I don’t think it’s completely cynical to believe that the Michael Richards incident is a humongously successful media stunt. Yet few pundits seem to be emphasizing this angle, preferring platitude (racism and lynching are wrong) and punny headlines (Kramer vs. Kramer) over analysis. Of course those platitudes all seem like part of the stunt, part of the performance initiated by Richards himself.

The New York Times hints at the performative aspect of the Richards rant and subsequent feeding frenzy in a blog post about Richards’ appearance on Jesse Jackson’s show. The title of that blog post, speaking of punny headlines, is "Keeping Michael Richards’ Career Alive." An obvious reference to Rev. Jackson’s familiar "keep hope alive" refrain. A subtle reference, also, to the ridiculous suggestion that this incident will be the end of Richards’ career. Duh…didn’t his career pretty much end with the closing credits of the Seinfeld finale? And then begin again last week?

Interesting that this dust-up comes on the heels on the success of the film Borat, a film whose brand of guerilla cultural critique relies upon over-the-top racism and anti-semitism. As Dr. B suggests on her blog, Borat’s critique may fly over the heads of white audience members. Describing the young whites in the theater where she saw Borat, Dr. B writes: "The timing of their laughter and their silence indicated that they clearly didn’t get that the joke was on them and their racist ideology." Now, I found Borat to be an often hysterical (and always original) piece of work, but the ethical issue of reproducing and rehearsing racist tropes on such a public stage is–as Dr. B. suggests– a significant concern.

The differences between the Borat film and the Richards incident are numerous, but consider the connections: Both are examples of comedians using a non-fiction genre (Borat as a "documentary" and Richards as a stand-up "routine") to provoke. Both operate in the tradition of Andy Kaufman. Kaufman’s such an icon that I’m sure the comparison will raise some neckhairs. But consider the vitriolic, hateful things that Kaufman said about women and working-class folks during his wrestling "career." There’s a twisted, twisty lineage from Kaufman’s classist (calling working-class southerners "inbred hillbillys") and sexist-misogynist rants to Richards’ racism.

Incidentally, both Kaufman and Richards have now used David Letterman’s show as a (center)stage for blurring the lines between reality and performance. And of course another moment where Richards *seems* to have lost his temper in public was in 1981 on his live sketch comedy show Fridays when the show’s guest host–Andy Kaufman–pretended to forget his lines and prompted an awkward, dead-air moment. Richards, looking out of control on live tv (sound familiar?), stormed onto the set with the cue cards and angrily threw them at Kaufman. Kaufman, in turn, dumped a pitcher of water on Richards and the two began to fight.

I don’t offer these comparisons as an excuse for Richards. Nor am I arguing some kind of intentionality.  I can’t know Richards’s intentions, of course.  Tellingly, though, today’s CNN updates say he’s hired a team of publicists to handle his p.r.  My point is that despite how media savvy we’ve become as a society, we don’t really know how to react to these incidents. Our response leans toward empty platitude–again, the ubiquitous and absurdly obvious suggestion that lynching is wrong. In the meantime, Richards takes his place among the Mel Gibsons of the world, assuming his place in a story of career rennaisance and personal redemption. And, blithely, we watch.

-bdegenaro

Oftentimes, bands like The Hard Lessons that become known for their
high-energy live performances put out lackluster releases that reveal
lots of showmanship but less musical prowess.  Not so The Hard
Lessons.  "Wise Up" boasts tight performances from all three members,
with Ko Ko Louise’s organ sounding especially vivid.  The two ballads,
"It Bleeds" and "Move to California," are highlights, both spinning
heartbreak yarns–stories populated by round, real characters.  The
latter is a great example of The Hard Lessons’ characteristic,
male-female duets, with vocal duties vollying between Ko Ko Louise and
Augie the guitarist.  Well worth a listen, and if you’re in the Detroit
area, check them out at Flint’s Local 432 on May 27 or Ferndale’s Magic
Bag on June 10.

-bdegenaro

This was my
personal context for viewing these two very, very different films and
probably had everything to do with how I responded to them. History
of Violence tells the story of a small-town diner owner who defends his
café from two brutal thugs intent on robbing and brutalizing his
customers. The protagonist, played by Viggo
Mortensen, becomes a local hero and gains attention from the press and
also from shadowy figures who may or may not be from his past. Mortensen offers a disturbing embodiment of how violence changes him—and how violence may or may not have shaped him. His
performance is amazing, moving in and out of his shifting identities:
small-town good guy, justified vigilante, ruthless tough guy. Ashton
Holmes gives an equally multi-faceted turn as the protagonist’s
teen-aged son, bullied at school until his father’s actions inspire him
to fight back. David Cronenberg (Dead Ringers,
Dead Zone, Scanners) directs, so black humor provides something other
than levity or comic relief—the jokes instead offer wry commentary on
American attitudes toward justice, community, and crime.

I’ve written before
about my life-long love affair with horror movies, so I won’t go into
any apologies for dropping two bucks on a piece of pulp like Hostel. Let’s just say the movie takes its aesthetic cues from ultra-violent Asian horror films. Two college kids backpack through Europe, engaging in raucous behavior that goes beyond teen-slasher-film sex and moves headlong into the realm of the exploitative. They end up in Slovakia,
for example, because they hear that many of the men there died in “the
war” (don’t ask—nobody claimed the film was a history lesson) and that
the women are poor. That equoation adds up to "great place to score." Charming guys. The NYTimes review accurately pointed out that, once the carnage begins, it’s hard to feel sorry for these dudes. Anyway,
they end up at a horrific dungeon-of-sorts where rich men from the
western world can pay to commit murder in any way they see fit. Part “Most Dangerous Game,” part Dateline NBC special on atrocities that go on every day in Eastern Europe and southeast Asia. As an Asia-ultraviolent-wannabe, Hostel suffers the limits of its own genre: weak acting and predictable plot trajectory. But,
on another level, the film meditates on what happens when capitalism
comes to town overnight—not to mention what happens when the violent,
the depraved, are given a playground.

Two meditations on violence. One, a great film (the 5 stars refers to History…). One, a poor film (I’d give Hostel two stars). But both in their own way confront the culture in which we find ourselves living.

–bdegenaro

Thematically, "Standing in the Way of Control" tackles familiar riot grrrl themes. At times there’s too much angst, too much bemoaning one’s "outsider" status, but Gossip balances the anger with an eternal optimism. Not only in Ditto’s lyrics, but also in the pervasive rhythms and upbeat tempos. Nine out of ten tracks on the album are uptempo and would fit on a club dj’s playlist. Refreshing, this juxtaposition of critique and revelry. LeTigre, also one of Gossip’s cited influences, come to mind. "Keeping You Alive," the title track, and most especially "Yr Mangled Heart" are standouts. Occasionally the lyrics move too wildly from statements of angst to abstractions of hope, but mostly Ditto gets it just right, with ambiguous and provocative lines like "If everything you do has got a hold on me/Than everything I do has got a hole in it." Recommended.

–bdegenaro

Steven Spielberg’s Munich distinguishes itself as one of the most arresting films of the year. Munich chronicles a series of assasinations (with all of their intrique and all of their blood) of Palestinian terrorists connected to the killing of Israelis at the 1972 Olympics. We glimpse the killings in excruciating detail, but we also glimpse how the assasinations destroy the men rigging the bombs and pulling the triggers. The film is about revenge and the ethics and justifications of taking human life. What I found most remarkable about Munich is the way the film respects and values theme over plot. Viewers remain on the edge of their seats, not merely wondering whether the little girl will perish in the blast, but also wondering the extent to which her death will impact the righteousness of the vengeance-seeking agents. Will they still feel justified? Will I still feel secure in my own moral and political stance regarding the notion of returning violence with more violence?

Eric Bana leads a stellar cast, playing Avner, a former bodyguard to Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and the son of an Israeli hero who is recruited to lead the mission. Avner, a dedicated husband, must leave behind his very pregnant wife and become patriarch–albeit a tentative one–to a family of agents. Bana brings a great deal of gravity to a role that challenges him to display ambivalence, cunning, amorality, pride, patriotism, and finally anguish. Bana surely deserves an Oscar nomination for this performance.

I’m struck by words Golda Meir speaks to Avner while recruiting him for the mission: Now is not the time for peace. Later, peace. When? The historical accuracy of the film will be debated a great deal. Good, we should all check facts, consider conflicting accounts, and learn more about the middle east. But Munich is not a history but rather a morality tale about righteous indignation, retribution, and the ways that nations justify killing. Certainly Spielberg’s film is a meditation on the post-9/11 American mindset, and the action the Israelis take against the Olympic terrorists prompts us to consider our own counter-action against 9/11 terrorists. Look at the film and consider Avner at the film’s end: haunted, hollow, homeless. Then consider our own national righteousness. Where are we headed? At what point are we no longer justified and righteous?

–bdegenaro

So I’m addicted to the tv series Lost and have been since last winter break.
Critics seem to praise the show and explain its commercial success based on two
related factors: 1) the writing, and 2) the characters. I don’t necessarily
disagree, but I wonder why–if the show’s popularity stems from these two
factors–the series traffics in such blatant stereotypes. Aren’t these kind of
broad, stereotypical depictions usually indicative of lazy writing and/or the
substitution of caricatures for real characters?

First and foremost,
Rose. Here is an African-American woman given almost "mammy" like traits:
humble, faithful, maternal, de-sexualized, stripped of dangerous allure, and
physically large. She’s the only non-pregnant female character from season one
not regularly shown on the beach in a bikini. She also removes herself from the
island’s decision-making processes. Instead, she’s depicted in various servile
activities, notably doing laundry.

Second, Sun. An Asian woman with
expertise in alternative medicines.

Third, Sawyer and Kate. Two southern
whites with working-class roots. Oh yeah, they’re also the products of
dysfunctional and/or violent home lives. One (Sawyer) is also a racist, and the
writers of the show allow terms like "redneck" and "hick" to be used as identity
markers for him.

Lastly, the most extreme caricature, the most dangerous
stereotype. Sayeed. Arab man and expert in torture.

Of course, elsewhere
we get traits that are less-than-original. The doctor loves golf. The rock star
has a drug problem. Etc, etc, etc. Are these caricatures deliberate? Many of the
conspiracy theories about the show’s and the island’s secrets involve the notion
that the characters are reckoning with/for past sins. But does that change
things?

Like I said, what interests me about these stereotypes is that
they don’t prevent commercial and critical praise for aspects of the show (the
great writing, the interesting characters) that would seem to be nullified by
the stereotypes themselves.

–bdegenaro

Enter The New Pornographers, a super-group side project featuring
various luminaries of Canadian indie rock, most notably songstress Neko
Case.  The New Pornographers don’t really do anything new
musically.  They take a little 60s power pop (Beach Boys, The
Kinks), toss in a little 70s power pop (Paul McCartney and Wings), and
integrate Case’s brand of alt-country (early Wilco, Ryan Adams) and
21st century indie rock (The Shins, Postal Service).  The result
is a fun, poppy sound that keeps listeners interested, as each song
brings in a different style, a different genre, a different influence.

"Twin Cinema" is the NP’s third record, following last year’s "Electric
Version" (which included a great single that got a bit of airplay: "The
Laws Have Changed").  "Twin Cinema" is full of catchy melodies, a
very good CD for your commute home from work.  Music to unwind
by.  Music to make you tap the steering wheel and forget about the
jerk at the next desk.  The fast songs work best: "Sing Me Spanish
Techno," "The Bleeding Heart Show," and the title track are three
standouts if you’re hoping to download the highlights.  The
ballads, like "The Bones of an Idol," slow down the record’s pace a
bit, but overall you’ll like the upbeat tone.  If you thing the
"O.C." version of indie rock is too sad sack, check out The New
Pornographers.  Right now, amazon.com has the title track–as well
as last year’s "The Laws Have Changed"–available for free download.

–bdegenaro

Synopsis

As the new millenium approaches, cults, sects, and crackpot prophets
flood the worldwide media. But for Michael Arcangelo none of their
catastrophe theories are more frightening
than the Goodknight virus. Michael suspects it is the work of a
mysterious programming genious, who designed it to create a computer
role-playing game so real it can kill. Now Michael and his team of
techno-wizards must descend into a harrowing and convoluted world of
reality and fantasy. But what they discover is even worse than they
could have ever imagined. For the so-called game is already out of
hand, the virus has taken over the internet, harnessing the power of
the millennial frenzy already sweeping the world. And if they don’t
find and defeat the twisted mastermind responsible, humanity will wake
from its worst nightmare to find the end of the world is truly here.

"Wyrm is a hugely enjoyable book. All hackers should have this book; so
should anyone intersted in artificial intelligence, the Internet,
computer viruses, role-playing games, mythology, science fiction, Lewis
Carroll, or Monty Python. Anyone not in this group has my sympathies."

– Charles Sheffield, author of Tommorow and Tommorow

"A plot so wicked and intricate it should be illegal…Very, very cool."

– Sci-Fi Universe

"The real thing, [a] straight-bracing science fiction of ideas…[that]
has the feel and delivers the jolt of a good fantasy quest."

– The Orlando Sentinel

My Review

I read this book a long time ago, but figured I would review for smashy.net.

I’m not exactly what one could classify as a "hacker", but my roots are
in the oldskool scene. I’m what you could call an "enthusiast".
None-the-less, I’ve learned alot from reading this book. That said, you
know the review is coming from someone who may not be part of the
intended target audience. Fabi does an
excellent job of introducing new terms and theories while providing
proof and explainations as to keep the reader informed.

The book starts out rather dry, with very little background on the
books main character — "Michael Arcangelo". The plot unfolds when
M.A. is brought in to rid a virus from a
chess computer, called GoodKnight. With his friend George, one of the
people who coded the AI engine for GoodKnight, M.A. realizes that he’s
not up against a normal virus.

There is a sarcastic tone throughout the book towards Macrobyte, the
dominating company with the best operating system, which turns out has
a worm out of the box when it’s installed on a new system. Mabus-2K
their current OS turns out to have the same virus that GoodKnight has,
M.A. makes the realization after isolating the virii’s self-id code
"666". From here on in, the book begins to rock. M.A. later goes to a
hacker seminar, which the author must have attended because the terms
he uses and the underground things
hackers do at these conventions are described in detail. Like i said,
i’m not a hacker, but reading this book made me want to be one.

It should be noted that this book came out long before real worms were
released and rampaged on the internet, and long before microsoft
operating systems were found to be susceptible to any number of threats
and compromises. In this manner, this book is incredible for it’s
accuracy. A tell tale sign that the author is indeed a geek like us. I
should also note that "hacker" in this context implies anarchistic
genius with computer super powers

M.A.’s arch-rival, a virus-programmer who calls himself Belzebub makes
an appearance here and there beyond this point. Eventually M.A.
accumulates a handful of friends and they discover the the worm/virus
they are up against is some sort of rogue-ai. It can remove anything
harmful to it, while learning from the anti-virus software that M.A.
codes.

I’m not going to go into detail about this, it may ruin it. The
review is hard to write because I dont want to spoil
anything for people who have not read it. Anyway, on the
side, Marlon Oz, a revolutionary AI genius is brought into the picture
by M.A. This is one of the elements that i found most entertaining. Eventually they all group together, the M.A. crew,
Oz and his crew, and even some guys that used to work for the DoD and
take on this worm.

The ending is rewarding and the concept is cool.

Well worth reading by anyone that is remotely interested in hacking/AI/RPG’s, etc.

• Read the first chapter online
• Buy from Amazon.com
• Visit the WYRMPAGE

On a side note, elusion, a member of Smashes ka’tet, ran a BBS
called the Wyrmhole, which was the original reason I even picked this
book up and looked at it in the bookstore. His BBS was cooler than the
book.