time in American history, violent crime is down and / or trending down in many places.    
 
Given the U.S. president’s insistence that gun control laws be revised given this latest violent tragedy, a further difficulty in passing and implementing, even enlisting help in the writing of such laws and their various regulations and guidelines in view of current resolutions are the right of adults in America to bear arms and related freedoms that are among the fundamental principles of our republic, and in the view of many, among the documented principles that have made America a great country.  Certain types of firearms that are sold person – to – person, either across a gun counter or at shows or other markets, and of which there are an overwhelming number of different types, do indeed need to be better controlled as these arms are made for sporting uses, pretty much only, but have proliferated greatly, and are in fact intentionally used in armed and violent crimes.  Examining this in any new set of rules should probably be chapter one in any application of the federal legislature in a law sent for passage and executive approval.  With this in mind, one would do well to contact local Congressional representatives in any area of the country with opinions, stories, missive and the like, as apparently everyone in the federal legislature, Congressmen and Senators alike, will be voting on the new gun control rules after rules are drafted for approval by same.  With well – reasoned legislation in view of the more modern societal imperatives that call for such reform, gruesome, violent, and uncontrolled, horrendous tragedies such as those in Newtown recently will be further avoided, especially considering any provisions in the new law(s) calling for certification of the owners of firearms outside those in public safety, the militia, and other law enforcement and military, that have their own approval methods for those actually physically handling firearms of different kinds. 
 
The victims of violent tragedies, such as those at Sandy Hook elementary school a few days ago, no longer have a voice to express outrage over what happened to them, much less can they pronounce the primal scream that such violence and outrage against them invites while touching upon the horror of the mortal offenses committed on them.  There are many details to continue to examine, including issues like the mental condition and character of the single perpetrator of the school shooting, what drugs he was taking and their related effects and side effects, and the slippery slope that led to his explosively violent and definitive and extremely malevolent act on innocents who were blind to his own, possibly self - loathing and uncontrollably ill – willed actions in their midst.  Any rules that arise as the result of this and similar previous tragedies, and there have been too many, should address not just simply a principled “assault weapons ban,” but proceed further into the culture of the offensive use of firearms, of whatever type, versus those used by responsible adults as a deterrent or for sporting purposes, especially considering the topic of small arms.  Counter to this, again, is the background of sporting and other types of gun enthusiasts who are responsible gun owners and users, and who would possibly be severely impacted by additional controls on their hobbies and pursuits that would technically place them in the same arena legally as those uncontrollably violent, sometimes traumatized, or psychotic or psychopathic perpetrators who have grossly abused their rights to use a firearm, and through wrongful and lethal use of a gun, deliberately (and the language is non – technical here) destroyed the rights and lives of others in the process.  Any future gun rules given the tragedies of which we are now anew and well aware need to reach down to the individual user, any culture or sub – culture in the world of firearms, and to American society as a whole as far as the systemic legal awareness of this issue and any relatted public awareness is concerned. 
 
For excellent commentary / editorial, see also:  CNN “Situation Room” – December 22, 2012; Wolf Blitzer’s Blog.
 
 

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Presently, Any Way They Can.

A curse.
Media Photo
Effects of Extreme Right in Germany.




The recent story of Beate Zschäpe that has been brought to light in Germany highlights the additional modern problems and difficulties affecting ordinary and everyday citizens there. There is a an attitude pervasive among extreme right - wing activists and their associates in FRG at this point that calls for anti - foreign politics and administration and a message of preserving what the rightists there see as the national heritage or national trust. Much has been made of this in the national political debate there and media discussions as well, enough to invite the ban of the major extreme right - wing party, the NPD.
The origin of the case of Ms. Zschäpe and her cohorts has been traced to a part of the country with a particularly dark past given what happened there during WWII against the Allies. Anti - foreign and other extreme - right feelings are still harboured in places in Germany, but this is even more true in larger areas in the former East Germany. This presents a problem of public safety and other difficulties for authorities to deal with serious and capital crimes as discussed in this current case, and in some cases as here, the perpetrators did not appear to have sympathies among the police, though the police were at a loss to deal with the actual criminal elements they found and then therefore to try constructively to investigate and then to make arrests.

The reasons for the neo - nazi surge and resurgence in places like the former East Germany has to do with the legacy of the past, probably going back a hundred years, where the promise of a 'radiant future' enticed the populace of the area first into the political persuasions of one group, then another, then with the oppression of the former soviet regime followed by the economic depression there associated with the collapse of the soviets and the arrival of free - enterprise and more permissions and freedoms concerning political ideas. In many cases, the German authorities during the 1980's forward had methods to deal with the threat of the extreme right and its violent and criminal elements, and only occasionally at the time did anyone outside isolated observances of instances of neo - nazi events or crimes know there was cause for concern about such matters. The issue of the doings of Ms. Zschäpe and her associates has called for a re - evaluation of the local authorities there and their effectiveness in dealing with the conspiratorial and collusive, and violent crimes of such persons. See below for German press coverage links.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-chief-prosecutors-talks-to-spiegel-about-impending-nsu-trial-a-868133.html


http://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2012-04/nsu-zschaepe


http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005199


http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005224