Blue Note Records: "One of the most profound musical experiences is playing with people who are better than you," Charlap says of Tony Bennett, Shirley Horn, Jim Hall and Frank Wess members of a mutual admiration society, to be sure, who graced "I Get Along Without You Very Well," "Stardust," "Two Sleepy People," and "Rockin' Chair," respectively (Wess also graces "Blue Orchids"). "These are not my peers. They are my masters. My vision was expanded by their vision. They don't play false notes. They play themselves." "
[Bill and I went to college together. I had some great fun (and learned much) listening to and playing with him back then, and I hope to again in the future. Stardust was given a rave review by the New York Times this weekend (amongst other recent notice). It's a great album featuring the music of Hoagy Charmichael. Go Bill!]
It's never easy *
[I have read Adam Curry's Big Lie a number of times and I have some questions. "Why was Pim Fortuyn killed?" wasn't answered in this piece. Adam alluded to possibilities, but I'm unclear as to what he thinks was the cause of Fortuyn's death.
Was he killed for speaking the truth? Is that the implication?
I understand the issue of immigration changing the culture of a nation from my own background. The dynamics of small democratic countries can be volatile. It's a difficult dillemma frought with complexity.
In Adam's essay, The New York Times is both decried as "stunning" in its poor reporting, and praised as the paper that "revealed the kernel of what sparked the controversey over Pim Fortuyn" and "Spot on" in their translation. (It's a big organization. It's possible for them to be both at the same time. I feel the same way about them often enough.) It doesn't make the essay easier to understand.
I learned that he thinks that the price of fame is truth.
I learned that he thinks that television is not benign (fascinating, that he thinks this, but that's for another time.)
There was this quote on Linklust. "If you read this article, you should know that Adam is not totally independant, he openly applied to become a member of Pim's party. He never got a reaction by the way." This is part of the MetaFilter thread Dave points to.
Why wasn't this disclosed at the top of Adam's essay? Isn't this an important factor in Adam's opinion of the events? (Dave is quoted in the same thread as saying "Adam was a supporter of Fortuyn." but the link doesn't take you to the quote, so I have no idea if this was written or not.) I'm not sure I understand this application, as I thought I read somewhere on Adam's site that he cannot vote in the elections? If you cannot vote in an election should you stay away from campaigning?
None of this means that what Adam wrote wasn't closer to the truth than the reporting of the Bigs. But maybe it was just slanted to the other side? (Pim was Good vs Pim was Bad). I have little to go on but the trust chain between myself, Dave, and Adam.
In regard to this piece I saw a lot of 'blogs write something like "I can't believe I was duped, and thanks for some great television a few years ago..."
I can't help wonder what else I don't know.]
Dave provides behind the scenes insight and thoughts on the coverage: Daniel, Adam, John, Lance and Daniel. He finishes up with "...and there has been no more information revealed about why the assasin killed Fortuyn." [Exactly.]
Mother's Day *
To my Mom,
You're the best!
d.
3:52:42 PM 
|
