We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

50 Years without worry

If it got under J. Edgar Hoover’s skin it’s no wonder I loved it when I was a kid.

Happy 50th Alfred!

Art and the libertarian

Brian has commented on a left/right difference in art punditry. I differ with what he said only because I’m uncertain it matches what he does and why he does it. His High Arts (and low!) commentary has been been a breath of fresh air.

Artists, artist wannabees and art students like to write about art because that is what they do. It’s their passion. What they think about when life isn’t messily intruding on those More Important Things.

A few years ago a large part of my writing would have been in the music biz vein. I was playing as near to professionally as I could afford to. At the moment I’m spending all my time with technology and still trying – badly I might add – to make a living. At times I wonder if tech should be the hobby… but then I talk to a friend whose record label is failing and whose tour gigs are falling off and I realize it doesn’t work well either way.

Although I write a lot on technology and policy, catch me at the bar while a Rock gig is on (well, during the break when you can talk anyway – I always stand near the speakers) and I’ll talk your ear off about “the biz”. I drive my business partner up the pub wall at times. I point out the features of the electronic kit the lead guitarist is using, what keyboards they have, the qualities of various amps and speakers and of course the pros and cons of why CF Martin makes the best acoustic guitar, whether a Strat or an SG is a better electric and for what, direct feed versus amp miking etc. etc…

I would posit libertarians are more like the Left when it comes to the arts. It’s the socially liberal side of the equation which we don’t share with the Right. Some who once thought they were Conservative may disagree. I ask them: “Why do you think you were politically homeless before you found us?” It’s because you weren’t Left and you didn’t fit on the Right. The vice-versa thing heppened to me on the Left.

Libertarians are neither Right nor Left: go find a Nolan chart. We’re, well… sort of, you know… UP1. We’re the new kid on the ideological block and most of the writers in our corner have been philosophers, policy wonks and political pundits.

Samizdata is out to change all that. Libertarians have a life style as open as the philosophy itself. We’re here to show that.

1 = Extra credit for those who recognize my literary misreference.

Art to the left – art to the right

The buzz started by the Two Blowhards about whether righties like art or not, etc., rumbles on most entertainingly. I particularly liked this posting. Here’s a few more pennies-worth from me.

If you are a lefty, you believe in actively shaping the details of the big wide world out there. You and your friends are going to plan it, shape it, sculpt it, collectively and democratically if you are being nice about it. Therefore your opinions about everything, including art, are a public issue. If you prefer abstract impressionism to neo-realism, then you have a positive duty to say so, because when you have finally become the Benevolent Despot of Everything of Behalf of Everyone, your opinion is going to make a big difference to all those favoured or thwarted artists and art fans out there. Ditto your opinions about history, geography, biology, nuclear physics, literary criticism, sport, car design or car abolition, Linux-v-Windows-v-Mac, gay marriage, tupperware, who should or should not get the Nobel Peace Prize and who should or should not be allowed to enter the Eurovision Song Contest. And when you finally realise that you aren’t going to be the Benevolent Despot of Everything on Behalf of Everyone, there remains the matter of badgering the person who is into giving political support to the art you approve of, and to everything else that you approve of, and dissing everything you want dissed. There are no boundaries to politics. Everything is political. Even the personal – in fact especially the personal, because that makes this quintessentially leftist point so strongly – is political.

And then there’s the right, by which I mean me. Actually I don’t care for the word “right” to describe my noble and infinitely nuanced self, for all the usual libertarian reasons. Legalise drugs, hurrah for the international free migration of labour, blah blah blah. But the word refuses to detach itself from me. So yes, the Other Position I contrast with leftism is my own. → Continue reading: Art to the left – art to the right

Madonna: too scary to be a star

Alice Bachini is now taking terrorism seriously. (The blogspotting link refuses to work. Scroll to Monday Oct 22: “Taking Terrorism Seriously”, if you aren’t already there.) So I will now pick up the torch of triviality (importance of) and ask: Madonna, crap actress or what? I’m going to argue for the or what position. At some length, I’m afraid, but what the hell? It’s been a rather slow Samizdata day so far.

BBC 1 showed a Madonna movie last Sunday evening. My Radio Times makes no mention of it, but does mention the movie Black Sunday, which they didn’t show. This is the one where Bruce Dern hijacks the Goodyear Blimp in order to zap a Superbowl crowd with knitting needles, and presumably they cancelled it so as not to give those Arab terrorists any clever ideas, or maybe because, what with the bad guys in this movie actually being Arab terrorists, they didn’t want to show a work of fiction that had now become insufficiently fictional. It’s odd that, isn’t it? – although I’m not disagreeing. Odd also that I settle down to blog about triviality (importance of) and profundity has immediately barged its way back in. That’s terrorism for you.

Anyway, Madonna. The movie BBC1 did show was Body of Evidence. The plot concerns a woman who picks on rich old guys with heart conditions and then shags them (very kinkily and dominatingly) to death, after first ensuring that the will gets changed in her favour. → Continue reading: Madonna: too scary to be a star

Pussy stuff?

Michael, one of the Two Blowhards, has a great … well he calls it a “rant”, but all I take that to mean is that it took him only ten minutes to write it. Whatever it is, it’s very good and very true, and is about the inadequacy of envy as the explanation of leftism. Michael offers another:

I’m hoping you can explain to me why so many people on the right, libertarian or conservative, discount the question of attractiveness. Are they puzzled by it? Do they think it’s pussy stuff? Are they even aware of it?

As you and I, arty maniacs, both know, beauty and pleasure play big roles in people’s lives. People — and not just artsy-fartsies — make life decisions based on feelings and tastes. Aesthetic preference is a powerful engine that can affect which neighborhood you choose to live in, how you dress and feed yourself, where you shop and travel, and how you make a living.

Too bad the right refuses to wrestle with the question of aesthetic preference. In doing so, they risk alienating everyone who’s attracted to attractiveness. (And who isn’t?) Seductiveness, glamour, sensuality, entertainment, food: are righties really willing to let the left own all these potent issues and qualities?

I’d humbly suggest that resorting to “envy” as one’s only, or root, explanation for leftie-ism, is itself unattractive. It has its validity, of course. But it’ll never sell.

Michael is kind enough to exclude Natalie Solent and our good selves (“slyness, elegance and perversity”) from these critical generalisations. If they haven’t already the Blowhards should also have a read of the sly, elegant and perverse Alice Bachini.

By the way, thanks again to the 2Bs for making me read Peter Hall’s Cities in Civilization, which I took with me on my recent holiday that I promised not to keep going on about. It’s over a thousand pages long and weighs about four and a half tons but I didn’t regret taking it with me for a single second. Had I left it behind I would have pined dreadfully. I’ve already done (since we’re on the subject of aesthetics) Athens, Florence, Shakespeare’s London, Vienna (twice – at each end of the nineteenth century), Paris (also end of C19) and post WW1 Berlin. Then it was on to the techies: Manchester (cotton), Glasgow (ships), Berlin again (electronics), and I’m now in Detroit doing Ford and his Model T. Great stuff, and there’s twice as much again more great stuff to come, including Hollywood (Hollywood) and fifties Memphis (rock ‘n’ roll). I will surely be saying more about this fabulous book.

“Arts and Entertainment” doesn’t really do all this justice, but it was the best label I could find. There isn’t a samizdata subject category for “not pussy stuff”.

Conservatives can rock too!

In response to a recent Bruce Bartlett column identifying the top forty “conservative” pop songs of all time, blogger Radley “The Agitator” Balko comes up with his own list in a column for TechCentralStation.

My first reaction to Bartlett’s column was: “Ugh! This list reads like Dave Barry’s ‘Book of Bad Songs’.” How can the list be so overwhelmingly dominated by soulless, ham-fisted schlock? Even the handful of great songs seem out of place — James Brown’s “It’s a Man’s, Man’s, Man’s World” is an all-time R&B masterpiece, but was the Godfather really proffering a conservative worldview, or is Bartlett reading way too much into it? Could it be that statists are just better rockers than us pro-market types? There have to be more hip tunes that carry a conservative message.

Radley Balko’s list is better and fresher, with songs by the Kinks, Vernon Reid and Bob Marley. He also acknowledges the Canadian rock trio Rush, which built an entire concept album around Ayn Rand’s “Anthem”. Good choices, Radley — but there are a handful of classics that both Bartlett and Balko have overlooked.

The finest “conservative” rock song of all time is “Trouble Every Day” by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention. Now, Zappa wasn’t exactly a Goldwater / Reagan conservative, but remember — pro-democracy, pro-capitalism demonstrators in Czechoslovakia made Zappa’s “Plastic People” their anthem.

“Trouble Every Day” originally appeared on the Mothers’ double LP “Freak Out!” in 1965. Written in reaction to television coverage of the Watts riots in Los Angeles, this tune manages to savage the news media, ridicule the “root cause” mantra of left-liberals, and even take a timely swipe at LBJ’s Great Society. Over a bed of wailing harmonica and Frank’s own razor-sharp blues guitar, he ridicules local press coverage of the riot:

You know I watched that rotten box
until my head began to hurt
From checkin’ out the way
the newsmen say they get the dirt
Before the guys on channel so-and-so,
and further they are certain
That any show they’ll interrupt
to bring ya news if it comes up
If the place blows up,
they’ll be the first to tell
Because the boys they got downtown
are workin’ hard and doin’ swell
And if anybody gets the news
before it hits the street
They say that no one blabs it faster!
Their coverage can’t be beat!

Next, he captures the hypocrisy of the rioters (and their apologists) with startling conviction:

Well, I saw the market burning
and the local people turning
On the merchants and the shops
that used to sell their brooms and mops
And every other household item,
watched a mob just turn and bite ’em
And they say it serves ’em right,
because a few of them were white
And it’s the same across the nation,
black and white discrimination
Yelling “you can’t understand me”
and all that other jive they hand me
On the papers and TV,
and all that mass stupidity
That seems to grow more every day …

Finally, Zappa has a few choice words for would-be revolutionaries, three years before John Lennon excoriated those “minds that hate”:

You know we’ve got to sit around at home
and watch this thing begin
But I bet there won’t be many
who live to see it really end
Because a fire in the street
ain’t like a fire in the heart
And in the eyes of all these people,
don’t you know that this could start
On any street, in any town,
in any state, if any clown
Decides that now’s the time to fight
for some ideal he thinks is right
And if a million more agree,
there ain’t no Great Society
As it applies to you and me,
the country isn’t free

This is a conservative jam if ever there was one. Do I have more? Of course I do. How about Leonard Cohen’s “The Future,” a nightmare vision of totalitarianism and the destruction of western culture? How about Ben Harper’s “Oppression,” a stirring reminder that we all hold the power to overthrow tyranny? How about CCR’s “Keep on Chooglin'”? Okay, maybe not that last one.

Eastern European Idylls

Posted from Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Here at the only Internet cafe in Bratislava that I can find, I am struggling with a crazy Eastern European keyboard and what are for me the difficulties of using�yahoo. It’s an arkward combination, not made�anz easier bz the fact that whenever I tzpe z I get y and whenever I tzpe y I get z. So it comes out as zahoo unless I concentrate verz carefullz.

But enough of trivia. I got to Bratislava last Friday and leave next Monday, and so far it’s been great. I have lucked into a classical music festival, the initials for the Slovak title of which are BHS. So when I went to the concert on Saturday, I thought, oh no, they�ve done a truly tacky sponsorship deal. But all was well.

The concert however was dull, I thought.��The solo pianist, Ivan Moravec, is world-renowned, but frankly he made his two pieces, the Franck Variations for Piano and Orchestra and the Ravel Concerto, sound to me like run-throughs. Maybe it was me. Maybe it is that he looks like a waiter. Whatever, everyone else seemed happy.

But then on Sunday, there was Vladimir Ashkenazy conducting the Czech Philharmonic in Mahler’s Resurrection Symphony. It was sold out of course, but I went along anyway, and a Japanese gent sold me a ticket, for the Slovak equivalent of about £6 sterling ($9 US). Unbelievable. As was the performance. For once all the flim-flam of classical musical ovations – a loud a pretentious ‘bravo’ as soon as the last chord went silent, vast gobs of flowers for the lady solo singers and even for the gentleman conductor, constant returns to the platform for more applause, rhythmic applause – all seemed entirely appropriate. → Continue reading: Eastern European Idylls

Snuff or nonsense?

Do ‘snuff’ movies actually exist or are they merely an urban legend? I use the term ‘snuff’ movie in its traditionally accepted sense i.e. an act of murder which is committed to film or videotape and then replayed in order to provide some warped sexual gratification for the viewer.

I have been prompted to raise this question by a showing of the film “8mm” on British terrestrial television this evening. According to the makes of the film, snuff movies do exist but you have to go to considerable trouble (and expense) to obtain them.

I have never seen a snuff movie but even if I had been shown such a movie how could I know for sure that the ‘grisly murder’ I was witnessing was not, in fact, a very convincing simulation? After all, realistic and gory murders are simulated in mainstream movies all the time so the expertise clearly exists.

Another thing that occurs to me is the problem of marketing such a thing. How (and to whom) do the producers sell their snuff videos when they can hardly be advertised even in the most questionable publications? Furthermore, I am not aware of any criminal convictions (in the UK at any rate) in respect of the making or distribution of snuff movies.

On the other hand, contract killing certainly does exist and if one can pay to have someone murdered surely one can pay a bit extra to have the execution filmed. In the “8mm” film, the snuff movie is made to order at the behest of an extremely wealthy magnate. If they do exist, then perhaps that’s how it works.

I am no nearer to an answer but I am not sure I want to be. I never want to see a snuff movie and I’d like to think they they are, indeed, nothing more than exotic urban fairytales. But sometimes, the world can be a very ugly place.

There’s no business like Shakespeare’s business

We’re based in London, and this is about London at one of its most glorious moments, the one that gave us William Shakespeare (1564-1616):

The London theaters represented a revolution in culture; they were apparently the first capitalist businesses in the world built entirely around entertainment. The heart of this cultural business model was the actors company, in which a group of actors invested money in a common stock of properties, costumes and plays. Each company of actors obtained finance from an impresario, who got a share (usually 50%) of the box office. Shakespeare was 10% owner not only of the Chamberlain’s Men but also of the Globe (that is, the building and real estate itself.)

Theaters were “big business” for the time. Costs included hundreds of very expensive costumes (velvet cost 1 pound a yard), plays (which if bought freelance were usually purchased outright for about 6 or 7 pounds), the salaries of “extras” and minor actors on stage and the salaries of about 30 paid hands (including musicians, actors, prompters, bookkeepers, stage keepers, and wardrobe keepers) behind the scenes. Hundreds of playbills, pasted up around the City, served as advertisements. The range of business affairs was so complex that each company had an administrator, usually called an actor-manager.

So just keep all this in mind next time you attend a Shakespearian play—what you are seeing was NOT created as “art for art’s sake.”

Friedrich of 2 Blowhards dot com wrote that after himself reading Peter Hall‘s book Cities in Civilization. I wonder if the people – scriptwriter Tom Stoppard in particular – who made the film Shakespeare in Love, the running joke of which is how similar Shakespearean London was to present-day Hollywood, had also read this book. I possess a copy myself. Friedrich’s piece reminds me that it’s about time I read it.

In general, 2 Blowhards looks really good and I’m going to be reading that some more also.

My favourite music

The other night around Perry’s house after a few cans of beer and the usual chit chat I said that I was thinking of making a “my favourite music CD”. Perry is always trying to get me to post things on Samizdata, so he suggested that I come up with my list, post it on the blog and ask others to do the same. In some way this may give us an insight into the types of people that read this blog. I am not sure what we will get out of this, but it’s worth a go. So please feel free to post your lists as comments to this post. If we get enough, maybe a super list of the favourite music can be compiled.

Now I have put together tapes of my favourite music before, but they have always consisted of music that I was into at the time. What I wanted to do this time was put together a list of songs/tunes that I would take with me to a desert island if I was given the choice (desert island disc’s style). Now I have started to think about it, it is actually harder than you initially think. I had to make one or two rules for my self just to make things easier. I limited the number of songs to 15 (thats about what you can fit on a CD) mainly because I didn’t want to calculate the lengths of the songs and add them together to see if they would fit and the second rule was that you can only take one piece of music by any particular person.

When I was thinking about what to put on it, three tracks came straight to mind. These have always been favourites of mine since first hearing them, and have always been near the top of the pile of CD’s or records that get played, now all I have to do is get another 12 songs and I’m finished. I have been ill for the last week, so I have had plenty of time to contemplate what I was going to choose. The hardest thing to do was to not choose a song because it was a ‘classic’ song, you know the ones that always get chosen even if you don’t particularly like them, they just make you feel comfortable when you hear them. What I was looking for were songs that I really, really liked and could listen to for the next 10 years (or so). Also I do listen to a lot of music, and I have chosen not to put any of the new music I am listening to at the moment into my list. This is purely because it hasn’t survived the test of time yet, I like it now but may not like it in a years time. Anyway, less of my ramblings, here is my list of my most favourite music. If you don’t like my choices, I don’t care because it’s my list. Make one up and post it as a comment.

Walking on Sunshine – Katrina and the waves
Golden Brown – the Stranglers
Norwegian Wood – The Beatles
This Woman’s Work – Kate Bush
Visions of You – Jah Wobble’s Invaders of the Heart with Sinead O’Connor
Mr E’s Beautiful Blues – Eels
Night Boat to Cairo – Madness
Jangle of a Dogs Collar – Butthole Surfers
Ghost Town – The Specials
Sul-E-Stomp – Astralasia & Suns of Arqa
The Rhythm Divine – Yello with Shirley Bassey
59th Street Bridge Song – Simon and Garfunkel
Danse Macabre – Saint-Saens
Stop the Car (12” version) – The Woodentops
Big Noise from Winnetka – Kenny Ball & His Jazzmen

Simpsonia

Responding opportunistically, and there’s nothing wrong with that, to our last two slogans of the day, Radley Balko has emailed to tell us about this, this being, I kid you not, a Nietzschean analysis of The Simpsons. Well we can’t all be deciding what to do about Iraq.

The Simpsons bit that I often like best comes right at the beginning, when Bart is shown writing lines on a school blackboard, which allude to whatever he’s been doing that day that the school says he shouldn’t have been doing. My favourite: “Bart’s Bucks Are Not Legal Tender.”

A question for the USA, maybe for Balko himself, or maybe just for Brits with Sky TV (which is where The Simpsons were first shown here). The Simpsons is now on BBC2, but it often goes straight to the surreal TV sofa scene, and skips Bart’s blackboard lines. Is this because the show itself sometimes does this, or is this the BBC inflicting vicious cuts? The latter, I suspect, but maybe only so that they can cut it down to less than twenty minutes, for their own BBC reasons. Or, maybe they really do feel the need to cut out the most disturbingly anarcho-libertarian messages?!?! I await comments.

Balko, you say you want to train your dog to retrieve beer from your fridge. Stay tuned to Samizdata for some canine management advice, gleaned from my nice sister Daphne and her nice husband Denis (i.e. these two), which I will be posting Real Soon Now.

And while we’re on subject of dogs, don’t we all think that K19, now showing at London cinemas everywhere, sounds like a Silly Police Dog Movie, rather than a Serious Russian Submarine Movie? Yes we do.

Do I digress? But what could be more Simpsonian – nay Homeric – subjects than your dog getting beer for you from the fridge, and not-very-good-movies?

Modernism, architecture and Ayn Rand

There’s a nice review by blogger Pejman Yousefzadeh of Ayn Rand’s 1940s classic The Fountainhead, and it got me thinking not so much about architecture, where I think Rand’s views were often an uncritical acceptance of Modernist ideology, as about the fact that she missed a key argument for free enterprise – it can be a lot of fun! Let’s face it, the main hero, Howard Roark, doesn’t come across as the kind of guy to let his red hair down at a blogger bash, does he?

I think one of the unacknowledged aspects of liberal capitalism is that it can tap into humans’ need to play and experiment. Paleo-conservatives like David Brooks, author of Bobos In Paradise, which is a mild send up of 1990s America, seems almost offended that geeky tech entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley and elsewhere liked to have fun even as they made – and later lost – their billions. But what’s the problem with that? In fact, one of the most potent memes we can inject into the culture is the idea that not only is collectivism morally and economically bankrupt, it is also bloody boring. For a good and more considered take on this point, Virginia Postrel’s excellent The Future and Its Enemies is highly recommended.

some graffiti: tblives!