Songs of the Day: Velvet Underground - "Jesus", Wax Poetic - "Tell Me" (feat. Norah Jones), Arild Andersen Trio - "Cinderella Song".

So much flying around the synapses at the moment. I'll have to fire off a few quickies to try and catch them.

Sampling, fair use, and artists' rights. I've been thinking about these topics a bit lately, after reading an article in the last issue of Wax Poetics and downloading the Grey Album put together by DJ Dangermouse. It seems to be a pitched battle between the 'anything goes' fair-use advocates (more info) and rights owners, mostly corporate. On one side you have those who essentially see creative content as part of a vast, connected palette to be used by anyone who chooses. The assembled sounds of thousands of albums over the decades, all raw material for ongoing creativity and experimentation. The other extreme allows no use of a creative work without explicit consent and legal clearance.

What's the answer here? I haven't fully sorted that out for myself. I can understand the motives of both sides but ultimately feel that the truth is somewhere in the middle. So long as artists and those who own the copyrights are properly compensated for use of their work, I don't see much harm in the fair-use doctrine. But as an artist myself, I instinctively support the right of an artist to ultimately control their work. One may not have to get permission to sample, but if the source artist specifically doesn't want their work used in a certain way, their wishes should be respected. Those in favor of extending the concept of compulsory licensing beyond such areas as simple broadcasting and into the unrestricted manipulation of artistic works run the risk of destroying the artist's ownership over their own work. It's true that the current situation is largely a mess, with massive corporate entities dominating the copyright & publishing-rights arena--but I can't help but be nervous about the activists who are trying to dismantle the current music-business model. What makes me nervous is that while they're correctly pointing out the unfair nature of the system--artists give up a lot and get very little in return--they're taking it upon themselves to undermine a system that in fact really does sustain the lives and careers of many musicians. In both the issues of use and distribution, it may be the artists themselves who end up caught in the middle and left in the dust. This is far from resolved.

Ralph Nader. I've been trying to decide what I really think about this guy. On one level, you have to inherently admire someone who so doggedly marches into battle as he does. But overall I find myself sad and disappointed with him. His supporters readily attack people who express those kinds of sentiments, taking a philosophical high ground and condemning those who would sacrifice their ideals to support one of the major political parties. But the truth is that by continuing to mess with presidential politics, Nader himself is undermining and putting at great risk the ideals he's fought for his whole life. He seems obsessed with the notion that two-party politics is the greatest evil facing our world today. He may be right; I don't think he is. One has only to look at how his long-championed causes have suffered under the withering abuse of the Bush administration these last few years to see that he's on a fool's errand.

Since he cannot possibly hope to win the presidency, I choose to believe that he's misguided, and not the only other logical conclusion--that he is intentionally playing spoiler to help show just how bad things will get under the current system. Furthermore, by again coming out of nowhere (what's he been doing these last few years, anyway?) in an attempt to hit some kind of grand slam, he's undermining the very spirit of his personal philosophy--that power should ultimately reside in and come from the people. How so? By ignoring the grass roots. By avoiding the Green Party, he's shown that he didn't believe in them from the start, and as an independent, he's building no kind of practical grass-roots movement. The Ralph Nader we all thought we knew before 2000 would instead be working tirelessly to develop organization and focus at the local level--building a movement from the bottom up that derives its power from shared local energy, not an iconic run for the highest office. His foolish run tricks progressives into hanging their hopes on one man, a cult of personality, rather than making the changes in their own communities that will have meaningful, lasting change. For all of that, Nader has betrayed his ideals, and he's lost my respect. The saddest part is that I agree with him on most all of his issues--but I can't in good conscience support his run. I'm an independent and progressive, but it's Kerry all the way for me. The goodness in this country is being driven out by Bush and it must stop. But, in the interest of democracy, please learn more and decide for yourself.

Sometimes, the internet makes things too easy. Tonight I saw the video that's been in the headlines today--the beheading of that poor American worker in Iraq. I wasn't looking for it--I accidentally stumbled across a link in a discussion forum of an altogether unrelated site, and, doubting its veracity, followed it. And it was the real thing. I'll spare the gentle reader any discussion of it, but its impact on me was unexpected. I didn't realize until it was too late that I had just given away a part of my innocence that I can't get back. I wish I hadn't seen it.

But that's a lousy note to end a day's post on. So instead I'll end on a happy thought. I had lunch yesterday with someone unique in the world, who never fails to give me hope in the goodness and beauty in life. Someone whose mere presence reminds me both of my weaknesses and failures, and of my potential for redemption and transcendence. I'm not worthy but I'm grateful to her.

Labels: Music, Politics