This album from 1978 features the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra playing that most maligned of instruments, the kazoo. The kazoo was invented by an African-American named Alabama Vest in Macon, Georgia sometime in the 19th century and it was first publicized at the Georgia State Fair in 1852. (I got all this information from Wikipedia, so you know it’s true.)
This first song is called “2001 Sprach Kazoostra” and it’s based on…well, you know what it’s based on. You can almost imagine the little Star Children playing this as the monolith approaches Earth.
This next song shows how kazoos can even be used in disco music. Ladies and Gentlemen, I present “Stayin’ Alive.” (Beware of some pretty scary ad-libbing here.)
While this last song is not included on this record, it’s still by them and it really needs to be included. There was an annoying group in the ’80s called Stars on 45 that did medleys of songs to a steady clap track. Here, the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra does its own take on this phenomenon.
BONUS: Here’s a clip of the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra performing live on The Mike Douglas Show!
If you’re also interested in hearing their take on “Miss You” by the Rolling Stones and “Whole Lotta Love” by Led Zeppelin, you can get the whole thing right here!
It’s no secret that tribute albums and charity compilations can be hit-or-miss affairs at best. In the case of the latter, all you can really do is be happy that you’re supporting a good cause, and hope that the music is more hit than miss. Two important charity albums have recently appeared, and when I say important, I don’t just mean for the causes they’re helping, but also for the virtual who’s who of contemporary indie artists that has contributed tracks to them. If you could somehow assemble all of the buzz that these artists have collected, you could light the universe. In other words, to the naked eye, it’s a music blogger’s dream.
The Red Hot Organization has been using pop culture to fight the good fight against AIDS since 1989. They have released 14 albums together with related television shows and media events, and have raised $7 million to date. Their most recent project is called Dark Was the Night (4AD Records). It’s an enormous 30-song effort that has been curated by brothers Aaron and Bryce Dessner of the National. In addition to a track from the National, contributors include Bon Iver, The Decemberists, Arcade Fire, Sufjan Stevens, Grizzly Bear, Andrew Bird, Feist, and a host of others.
Let me say right up front that apparently Bon Iver can do no wrong. From Justin Vernon’s nearly perfect debut album, For Emma, Forever Ago, to his recently released Blood Bank EP, and now, this album’s best track “Brackett, WI,” there have been few, if any, missteps. Vernon is also involved here in an intriguing collaboration with Aaron Dessner called “Big Red Machine.”
Sufjan Stevens’ contribution, “You Are the Blood,” reminds me that it’s been too long since we’ve had new music from him. Antony and Bryce Dessner duet on a beautiful version of the traditional “I Was Young When I Left Home.” Yes, Feist is here, combining with Ben Gibbard of Death Cab For Cutie on “Train Song,” and with Grizzly Bear on “Service Bell.” (more…)
I have a lot of thoughts about the quasi-nationalization of Citigroup, because I am a Citibank shareholder. Some of those shares were acquired in the traditional capitalist manner; my husband placed an order through his online brokerage account. (We thought we were so smart, buying shares at $5 and change!) Some of the Citi exposure came through socialist means: I’m a U.S. citizen, so Timothy Geithner doubled down on my stake.
What happened? Subprime mortgages and global financial collapse aside, Citigroup may have become too big to manage. It is definitely too big for another bank to take over; Chase was willing to take over Washington Mutual accounts, but it could not handle the account volume of Citi, too.
Citibank has long pushed the financial supermarket idea. By offering banking, brokerage, and insurance services under one umbrella, Citi hoped to make it easy for customers to deal with them. It also hoped to squeeze more profits out of each person who walked through the door. But it was always a tough sell. Savvy investors don’t want any one institution to know everything about them; they’d rather play a few different companies off of each other. They’ll shop around for an extra 0.50% on a CD, work with a few brokers to get the best stock ideas, and move their insurance business whenever they find a better premium.
Also, diversifying among several firms reduces the risk of problems – from the Madoff risk at one extreme to the simple headache of limited access when something goes wrong. If you lose one credit card on an overseas trip and need to get home, it’s nice to have another card with a different bank. If a teller is mean to you and you decide to move all of your business in a huff, it’s easier if there isn’t that much to move.
The underlying problem with the financial supermarket is management. How can anyone be on top of everything from how nice and knowledgeable the tellers are to the risk levels of complex derivatives trades? The President of the United States has an easier job, because the president isn’t expected to post a profit. Also, he can print money and drop nuclear bombs to get things done. Vikram Pandit, the CEO of Citigroup, doesn’t have those nifty tools. He couldn’t even split the company up into more manageable pieces, because that would have taken away critical assets needed to prop up the banking business. (more…)
Last week I read an article in the L.A. Times’ business section that detailed how Americans are watching television at an all-time high these days. To quote Alana Semuels’ piece, “The Nielsen Co.’s ‘Three Screen Report’ — referring to televisions, computers and cell phones — for the fourth quarter said the average American now watches more than 151 hours of TV a month. That’s about five hours a day…up 3.6% from the 145 or so hours Americans reportedly watched in the same period last year.”The article also goes on to state the obvious that in these harsh economic times, adults and their families are more likely to stay at home than go out to dinner and to the movies, both expensive endeavors. I mean, when you could easily drop $60 on a family of four at the cineplex vs. watching a movie or program on TV and cooking dinner, which would you choose?This all makes sense, but I think it goes a little deeper than just spending as to why people are watching so much television.
This weekend, as I was preparing to write this week’s article on Lie to Me (Fox’s newest hit) or Ashes to Ashes (the BBC’s spin-off of Life on Mars) I walked through the bedroom and saw my wife watching a repeat of America’s Next Top Model on Oxygen. The expression on her face made me stop. She didn’t seem all that consumed by the show; instead, she seemed dazed, as if escaping for a couple of minutes before having to drive off to the laundromat. It was a hell of a weekend, primarily because we put one of our cats to sleep. It’s not just the cat, though; our lives since last year have been pretty stressful. We have home repairs that have been placed on the back burner (including plumbing work, hence the laundromat), bills piling up, and (obviously) we have our son’s health, which occupies much of our thoughts. When I came upon my wife and saw that expression on her face, I knew it well, because I’ve had it many times myself.
I don’t think it’s just about spending money or about having more options in our television viewing habits that is making so many people watch TV. I believe it’s the chance to escape, even if it’s just an hour a day, from the daily barrage of bad news you see in the newspapers, on the Internet, and yes, on television. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve found myself curled in a ball trying to forget those worries that seem to follow me around nearly all day. At 9:00 PM on a Monday night, when I want to forget, you better believe I’m going to watch something pointless and funny like Two and a Half Men or How I Met Your Mother.And when I want to really get away, what better place to escape to than an island trapped in a time loop, like in Lost?
For my wife, it’s drawing inspiration from the contestants on The Biggest Loser, or the doctors on Deliver Me, that offers her some quality time away from the daily stress. Television has become comfort food for the brain, especially in these trying times. Some television is thick and fills your belly like a good stew, some of it is completely bad for you, but oh it tastes so good going down, and occasionally there is some television that actually nourishes you in your time of need. Until the country comes out of this recession and people find the means and/or the enthusiasm to go to the mall or to the ballpark again, television viewing is going to continue to rise.
“Incongruous” is the only way to describe this night. First of all, UNH is perhaps the whitest venue in the whitest state in the union. Furthermore, the Godfather of Funk shared a bill with…The Samples? A quirky jam band more popular in Colorado than in all of the territory east of the Mississippi? Makes me wonder who was in charge of booking. It was out of place as the Jonas Brothers opening for Ice-T.
A buddy called me up and wanted to take me along to gets us a little funk education. He didn’t know much of George Clinton beyond “Atomic Dog” and the funny hair. En route, his schooling involved mostly learning the chants (”Make my funk the P-Funk, I want my funk uncut/Make my funk the P-Funk, I wants to get funked up”) and yelling them at the top of our lungs in the cah on the way to the cohn-suht.
He later got busted carrying a switchblade into the gig (are you kidding me?) but, since New Hampshire is close to Canada–the land of Rocky & Bullwinkle and the home of the nice–the pleasant security officers checked it at the door and let him have it back on the way out.
The show was worth at least twice the $15 general-admission cover, and that’s counting having to endure the Samples, which to my ears sounded like one long droning synth chord and cute harmonies sustained for oh, about four hours. In reality it was probably just a little shy of a two-hour set, but I’ve endured a lot of jam-band shows and these guys had to have been the worst, ever. Look up “stultifying” in the dictionary, and The Samples picture will be there. This band was such a peculiar opening act for the P-Funk All-Stars–they had no funk whatsoever, unlike the area jammers from the area like Lettuce and Jiggle The Handle, whose grooves could make us shake all the junk in our trunks.
Basically, while there were probably more than a few UNH students who knew what they were doing and some actual adults in the crowd who understood the whole funkifications of George Clinton and his branch of the rock family tree with Bootsy Collins and Bernie Worrell, it felt like this crowd had no idea what was about to transpire when the house lights dimmed and Dr. Funkenstein came out to throw down an absolutely magnificent set. Few of the guys behind Clinton were recognizeable, but according to Wikipedia, Kidd Funkadelic and Billy Bass would have been in the house. Both of them—and Clinton—made the Rock Hall in 1997, for what it’s worth. (more…)
Because I’m geeky that way, I’ve been working through Robert Skidelsky’s biography of John Maynard Keynes. In some circles, Keynes is just as bad as Darwin, a godless heathen taking away the divinely ordained tax cuts on the rich. It probably doesn’t help that he was gay, married to a Russian (a woman, but we all know what Russians symbolize in economics), and a member of the Bloomsbury Group.
Keynes has become shorthand for “spend more than you make in the hopes of improving the economy.” But that’s not what he stood for at all. He made his mark after the first World War with The Economic Consequences of the Peace , a discussion of the problems with the Treaty of Versailles. The treaty required Germany to pay reparations to England, France, and the U.S., and Keynes pointed out that Germany did not have the money, would print money to meet the demand, and would sacrifice its domestic economy and political stability to give money to nations that did not need it. And Keynes was right: the German government spent money it did not have on reparations. It printed money, leading to hyperinflation, and created a climate that allowed a madman to come to power in an attempt to assert Germany superiority over those it was forced to pay.
It’s not that Keynesian theory recommends deficit spending. Instead, it recommends government spending during those times when consumer spending and private-sector investing would not be enough to support economic growth.
The basic equation is C + I + G = GDP, where C is consumer spending, I is business investment, and G is government spending. Added together, they equal gross domestic product. If the government taxes people in order to spend money, it could crowd out consumer spending and business investment. But if consumer spending and business investment are falling, then government spending is the way to force GDP back up.
In other words, there are times when it makes sense for the government to spend money, and times when it does not. Because I don’t see consumers and businesses rushing to pick up the slack right now, it would seem that the responsibility falls to our duly elected and appointed leaders. On the other hand, if consumers and businesses were throwing cash around, it would be all right for the government to cut back. (more…)
The first time I heard A Love Supreme, I was on a train coming back from MacArthur Airport in Islip, Long Island. I was in my senior year of college and had just watched my long-distance boyfriend board a plane back to California.
It had been an interesting and emotional trip, as rushed visits between distant lovers can be. He had told me early on in the relationship that he loved me. It was the first time anyone other than a family member or friend had used that word to describe how they felt about me. It put me in a confusing state of mind. I wanted to tell him that I loved him, too, but regardless of what my emotions were telling me, I felt obligated to understand what, exactly, that word meant. What it meant to him. What it meant to me, in regards to those I felt I had loved in the past, but also in relation to him. I felt like I had to explore what I was acknowledging, what I was committing to, what was expected of me.
After an extended visit from him, I was exhausted. And the fact that the confusing Long Island Rail Road schedule caused him to miss his flight didn’t help. He booked another and I rode out to the airport with him. After we parted ways, I hopped back on a train to campus. I was exhausted and selected the “Jazz” genre on my iPod and drifted off to sleep.
Eventually, I was awakened by a fast and furious stream of notes from a saxophone. It was A Love Supreme. I had never really listened to it, but owned it because of my jazz history class. Music history courses usually came with listening tests, which I was habitually horrible at. I made sure I owned all of the music from the course so I could listen to it on repeat. A Love Supreme was one of the pieces. (more…)
For a few precious years in the late 1980s and early ’90s, the most communal experience on the pop touring circuit was a family affair. Recording artist-producer Don Dixon and his wife, the singer-songwriter Marti Jones, traversed the nation practically nonstop during those years, giving audiences in rock clubs and small theaters an irresistible two-for-one package: great tunes, of course, and the casual banter of two free – and kindred – spirits who were at the peak of their creative powers and clearly having the time of their lives.
This column represents a first for Popdose: our initial opportunity to post an “official bootleg” recording provided to us by the artists themselves. If you’re a loyal Popdose reader or Dixon fan, you hopefully recall the seriesofarticles my colleague Will Harris and I devoted to him last autumn; in the coming weeks you may look forward to a similar series spotlighting Jones and her career. Today, we’re focusing on the unique alchemy Dixon and Jones created onstage, and the small but dedicated following they built during their touring years – a following of which I’m proud to have been a member.
The high church of the Don-and-Marti cult may have been Washington, DC’s old 9:30 Club, where the pair set up shop at least three or four times a year, often for multiple nights. Since the club’s capacity was only about 450, it wasn’t difficult to pick out some familiar faces at every show – the heavy-set guy who came alone, planted himself in the front row (slightly stage right) and sang along to every song; the slightly built, bespectacled guy who was always close (but not too close) to the stage and never looked like he was having too great a time, yet was always back for the next show. There were several couples we could rely on seeing as well, and my (future) wife Gwen and I would secretly (and competitively) keep count of their appearances at the gigs.
“Those shows at the 9:30 Club were definitely special,” Jones told me last week. “We loved those audiences, because they obviously knew our songs and they were so wonderfully warm to us. We felt like we attracted fans who were a lot like us, so a lot of times it seemed like we were in a roomful of friends. There were a number of places like DC and the 9:30 Club during that time – pockets around the country where we got more airplay and could play larger venues, where we could count on folks showing up who were actual fans of our music. But then there were also times like the show I did at a little club in Detroit, where the marquee said ‘Mary Jones.’ I mean, that’s my grandmother.”
The shows themselves were intimate yet rollicking occasions, Dixon and Jones trading the spotlight and sharing silly asides between songs. Jones would poke fun at Dixon and encourage his self-deprecation; she would even playfully mock his songs (a habit displayed to great effect on Dixon’s live Chi-Town Budget Show CD, on which Jones sings his “Heart in a Box” to the tune of John Denver’s “Annie’s Song.”) Dixon, inevitably, would at some point pick up a towel and wrap it around his head, Lawrence of Arabia-style. They seemed willing, even eager, to give their audiences a real sense of themselves and their relationship, and their set lists flowed almost as though they were being conceived on the fly.
Almost. “If that was the sense you got, that’s a great compliment, because those shows were always carefully structured,” Jones says. “We would put a set list together, we’d label it, and we’d keep doing that same set through a particular batch of shows. We’d organize them based on who had a record out at the moment – we would go on ‘Don Dixon’ tours and ‘Marti Jones’ tours, and whichever one of us wasn’t pitching something would get fewer songs. But then, when both of us were between records, we’d do ‘Don and Marti’ shows where we evened things out. Those were always the best shows, as far as I was concerned, because we had the least pressure on us and the most fun.” (more…)
By 1989, Lyle Lovett had already been kicking around for a couple of years. He cut a unique figure from the start, a Texan Eraserhead with a knife-slash mouth, and there was a buzz about his songwriting chops based on tunes like “God Will” and “Pontiac” — perfectly-crafted little gems, both gorgeous and unflinching. But there was, in his earlier records, a sense that Lyle was still a work in progress. His persona shifted variously to the traditionalist and ironist camps. With Lyle Lovett and His Large Band, from its ruthlessly literal title on down, he gets definitive by getting ambiguous. It’s a neat trick.
“Here I Am”(download) stakes out Lovett’s unique territory. A stomping, shouting blues vamp is continually interrupted by a series of surreal, goofy asides. It’s pure vaudeville, of course — extending from a tradition that traces back to “The Arkansas Traveler” and the minstrel show — but rendered with such deadpan earnestness that it creates its own interzone of doubt and indeterminacy: Is he serious? Is he kidding? Maybe both, or neither.
That’s a delicate balancing act. The key is to never let the audience see you wink, and it’s the rare artist who can pull it off consistently. Randy Newman used to own this patch of real estate, back in the 70s — Tom Waits, too; but Newman’s satire has grown blunter with the years, and Waits’s songs have opened up emotionally. David Byrne can still manage it, on occasion, mining the common ground between yearning and absurdity with nerdy intensity.
The last couple weeks have served as a brilliant, if butt-ugly, reminder that governance should be judged not on the back and forth of day-to-day events, but on outcomes. When the history of President Obama’s first month in office is written, it will state that he moved swiftly and boldly (and perhaps “wisely”) to combat a calamitous economic crisis, pushing through stimulus legislation that emerged from Congress in pretty much the form and amount he requested, and in impressively short order. The sturm und drang over line items that came and went, honeymoons that supposedly ended early, and Bipartisanship: Impossible will be rendered mere footnotes to the end result.
That doesn’t mean, however, that the minutiae of this past month should be disregarded completely. Indeed, they offer an assortment of clues to the manner in which Obama’s administration will play out over the long term. As long as he continues to get what he wants, Obama will use both carrots and sticks to engage the Republicans and maintain the bipartisan high ground; the minority party, meanwhile, will likely play nice and talk up what a great guy Obama is, while offering little to no actual support for his agenda.
Note, however, that last phrase: “his agenda.” As I noted, historians will regard this stimulus as distinctly Obama’s package – and once the bill reaches his desk for signature he will take full ownership of it. But since the day after Inauguration, this legislation has hardly felt like it belonged to Obama. He made a big show of acceding to various GOP tax-cut proposals during the weeks before he took the oath, but once in the White House he left the bill almost entirely in Congressional leaders’ hands to shape, reshape and fight over. He seemed determined not to get his own hands dirty, not to demand specific items in specific amounts nor to reject specific Republican proposals out of hand.
He allowed the House to steer the bill too far to the left, then the Senate to over-correct to the right, before yesterday’s frenetic negotiations concluded with Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ben Nelson, Arlen Spector and the Ladies from Maine all smiling. (Here’s another clue to the next two years: As long as those six people are smiling, Obama’s agenda will sail through the legislative branch.) The president’s own arm’s-length embrace of this process wound up costing him only a few billion in education funding here, a few billion in aid to the states there…
…And about 25 percentage points of popular support for the legislation. That’s the extent of the disconnect between Obama’s approval rating and that of the stimulus package itself. Obama’s decision to allow Pelosi and Reid to shape and guide the bill not only made opposition less painful for the Republicans – it cost Obama considerable buy-in from a public that clearly wants him to seize his mandate and succeed with it, but is far less attached to the fortunes of the Democratic Congress. (more…)