Alexander

Andrew Hill has long been my favorite living pianist. His death is a blow to the music, which will be the poorer for his absence...

Really? How much of it have you really listened to lately? And I don't mean on the radio.

i agree. and what about derogatory terms for homosexuals. everyone seems to get a free pass on this one. I have to speak to my students about this ALL THE TIME. Personally, I think that the hateful things people say about gays are more potentially damaging than those about women, blacks, or nearly any other group. Why? Because no 13 year old boy/girl is close to slitting his/her wrists over coming out as black or a woman.

I think intention is the key, however. Was Imus really trying to oppress women and/or African-Americans? Or was he just trying to be funny?

I am almost 100% sure that this particular comment was HEAVILY informed by the Spike Lee film "School Daze." If you recall, the film centers (in a humorous way) on racial tensions at an all black university. Two competing sororities do a song-and-dance number in which the fair-skinned, straight-haired rich girls call their darker rivals "jiggaboos" while the other girls call the light-skinned girls "wannabees" (as in "wannabe white"). Here's the clip. Again (and I am no fan of Imus. I've never once listened to his program), it seems PAINFULLY obvious that Imus was trying to latch on to the hip-factor of black trash-talk. African-American women can call one another "nappy-headed ho's" without meaning it as a real insult (just as I can call my wife a "shiksa" without her getting mad at me). Essentially, I think that Imus was trying to talk like he imagined the players THEMSELVES talk among themselves. It was a huge miscalculation, but I don't think that he should lose his job over it.

This is soooooo stupid. What he said was dumb and insensitive, but come on! This isn't even like Michael Richards saying the "n" word. Imus was just trying to sound hip.

A great writer and a wonderful crank. A friend of mine gave me a copy of "Man Without a Country" for Christmas last year. It's basically a long rant. No one could rant like Vonnegut...

Know how not goodbye depression, but syntax mine very good is.

Haven't heard any Christian Rock that I've enjoyed, but I LOVE Gospel music. If the music is good, I don't care if it praises Jesus, Hitler or my next door neighbor.

I own and enjoy albums by both Jay-Z and Beyonce. I've never been motivated to check out Usher, but that certainly doesn't mean that I never will. I appreciate good Hip Hop and R&B based upon its own merits. I don't LOOK for the same thing in good jazz that I look for in good Hip Hop or Country or Rock. I also disagree that Jay-Z has "no skills." He is an excellent MC. One of the best there is, although I would agree that his subject matter is limited to himself. Sometimes I wish I COULD ignore pop music. But I can't. I'm a part of this world and a fan of the music that is made in it. I honestly can't EVER see myself becoming one of those people who complains about "this music today." The day I decide that I can't get with new music is the day either I die, or music does.

I'm filing this post under "Sentences I Never Ever Thought I Would Read." What can I say. Sometimes I have a hankering for some crap!

BTW, I got "Back to Black" by Amy Winehouse, and I like it a lot. The thing that REALLY impressed me is that several tracks feature members of the Dap-Kings such as Binky Griptite and Neal Sugarman.

That's Earl McGraw, my favorite reoccurring character in the Tarantinoverse, and he was in both flicks. He was Dr. Dakota's estranged father in "Planet Terror" as well as in "Death Proof". Also, the character McGraw calls "Son Number One" in "Death Proof" and "Kill Bill 1 & 2" is played by Michael Parks' son. Don't know if you know but you know now: Earl McGraw was introduced in the opening scenes of the movie "From Dusk Til Dawn". It's the best realization of the character on film. I knew that Parks was in "Planet Terror," but not that he was playing Earl McGraw. I'm ashamed to say that I haven't seen "From Dusk Till Dawn." I'll have to rent it. Personally, my favorite Michael Parks performance is when he played Estaban Vihaio in the second "Kill Bill" film.

Got it, but haven't listened to it yet. I'll let you know when I do! I've listened to this several times now, and can comment on it. First of all, there's the title. It's been the butt of several jokes since the album was released last month. One review I saw here in Albany read, "Already met her. Twice." While I think she could have avoided this by choosing something different, there is some logic to it. One is the fact that she's changed lables. Well, actually what she's changed is her imprint. She used to be signed to S-Curve and is now on Virgin. Both are EMI lables, but from what I've heard it really isn't six of one/half a dozen of the other. When Wilco got booted off of Warner Brothers, they wound up signing with Nonesuch, a Warner Brothers lable. This wasn't some master plan by the folks at Warners, but rather the fact that Nonesuch is something of an independent entity. This may well be the case with S-Curve and Virgin, and if that is indeed the case, then one could argue that Joss views this as a new beginning, hence "Introducing..." The other is the fact that Joss was, apparently, unhappy with the way she was presented on her first two albums. While I loved "The Soul Sessions" and enjoyed "Mind, Body and Soul," Joss was dissatisfied with the "retro-soul" sound of both albums. "Introducing" is supposed to be closer to her personal vision. It's still inspired by classic soul, but with a more contemporary feel. As to the music itself, I like it a lot. I don't think that it's really that different from her first two albums, although it does make use of samples, drum loops and guest rappers (Common and Lauren Hill, both of whom I love). It still has a 70s-soul groove and her voice remains magnificent. Will she be able to maintain this? I don't know, but I do know that she's managed to release three albums without any kind of "sophomore slump," and that is encouraging. If you enjoyed "The Soul Sessions" and "Mind, Body and Soul," then "Introducing" will satisfy. If you didn't care for her debut, then this won't convince you. It's more of the same, but when the same is this good, you don't mind.

"Bright Moments! Bright Moments!!!" Happy Birthday! I'll have to spin some Rahsaan tonight in your honor!

I read the whole paper, cover to cover. Can't help it. I read everything, down to the obits and the classified ads. Do you send letters to the editor commenting on the obits? Only the ones that REALLY suck.

I read the whole paper, cover to cover. Can't help it. I read everything, down to the obits and the classified ads.

Dance on his grave Alexander. You need to understand the depth of my loathing for that strip. I wasn't indifferent to it, as I am to "Hi and Lois," for example. I actively HATED it. When my local paper pulled the brilliant "Pearls Before Swine" in order to introduce a new strip called "Grand Avenue" a few years back, I wrote in and angrily campaigned for the return of "Pearls" (which is wonderfully offensive, the very reason they pulled it) and demanded that "B.C." be yanked in its stead. They did bring back "Pearls," but only dropped "B.C." on Sundays (an irony that I relished). I guess I can understand people who have some sort of nostalgiac fondness for a strip, but I've always thought that "B.C." was a SERIOUS waste of space (other strips I can't stand, but read anyway: "The Wizard of Id," "Grin and Bear It," "The Lockhorns," "Miss Peach," "Momma," "Andy Capp," and "Beetle Bailey" plus any strip that employs golf humor, canned political humor (generic jokes about taxes and/or the incompitence of congress), wife humor, and especially any strip whose original creator has died and is being carried on by assistants or family members). I've also seriously advocated for the retirement of "Peanuts." I loved that strip as much as anybody, but come on. Its hard enough for new cartoonists to compete for space without having to compete with REPRINTS by a dead guy. Let "Peanuts" rest in peace. We have the books and our memories. Oh, yeah. Won't be sorry to see THAT go.

Dance on his grave Alexander. You need to understand the depth of my loathing for that strip. I wasn't indifferent to it, as I am to "Hi and Lois," for example. I actively HATED it. When my local paper pulled the brilliant "Pearls Before Swine" in order to introduce a new strip called "Grand Avenue" a few years back, I wrote in and angrily campaigned for the return of "Pearls" (which is wonderfully offensive, the very reason they pulled it) and demanded that "B.C." be yanked in its stead. They did bring back "Pearls," but only dropped "B.C." on Sundays (an irony that I relished). I guess I can understand people who have some sort of nostalgiac fondness for a strip, but I've always thought that "B.C." was a SERIOUS waste of space (other strips I can't stand, but read anyway: "The Wizard of Id," "Grin and Bear It," "The Lockhorns," "Miss Peach," "Momma," "Andy Capp," and "Beetle Bailey" plus any strip that employs golf humor, canned political humor (generic jokes about taxes and/or the incompitence of congress), wife humor, and especially any strip whose original creator has died and is being carried on by assistants or family members). I've also seriously advocated for the retirement of "Peanuts." I loved that strip as much as anybody, but come on. Its hard enough for new cartoonists to compete for space without having to compete with REPRINTS by a dead guy. Let "Peanuts" rest in peace. We have the books and our memories.

The title track is one of her best songs...

Fake trailers and then the next flick. Plus an ad for the "Acuna Boys Mexican restaurant." (A "Kill Bill" reference. Incidentally, did anybody else notice Michael Parks playing the sheriff from "Kill Bill" in "Death Proof"?)

Sorry to hear that he's dead. Not sorry to hear that there won't be any more "B.C." comics. That comic SUCKED. It was bad enough in its earlier incarnation, but when the serious Christian commentary came in, it became intolerable (of course, I read it every day in order to get pissed off at it). Glad his work made him happy. Glad I won't have to look at it any more.

Simple fact: There's gotta be a reason that some artists become hugely popular, and it can't always be that people are stupid. That may be the case some of the time (Kenny G), but most of the time its not. My observation is that the more popular an artist becomes, the quicker the artist becomes overexposed and the bigger the backlash against that artist. 7/4's opinion of my personal taste in music aside, I believe that the main reason Elton and Rod don't get the props they deserve for their superior early work is simply overexposure. People who grew up the in '70s (like me) have had "Maggie May" and "Your Song" drilled into our heads practically since birth. As Dan noted, these guys were HUGE in the early to mid seventies. They were part of the wallpaper, and quickly dismissed and/or taken for granted. Then the '80s came and both Elton and Rod began to suck royally. This confirmed the poor opinion some people had developed (since anything that appeals to so many people must be bad/stupid). Again, this goes back to my theory of the cultural gag-reflex and the fact that we tend to make knee-jerk decisions based on received information rather than personal experience. I will state that I will listen to nearly ANYTHING in order to form my OWN opinion rather than accepting it on faith that XY and Z music is bad. For many jazz fans, Wynton is anathema. I accepted this as received wisdom for many years. Then I decided to check him out for myself, and found that - while I still despise his rhetoric - I quite enjoy some of his music. Other things of his don't click with me, but the point is that *I* found out for *myself*. I certainly understand how some people (like 7/4) see this as a perverse tendency to embrace anything that is generally despised. But there HAD to be something to it (Wynton, Rod, Elton, Neil Diamond), otherwise people wouldn't have embraced it in the first place. My duty, it seems to me, is to cut through all the cultural bullshit and find that thing that appealed to so many people once upon a time. In Elton/Bernie, I found superb songcraft. In Rod, I found an electrifying stage presence. Doesn't push your buttons? That's fine. People listen to music for different reasons. I listen for pleasure, to be challenged, but most of all for the sense of discovery. I can't stand still. I must move forwards and backwards through the history of recorded music and experience as much as I can. Call it a compulsion. Maybe I'll outgrow it someday.

Um...it's fun? I love thought-provoking cinema as much as the next guy (one of my all time favorite films is "Les Enfants du Paradis" by Marcel Carne), but gory schlock has its place, too! That's why they made drive-n theatres...

No, go see "The Namesake" as well! Why does life have to be "either/or"? Why choose when you can have both?