Film Review: The Class

by Eric Green

"In Class" Can be A Teaching Event for U.S. Schools

This French film, "The Class" has been nominated as one of the 5 best Foreign Films for 2009 by the Academy Awards Oscars. There is stiff competition at the Oscars for this category: "Waltz with Bashir," An Israeli anti-war film, and "Baader Minhof Complex" a German film.

This is not your regular predictable high school film. In this film where 15 year old high school students from many backgrounds are followed through one year of school. Its could have been called, "A Year in the Life."

Most of the students are from the area of Paris in which they were born. But, given the migration of peoples' these days, in this class you have students from China, the Caribbean, African—Mali and Morocco.

As the preliminary notices said and confirmed by the credits at the end most of the students played themselves; as well as the teachers.

The film involved filmgoers in the students interrelationships, but also, the relationships between the teachers, not their romantic drama as too many films do, but in their relationships to the students.

The method of deal with disciplining of students should be of interest to any students and administrators in the U.S.

This is the kind of film that could and should be used by teachers in the U.S. with their high school students. It shows that the problems of teenagers, high school student are truly universal. This is a real teaching and learning film.

The film is shot with three high definition video cameras, which brings you closer into the classroom.

Laurent Canet directed the film, which won the Palm d'Or at Cannes.

Francios Begaudeau played Francios the teacher and Franck Keita played Souleymane the student from Mali. These two and all the other students were incredibly realistic in their performances. This also goes for the teacher and administration of the school.

This film is a must.

Theatre Review: August: Osage County

by Eric Green

"Plains Thinking" by Steppenwolf

A perfect combination of probably the best "regional theatre" in the States, the Steppenwolf from Chicago, the writing of Tracy Letts [a member of Steppenwolf], and an outstanding cast directed by Anna D. Shapiro has brought August: Osage County to Broadway in NYC.

Steppenwolf is a great theatre company which specializes in Ensemble presentations; a theatre presentation that is truly satisfying.

Topping the cast as Violet Weston is Estelle Parsons as the matriarch of this improbably family. The term dysfunctional is probably well overused to describe a family that has many challenges to face on a normal day, but when some special happen, like a death in the family, the challenges become Herculean.

The stage set must be cited for comment since Parsons has to climb up and down two sets of stairs for much of the performance. And, the performance is a hefty 3 and one half hours. Ms. Parsons is 81 years old. Her physical prowess is only equaled by her acting strengths.

Another recognizable actor is John Cullum who plays, Beverly, Violet's literary husband. And, Elizabeth Ashley another familiar actor, plays the sister of Violet.

The play takes place outside Tulsa, Oklahoma, in Pauhuska, Oklahoma. As is made clear early on in the play, these are "Plains" people who think "Plains" way of thinking. They are no Midwesterners or borderstate people.

Well as you can imagine Letts rolls out a cast of 13 characters, all of who play major rolls in this engrossing play. The entire play takes place in an old, large country home. I say that because to produce a play of this size is very expensive, something that will be less possible in the near future. Bringing this play to Broadway took a major effort from producers and supports alike.

Letts and Shapiro together give the audience a performance of acting that is never slow, never tedious and never without another family wrinkle that is sure to get your interest.

The 3 and one-hour performance is difficult enough, but on Wednesday and Saturday add a matinee production. These are hard working actors.

Given the economic crisis, tickets for this play and similar plays are much more affordable. So, if you are in NYC or around NYC or are planning a trip to NYC, be sure to see this play. You will not be disappointed.

NATIONALIZE THE BANKS PERMANENTLY?

Thomas Riggins

based on THE WEEK 2-20-09

Geithner’s bank rescue went over like a lead balloon. It was short on specifics and long on generalities and had no new positions to offer. The Week quotes Chicago Investment manager Peter Cook who observed the government said it was “going to do something bold and new, and it [Geithner’s speech] was neither bold nor new.” The Wall Street Journal pointed out the new plan looked like an echo of what Bush and Paulson wanted to do-- buy the toxic assets of the banks.

Why not just nationalize the banks and admit that capitalism can no longer function, if it ever did, for the public good?

Governments around the world will be forced to take socialist measures to get out of this depression-- any other actions will just patch the system up until the next crash.

Robert Kuttner (USA TODAY) says the truth is “Several of America’s biggest banks are insolvent.” How much cash will it take to correct that-- can it be corrected short of nationalization? Geithner’s proposals will only keep them running along while their assets go down the rat hole of bad debts.

What Kuttner suggests, according to The Week is “that ‘It would be far cleaner and more efficient’ for the government to ‘take over the large banks, clean out their balance sheets,’ and then sell them back to the private sector.”

Sell them back? Didn’t the private sector cause this mess in the first place? The whole argument for capitalism is that it is more efficient and runs the economy better than state ownership and socialism can.

But we have never had socialism in an advanced first world industrial state so we don’t know what it can or cannot do. But we have had capitalism and it has produced this current mess-- and we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.

No, I don’t think we should sell the banks back to the same private sector which ruined them in the first place. If it takes the government to keep things going then the government should just keep them permanently.

The banks should be seen as public institutions run by the government to provide loans at reasonable rates and to help people, not as means to generate profits for a few capitalists at the expense of all the rest of us.

Geithner has too many ties to the old moribund Wall Street gangs, he should be replaced by someone who will boldly go where no capitalist has gone before.

MUSIC EDUCATION AND THE SCHOOLS

Thomas Riggins

Two articles in SCIENCE DAILY online, five years apart, [“New Research Provides The First Solid Evidence That The Study of Music Promotes Intellectual Development” April 20, 2004 & “Adolescents Involved With Music Do Better In School” Feb. 11, 2009] should tell all people interested in the education of children what position to take when arguments are made to cut music programs in the school systems.

It is music and art that are often the first cut for budgetary reasons. The excuse is that they are not as fundamental as math and science. These articles show however that music at least is just as basic as it can be because without it many students will not reach their full intellectual potential and will thus do poorly in math, science, English, and other cognitive subjects.

The science is this. In the first study children who took keyboard lessons or singing lessons who were given IQ tests pre and post the lessons (just one year of lessons!) showed a jump in their IQ scores compared to children who did not get the lessons.

The second study showed that children taking music lessons and who were taken to concerts by their parents were positively effected in their reading and math scores. It also showed, and here is where school programs come in, that “socioeconomic status and ethnicity affect music participation.”

The study showed that “certain groups are disadvantaged in access to music education.” Young Hispanic and Black children are “less likely to take music lessons” than are Whites and Asians.” Family income is a factor.

Whites and Asians are more likely to get private music lessons than Hispanics and Blacks due to income disparity. What this means is that when a school distinct cuts its music program it is deliberately deciding to sacrifice the intellectual development of Black and Hispanic poor children and to make them less intellectually competitive with Whites and Asians. Music classes in schools are absolutely essential to bring about racial equally and to further democratic participation in our society.

Parents should be alert to the fact that any attempt to cut music education, or not to provide it in the first place, is a conscious racist attack on Black and Hispanic people not just a simple budget cut.

Notes on the stimulus bill

By Joel Wendland

The Republicans in Congress hated the economic recovery bill from the beginning. I think it reminded them too much of the past eight years and Bush's failure to handle economic matters in any intelligent way. It reminded them of how they toed Bush's economic line without deviation and voted for every single one of his budgets and his $3 trillion war in Iraq blindly. It reminded them of all the reasons they lost power.

This psychological turmoil combined with the humiliation of the loss in November prompted a bad decision-making process on how to handle the new political and economic reality in the country. When Obama and the Democrats introduced the stimulus package, top Republicans said to each other, let's fight the election battle all over again. Let's put our free-market fundamentalist, trickle-down ideology and policies that lost us the election out front – even with John McCain leading the way – and have it out all over again with Barack Obama.

So McCain led the way with an amendment to the stimulus bill that would have cut all the job-creating provisions in favor of hundreds of billions in new tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Needless to say, it flopped.

Other Republicans had other ideas. They have been a little trickier. They wanted to influence the outcome of the bill without having to actually vote for it.

Republican Sens. Tom Coburn, Chuck Grassley, Johnny Isakson, Mel Martinez, and David "DC madame client" Vitter added their own amendments or co-sponsored other amendments that were ultimately adopted to the bill and finally passed.

So much for the argument that the bill lacked bi-partisan input. Ironically, none of these Senators voted for final passage. Each one, instead, claimed the bill lacked bipartisan support and cost too much.

Funny claim, because two of those amendments offered by Republicans with bipartisan support added something like $100 plus billion to the final Senate version of the bill. One of those provisions actually would have provided $30 billion or so for a housing tax credit. They claimed it addressed the country's housing problems. In fact, the bill would have given a $15,000 tax credit to real estate speculators trying to take advantage of falling house prices by buying foreclosed homes on the cheap and flipping them for quick profits, and the government, under the Republican amendment would guarantee them a $15,000 profit for each house -- paid for by taxpayers.

That scheme wouldn't have fixed "the housing problem"; it would have exacerbated it. In fact it would have robbed taxpayers to pay off speculators.

But even with that Republican amendment, those Republicans who insisted it was meant to fix housing failed to vote for final passage of the bill.

(Note: the compromise package hammered out in conference Wednesday evening cut that $30 billion tax credit to $2 billion and reasonably limited it to first-time home buyers and imposed an income cap on who could claim the credit.)

Even more ironically, after the group of five Republicans named here (and probably more I have overlooked) added their amendments and raised the price tag of the total bill by more than 12 percent, most Republicans refused to vote for the bill.

Guess what their argument was. You got it. It cost too much and raised the deficit too much. This only shows a deficit in the Republican thought process. Their tax cut policy and war in Iraq added more than $5 trillion to the national debt after Bush inherited a surplus. Their tax policies delayed economic recovery after the 2001 recession for more than four years. Their economic policies and ideology of free-market fundamentalism handed the big banks the keys to the kingdom. They looked the other way as bankers robbed home buyers and made business decisions that caused the credit meltdown and the current economic collapse.

I don't envy Barack Obama the political and economic difficulties under which he leads this country. But the Republicans have proven, if nothing else, the bankruptcy of their ideas and the hypocrisy of their politics.

BOOK REVIEWS NEEDED

Thomas Riggins

Once again we have more books than reviewers. Anyone who would like to review one of the following books please contact me at pabooks@politicalaffairs.net. Reviews should be 800-1000 words and be sent to me as an email attachment in RTF. If you have a book already that interests you and you would like to review it for us please contact me as well.

1. SOROS: THE WORLD’S MOST INFLUENCIAL INVESTOR by Robert Slater.

2. GETTING A GRIP: CLARITY, CREATIVITY AND COURAGE IN A WORLD GONE MAD, by Frances Moore Lappe.

3. LEFTISM IN INDIA, 1917-1949, by Satyabrata Chowdhuri.

4. TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN UNION: PROSPECTS FOR A DIFFICULT ENCOUNTER edited by E. LaGro and K.E. Jorgensen.

5. RIGHT IS WRONG: HOW THE LUNATIC FRINGE HIJACKED AMERICA by Arianna Huffington.

Wall Street Wants "Socialism for the Rich" from the Obama administration

by Norman Markowitz

Yesterday the new Secretary of the Treasury presented an outline of the Economic Rescue Plan, and presented it in the general context of the Obama's administration's strong criticism of the banks and brokerage houses and their auxiliaries aka finance capital. And the stock market went down sharply. "Wall Street," "the Market," and other inanimate and metaphysical entities, were "disappointed" in the report, "upset" that it wasn't "specific enough," that it has not a "clear" plan.

What is going here? My educated Marxist speculation is that Wall Street wants what it has wanted in one form or another from the federal government through modern history, what one critic called during WWII "socialism for the rich," that is, benefits without responsibilities.

They got that in its fullest sense in the Reagan-Clinton-Bush era, when finance capital and capital generally got "deregulation" and an army of military and other subsidies along with guaranteed "bailouts" from federal agencies when their speculative baubles collapsed. When I outlined the concept of "Socialism for the Rich" in a class I was teaching during the Reagan era and asked students to try to define it in their own words, one student caught the principle brilliantly when she said " do everything for me. Don't do anything to me." That sums it up perfectly, then and now.

There are criticism's that can be made of the Treasury proposals. Although it is really a symbolic issue (albeit an important one) the cap on executive compensation for banks and other firms receiving rescue funds should be much stronger. While it is good that the Obama administration, raised the issue(for the first time since Franklin Roosevelt unsuccessfully proposed a $25,000 salary cap during WWII) the Treasury's retreat on here can be seen as a small setback. More importantly, the Treasury is not advocating the creation of government authorities to supervise finance capital's use of rescue plan money, hoping to use various incentive plans to prevent both capital hoarding and other misappropriations of funds.

But I doubt that those reasons are the causes of finance capital's criticism, reflected in the sell off yesterday by large institutional "investors" or multi-billion dollar funds, those who shape the daily prices of stock and the flow of capital. Nor do I believe that they want an item by item central plan over a definite period of time (something like a a state capitalist version of the old Soviet Five Year Plan, which would really make them accountable). What they want is what they had under Reagan and Bush co-existing with the fiction of regulation.

What upsets them I think is those parts of the Treasury's report that suggest that aid to student loans, cars loans, home loans, might be radically expanded from the 200 billion previously proposed. What finance capital wants is "caps" on spending that benefits workers and consumers, caps to "restrict deficits" while providing capital without strings to banks and other financial institutions. This would permit them to tighten the screws on workers and consumers and also profiteer with greater interest payments (ironically, one should remember those in the U.S. and internationally who are asking for "bailouts" that must increase deficits are largely those who collect the interest on the deficits).

The Obama administration is just beginning and it is beginning in very encouraging ways. But it will, as any Marxist would tell the President, have to develop dialectically through its conflicts and confrontations with the banks and corporations of the system that it is trying to save, just as the New Deal government had to move after its first two years to support far -reaching legislation (social security, unemployment insurance, the Wagner Act, the WPA, the National Youth Administration, minimum wages and the forty hour week) to advance the interests of the working people against the banks and the corporations. We should all remember that the capitalist class in the first years of the New Deal used the National Recovery Administration to set up company unions and price fix in their interests, and Agricultural Adjustment Administration subsidies both legally and illegally to drive tenants and croppers off the land,. T he leading sections of capital saw the new administration as a "temporary" expedient to deal with the depression, an expedient to be gotten rid of once the emergency rescue legislation for capital had stabilized the situation. I am sure that the leading sections of capital today see the Obama administration in a similar light.

Far more direct regulation of capital is in my opinion necessary. A better redistribution of public investment to aid working people is also in my opinion necessary. But my and any non ruling class individual's or group's opinions matter next to nothing without mass organization and consciousness around these issues. Through both its inevitable conflicts with finance capital and the growth of such organization and consciousness, the Obama administration should and hopefully will come to similar conclusions in the months ahead.

Salmonella Capitalism

The free-market fundamentalism that created the conditions of this situation is what Republicans stand and fight for:

Peanut Company Shuts Second Plant
Salmonella Found at Its Texas Facility
By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 11, 2009; Page A02

A second peanut-processing plant owned by the company at the heart of a nationwide outbreak of salmonella-related illness has been shut down after Texas authorities discovered the bacteria in products there.

Late yesterday, Congress issued a subpoena to compel Stewart Parnell, president of Peanut Corporation of America, to appear this morning at a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Parnell, 54, of Lynchburg, Va., has stayed out of public view since investigators first traced the contamination to his family-owned company in early January.

Peanut Corporation owns three peanut-processing plants, in Georgia, Texas and Virginia.

Read the entire article here.

TOXINS FOR TOTS

CHILDREN VERSUS PROFITS?

Thomas Riggins

Need I even pose the question under our economic system? The tainted milk scandal in China answered the question with regard to the “socialist” market economy, as did the peanut butter scandal here in the U.S.A. But these scandals were sub rosa, as it were. Capitalist purists can claim these scandals were the result of greedy people going behind the backs of society to engage in their evil deeds. So here is a better example of how children rate under capitalism. Shamelessly out in public the capitalists openly petition the U.S. Congress to let them poison children with toxic substances in order to make bigger profits.

I am referring to the information in a Wall Street Journal article of 2-10-2009: “Retailers Urge Rollback of Children’s Safety Law.” The law in question limits the amount of phthalates [toxic chemicals] and lead content in children’s toys. Phthalates cause developmental disorders in small children and infants. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act mandates new standards for these substances in children toys-- not only for new toys, but ones still in inventory.

The Retail Industry Leaders Association knows it can’t sell future toys that don’t meet the new standards, but the toxic play things for the kiddies that they already have on hand they want to sell off. Big companies such as Wal-Mart, Costco, Target, Sears, J. C. Penny and Best Buy are all members of the RILA. They must have many bins of toxic toys they want to sell.

With reference to these banned toxins, Stephanie Leste, a vice president at RILA, is quoted as saying, “There’s a lot of it out there; it’s on the store shelves, in the warehouses and distribution centers.”

Well, it's up to Congress to decide. Save big bucks for the retailers [“hundreds of millions of dollars”] and expose millions of the nation's children to lead poisoning and developmental disorders, or leave the retailers stuck with their toxic products. At least this time they asked.

Racist Origins of the Financial Crisis

Political Affairs #92 - Racist Origins of the Financial Crisis

In his recent article for the latest online issue of PoliticalAffairs.net, PA publisher Joe Sims examined one aspect of the financial meltdown that few other commentators have even taken up – its racist origins.

Walking, chewing gum

From Grist.org:

As a new administration took over in Washington in the midst of a massive economic decline, the media kept asking members of the new energy and environment team if the U.S. could "afford" their agenda in light of the economic condition of the nation. (Witness the Washington Post interview with Carol Browner.) The New York Times reported on Jan. 18:

Given a choice between stimulating the economy and protecting the environment, 58 percent of Americans said it was more important to stimulate the economy, compared with 33 percent who chose protecting the environment. In April 2007, 36 percent said it was more important to stimulate the economy, compared with 52 percent who chose the environment.

No doubt the priority given the economy today would be greater, given Friday's numbers on job losses and unemployment.

But it's a silly question and a false, unnecessary choice. It hides the most rational course of action: doing both simultaneously.

Support new Cuba travel bill in Congress

From Latin America Working Group

Big news! We now have legislation in the House of Representatives calling for an end to the travel ban on Cuba for all Americans. "Travel for All" instead of "Travel for None" or even "Travel for Some." Take action now: ask your representative to co-sponsor H.R. 874.

The purpose of H.R. 874 is "To allow travel between the United States and Cuba" - but the most important thing to remember about it is that it will allow travel for all Americans, no exclusions. It was introduced by Representatives Bill Delahunt (D-MA) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ), along with a short list of original co-sponsors. To see this list, click here.


Call your representative today.

Capitol Switchboard number: (202) 224-3121 or find your representative's number

here.

The message: Please co-sponsor H.R. 874, the Delahunt-Flake bill "To allow travel between the United States and Cuba."

This bill introduced by Rep. Delahunt (D-MA) and Rep. Flake (R-AZ) calls for lifting travel restrictions to Cuba for ALL Americans, restoring our right as citizens of the United States to travel freely, and takes a giant step toward restoring our country's reputation in Latin America and the world.

[If they ask . . . ] The original co-sponsors are:

Rep. Delahunt, Bill [MA-10]
Rep. Flake, Jeff [AZ-6]
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 2/4/2009
Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] - 2/4/2009
Rep Emerson, Jo Ann [MO-8] - 2/4/2009
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 2/4/2009
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 2/4/2009
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 2/4/2009
Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] - 2/4/2009

Thank you for your support in ending this inhumane and out-dated travel ban. To co-sponsor H.R. 874 please contact either Cliff Stammerman in Rep. Delahunt's office or Chandler Morse in Rep. Flake's office.

Or, send your representative an e-mail with this same message here.

LINCOLN AND THE DIALECTICS OF EMANCIPATION

Thomas Riggins

I ran across an interesting quote from Frederick Douglass the other day in The Week (2-13-09) regarding Abraham Lincoln. Douglass said. “From a genuine abolition point of view, Mr. Lincoln seemed tardy, cold, dull, and indifferent. But measuring him by the sentiment of his country--- a sentiment he was bound as a statesman to consult--- he was swift, zealous, radical, and determined.”

Here it looks like Lincoln represents a unity of opposites in his own person. Lets place Lincoln in his time. With regard to slavery we can postulate three possible positions. The defense of slavery is one position. The absolute negation of slavery-- “the genuine abolition point of view” is the counter position to the first. And a third position which combines elements of the two previous positions. This third position would incorporate the view that slavery should be gradually eliminated but not abruptly ended all at once and everywhere.

From the point of view of the progressive development of mankind the first position was, in Lincoln’s day, reactionary and untenable. Its historical manifestation was the Confederacy. The “genuine abolition point of view” was the philosophically and morally correct position. Its historical manifestation was the radical abolition movement-- which was a small minority movement relative to the total non slave population in the U.S.

Was the third position represented by the Emancipation Proclamation-- freeing some slaves but not all the slaves? Is this what seemed dull and tardy from the point of view of Absolute Truth (to use an Hegelian expression) but was zealous and radical from the point of view of existing reality?

When Douglass uses the expression “the sentiment of his country” what can he mean except that the consciousness of the American (white) people at the time was thoroughly imbrued with racism. To this consciousness Lincoln’s actions seemed radical and zealous.

This consciousness “was bound” to be consulted. Does this mean it was not possible for Lincoln to have been more “radical” than he in fact was-- i.e., that the Emancipation Proclamation was in fact the Truth of the other two propositions? Was the proclamation the best you could get in the “real world?”

A further question is if the Emancipation Proclamation would have been possible at all without the radical abolition movement? Was the historical role of the “genuine abolition movement” not to actually come to power but to make it possible for the American consciousness to accept the actions of Lincoln?

If that is so, are there any lessons for today about the role of Marxism and its relation to the consciousness of the American people to be learned from Frederick Douglass’s remarks about Abraham Lincoln?

Music Review: 2009 Grammys

by Eric Green

Pete Seeger Wins Grammy "At 89"

In the category of Traditional Folk Music, Pete Seeger who is 89 years old won the Grammy Award for the best album of the year, "At 89". He doesn't seem to stop. From his great performance at the Lincoln Memorial music tribute to Barak Obama where he was his usual show stopper best to this Grammy Award. As you could guess, it was not awarded on the television program announcing the awards.

Other nominees were Peggy Seeger for her album "Bring Me Home;" and the great working class album by Kathy Mattea, "Coal." The Mattea album has been characterized as a "throw back" to past eras of folk music dominance. This album gives us a future to struggle for.

Anyone who is collecting folk albums, and I hope people still go to their favorite store to buy albums, should make these part of their collective.

Plant and Krauss

In an unusual win, the combination of Alison Krauss and Robert Plant's, "Raising Sand" won the Album of the Year. T. Bone Burnett produced the album.

British Rock Group, Cold Play, Top Rock Group

Wildly popular, Chris Martin and his British Rock Group, Cold Play won the top Rock and Roll record for the 2009 Grammy Awards. The Record, "Viva La Vida," lyrics are filled with a few interpretations, but the most obvious is the one found on various websites that commented on the lyrics:

"The lyrics tell the story of George W. Bush trying to rule the World and now he'll go to trial for his crimes. I love this song and it should be SONG OF THE YEAR."

Viva La Vida Lyrics

Cold Play

I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own

I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing
"Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!"

One minute I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
Once you go there was never
Never an honest word
And that was when I ruled the world

It was the wicked and wild wind
Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sound of drums
People couldn't believe what I'd become

Revolutionaries wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh who would ever want to be king?

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter won't call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter won't call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world

Jazz Highlights

Best Jazz Vocal: Cassandra Wilson for "Loverly"
Best Contemporary Jazz Album: Randy Brecker
Best Instrumental Soloist Album: Terrance Blanchard for BeBop
Best Instrumental Album: Check Corea and Gary Burton New Crystal Show

Best Large Jazz Instrumental: Vanguard Jazz Orchestra For New Yorkers this is a special award given the important that the Village Vanguard has played in Music and NY history. The Monday nites with the Vanguard Jazz Orchestra are very special.

Blues

Best Traditional Blues album: BB King, One Kind Favor
Best Contemporary Blues Album: Dr. John & the Lower 9/11 City That Can't Forget

Sweet Caroline

The Grammy's seem to always do something different. This year we had Neil Diamond sing his famous song about Caroline Kennedy, "Sweet Caroline." Wonder if this had anything to do with her effort to become the NY Senator?

Other Awards

For Hip Hop, classical and other music awards, go to the Grammy.com web site.

Film Review: Annual British Film Awards

Review: Films; British Academy of Films Awards 2009

Eric Green

Winslet [the Reader] and Rourke [The Wrestler]
Top British Film Awards; Slum Dog Millionaire, Best Film

The 2009 British Academy of Films and Television Awards awarded their best Actress Award to Kate Winslet for her powerful portrayal of a Nazi guard in the "The Reader"; and, for best Actor to Mickey Rourke for his powerful portrayal of a professional wrestler in the film, "The Wrestler."

Keith Ledger was awarded, posthumously, the best supporting award for the Joker. Penelope Cruz won the best supporting actress award.

Slum Dog Millionaire won many awards, including the top BEST Film of the year, cinematography and adapted screenplay, as well as for Danny Boyle as best director.

Steve McQueen, a Black English director, won the Special Achievement by a British Director for their First Feature Film for his film "Hunger" the last 6 weeks of Irish hunger striker, Bobby Sands.

Man on a Wire won the award for the best British Film for 2009. Director Terri Gilliam won a special BAFA award.

Fortunately, the BAFTRA awards, while being for both film and television, sort of like the Golden Globes, only award the film awards on this evening. Mixing films with television shows is a bad idea. As much as "Hollywood" glitz has harmed filmmaking; in the television world, television is almost hopeless.

Theatre Review: TERRE HAUTE

Theatre Review: Terre Haute

59E59 Theatre
New York City

The Execution of Timothy McVeigh and the Involvement of Gore Vidal

by Eric Green

Timothy McVeigh was executed by the federal government in 2001, at a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, for the bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building in 1995. The cold blooded murder by McVeigh of 168 people and the injuring of another 500, to this day, is an act of terrorism by an ultra right winger that is hardly ever mentioned when terrorism is discussed. Many children died because there was a day care center in the Federal Building for workers in that building.

Thanks to Ohio borne Edmund White this whole episode in US history and in literary life will not be filed away any too soon. And, that is a good thing.

White developed the play at the Sundance Festival in Utah. But, he took it to be first produced in Edinburgh, Scotland and then to London.

Now, it has been produced at the 59E59 venue in New York City.

Real or Not Real?

White's play has the eerie feel of being an actual, documentary encounter between Gore Vidal and Timothy McVeigh. But, in fact, they never actually met, in person. Vidal did correspond with McVeigh before his execution, but unlike the play says, he never met him in person.

So, using a playwright's prerogative, White takes the several articles written by Vidal about McVeigh for The Nation and Vanity Fair magazines and constructs his play. The letters exchanged between the two were never made public.

In the New York Production at the state of art 59e59 theatre, the play ran for just 4 weeks. It received very good reviews, especially from the NY Times. Who knows it might get extended, it certainly deserves it.

The two-character play had Nick Westrate playing Harrison the character of McVeigh; and Peter Eyre playing the character of James Brevoort the character of Vidal. They both did excellent jobs.

The direction by George Perrin kept the pace at a good clip; with the play being 80 minutes without any interruptions. That was a good decision.

This is a play that can easily be produced in regional and local theatres across the country; including campuses of all sizes. And, it should be..

The power of White's depiction of McVeigh and his obsession with right wing/cult events is a theme that would and should resonate well across the country. White's depiction of Vidal's articles and his humanity is very important.

Objectively dealing with ultra right wing elements in our country is very important. By simply demonizing them they become something unreal….and, as we know, all too well, those ultra wingers are anything but unreal. They may be pushed to go under the rocks, but with our country and countries around the world facing unprecedented economic crisis with unprecedented unemployment, the breeding ground for the ultra right is before us.

Thank you Edmund White.

Quick Update on the "Stimulus/Rescue Plan

by Norman Markowitz

Further press reports significantly reduce the amount of cuts from the original house bill to about 40 billion. But the cuts appear to be bad ones, namely cuts in aid to states and localities who are bearing the brunt of the crisis in the public sector and also to President Obama's "middle class" tax cut (which is aimed at working people, not upper income groups). If these reports are true, it shows dramatically the hypocrisy of the Republican Right, the champions of "state" and "local government" who have now used their influence to take tens of billions in aid away from state and local governments and of course the champions of "tax cuts" as a matter of doctrine, who have now undermined tax reductions for lower income groups. Franklin Roosevelt's famous putdown of the conservative coalition during WWII remains true of the congressional Republicans: they are still pursuing a policy of "relief for the greedy, not for the needy" on questions of public spending and taxation.