Leap In The Dark

Have you ever felt like your life should have come with a manual? Jody does, or a least something that would help her deal with what's she's gone through in the past couple of days. She's broken up with her boy friend, which has also left her homeless, lost her job, leaving her without a source of income, and had her car impounded.

To top it all off she woke up and found herself lying underneath a dumpster with her hand burnt to a crisp. The plus side is she is somehow able to lift the dumpster off her, and whoever put it on top of her has also stuffed her blouse with about $100,000. The last thing she remembers is being attacked by some guy who not only bit her neck but also made her drink blood from his arm.

Oh! Maybe there's an explanation as to how she was able lift the dumpster off so easily, and why the burn on her hand is healing so fast. The hand that was sticking out from under the dumpster all day as she lay with two tons of garbage and metal on top of her. The hand that was burnt because it was exposed to daylight: bite in the neck, blood sucking, and burning in daylight.

Isn't that just a great way to top off a shit week, she's now officially undead, a vampire, or as the title of Christopher Moore's book from 1995 would put it. Jody has joined the ranks of the Bloodsucking Fiends. It wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for all the unexpected drawbacks.

The problem is the movies; they make it look so glamorous, fancy dress, beautiful people, sex, and blood sucking. They don't say anything about how you're supposed to get your car out of impound when they're only open during daylight hours and you have a tendency to combust in the sun.

And how are you supposed to find a place to live when they only show places in the day? It's all very dayist. You'd think San Francisco of all places would be a little more accommodating to alternative lifestyles, but even that most modern of cities still seems to be out of touch with the needs of the night stalkers. But then again that's why innocent dupes from places like Incontinence Indiana were invented weren't they? To become minions for the beautiful undead and do all their shit work. (The fact that Laundromats are open twenty-four hours is a real piss off especially if your minion figures it out, muttering something about bloodstains not being his fault)

C. Thomas Flood (Tommy to his friends, the C. is his pen name for when he is a famous author) has only been in San Francisco a week and has already received five marriage proposals, obtained a job, and had a beautiful red head throw herself at him. The fact that the five proposals have come from illegal male Chinese immigrants who have heard that men marry men in San Francisco and are hoping Tommy will make them legal takes the shine off the proposals.

But the job is good even if it is working the night shift with a bunch of deranged lunatics who suck nitrous oxide from Reddi Wip and bowl frozen turkeys in the notions section of the grocery store where they work restocking shelves and repairing the damage they cause. The beautiful red head is a little confusing in her habits and her intentions until Jody tells him about her predilections.

Instead of being terrified as she worried, Tommy is enthralled. When he finds out she knows next to nothing about being a vampire he enlists the aid of the world's authors and devices a series of tests to figure out what is a true characteristic and what is false.

While the two young lovers are working out the intricacies of their new relationship (should you or should you not store the TV Dinners in the freezer with the corpse or why sucking the blood from live snapping turtles just doesn't cut it) the vampire who got Jody is still out there and terrorizing the city. Corpses with their necks broken, the blood drained from their bodies, and no discernable wounds have been showing up with increasing frequency.

With each murder more and more clues are point at Tommy as the culprit. Why, Jody, wonders is the other vampire trying to get Tommy arrested, or even worse come after him as a victim. What did her minion ever do to him anyway? Besides she started to grow accustomed to him, and strange as she finds the whole idea, and is starting to fall in love with him.

With the cops closing in from one direction and the vampire from the other direction, Tommy has to rally the troops; the boys from the store, and a homeless man known as The Emperor of San Francisco who along with his canine companions has been fighting the good fight against evil since first catching sight of the vampire. Tommy and his motley gang first must track down the enemy and when they do figure out what the hell they're going to do about it.

Christopher Moore writes the funniest horror stories on record, from The Lust Lizard Of Melancholy Cove to Practical Demonkeeping he has exposed the world to the lighter side of everything from demonic possession to the humour of monstrous man eating creatures. Now he gives us the silly side of bloodsucking with his usual aplomb.

But what sets Moore apart from the usual run of the mill humour writer is he also has the remarkable ability to pull back from his humour and open the door to reality. In San Francisco of the mid nineties reality meant AIDS was still cresting and the wave was carrying people with it indiscriminate of sexual orientation and gender.

Jody has qualms about killing, it just doesn't come natural to her yet, until she meets the first person that wants to die because of the pain he has experienced and is in. She realizes she doesn't have to be a horrible bloodsucking fiend. She can ease the pain of others while keeping herself alive and well.

The amazing thing about Christopher Moore is not only his ability to tell a side splitting funny story, but that he can bring genuine tears to your eyes without resorting to sentimentality. Letting a situation develop at its own steam and not trying to manipulate an audience is a delicate task. Humour and Tragedy are the two faces of the human condition, and Christopher Moore is one of the few writers today who can wear either one with equal equanimity.

Read Bloodsucking Fiends for the sidesplitting, milk spiting through the nose laughs, but also be prepared to think and not escape from reality. Maybe that's why vampires are so funny, because reality can bite.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 01:20 AM | Permalink

The past ten years or more has seen a renewed interest in what's come to be known as "Roots Music". In other words the musical styles that have shaped American (North American) pop music. From the holler songs of the slaves in the field, old country versions of Scotch and Irish ballads, Rag Time piano, Carolina Blues, Gospel, and well the list is as long and divers as the people who have settled in one part of the continent or another.

By now there's pretty much a hard fast definition of what "Roots Music" is. Usually acoustic, and most often a variation on either early blues or country music, it is played on guitars, drums, banjos, and other "traditional" instruments from our rural pasts. It usually conjures up images of families gathered on the back porch playing, or old ramshackle bars in the south.

Although the harmonica was originally a German import to the country it was quickly adopted by both black and white musicians into their respective music as an alternate to vocals or using more complicated wind instruments in simpler songs. It was adapted from its original usage to fit the needs of the various styles of music, as it could be both a rhythm and a lead instrument.

But as seems more often the case then not when it comes to the arts, and music in particular, like the harmonica "Roots Music" has more to its history then just being how we hear it played today. In pockets all over America music has been made on instruments that have not withstood the ravages of time or the whims of popularity. Different ethnic groups would bring their instruments and their music with them, which wouldn't ever achieve the popularity of Blues or Country, but in their playing, would influence the musical styles of a region.

The harmonica has remained, but the same can't be said for the claviola, the cimbalom, the contra bass saxophone or the lute guitar. But all of those instruments have been played at time or another across North America. Now the band Hazmat Modine has recorded an album of "Roots Music" utilizing some of these, and others, forgotten instruments, and their first album, Bahamut, kicks over all our preconceptions of musical history.

Before we go any further, this isn't some sort of anthropological music album that we're talking about here. The music is just as alive and vital as any of the other albums of traditional Country, Blues or Gospel albums being released today. It's also every damn bit as good as what we've been listening to.

"Steady Roll" is the precursor to Chuck Berry style Rock and Roll; "Dry Spell" could easily be a New Orleans jazz song; and "Everybody Loves You" could easily be a hard driving Blues song from the Mississippi Delta. But America's roots are as European as they are African and so why shouldn't any of these songs include tuba solos, or reflect our Asiatic roots as the harmony vocals in "Everybody Loves You" do?

Okay so maybe throat singing from the plains of Siberia is not something you'd expect to find on a Blues track probably ever. The fact that the four piece band Huun-Huur-Tu not only sings on the song "Everybody Loves You", and that it doesn't sound like some weird novelty act, but a sensible contribution to the song, shows you how much our definition of roots music needs to be broadened.

I'm sure to some of you this is beginning to sound like a dreadful mishmash of music where a bunch of artisies have gotten together to try and sound cool. But you couldn't be further from the truth with that sort of guess. They haven't just done things for the sake of being different; they are trying to find a sound that is inclusive of all the musical sources that have made their way to our continent.

While these instruments may not have come here for the purposes the band puts them too, they are striving to create "American" music and these instruments are now American. The sound of the wind instrument Claviola may sound alien to our ears, but the music it is playing is familiar. When it is introduced into the mix with instruments we do recognise, it is no longer as jarring as it was initially.

The same goes for the vocal harmonies and instruments played by the men of Huun-Huur-Tu. Throat singing has a wildness to it that at first makes you wonder how in the world is this going to fit into any style of music that I'm familiar with. But in the end we lose track of the exotic nature of the sound and accept it as an important element of what is being performed.

Aside from the diversity of music being performed on this disc, Bahamut is distinguished by the virtuosity of the players involved in Hazmat Modine either directly or as a guest. But there is an intangible quality to this music beyond it merely being a bunch of skilled musicians playing neat instruments really well.

There is a hint of that in something that Wade Schuman, leader of Hazmat Modine, says about Country, Blues and Jazz music having a certain directness and simplicity that's very moving, and that's hard to understand. That simplicity and directness he says comes from a place deep in the soul of America that you have to tap into.

Hazmat Modine on their debut album Bahamut show that they are fully capable of taping into that simple and direct part of the American soul; the part that can cut through the shit and peel back the essence of a feeling or a moment and put it to music with courage and conviction.

The music of Hazmat Modine on the album Bahamut is some of the best music I've heard this year period. No one serious about knowing the potential that lies within traditional American music should miss listening to the disc. It will open your eyes at the very least, but hopefully also you ears and your heart.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 04:00 AM | Permalink

Do you ever stop and wonder how our species has lasted this long? How is it that we've made it after who knows how many millennia of busting each others heads, stealing each others' food, and doing whatever we can to ensure our survival in the face of competition.

Don't let anybody fool you into believing that one race of man were better than another, no matter who we were we'd stomp your ass if we could get away with it and it served some advantage. Long before the Europeans even existed we were forcing each other to fight for our lives in Africa and North America.

The great peace tree Hiawatha planted was only among the five nations who made up the Iroquois Confederacy. They had no problems burying their hatchets in Huron heads or other non-Iroquois nations.

Of course the Europeans were the professionals, starting from before Christ's time with the Macedonians under first Philip then his son Alexander carving a swath through central Europe and Asia just for the sake of Empire building. The Romans were no slouches in that manner either stomping the barbarians from Turkey out to Hadrian's Wall on what's now the Scottish border

Since then we've been at it pretty much non-stop; country against country, religion against religion and faith against faith. For all that both Muslims and Christians lay claim to compassion and peace-loving being integral parts of their belief systems, neither one has had any difficulty in recognising the business end of a weapon.

So what is this compassion that the big two of religions hold fast to as a means of establishing their passive credentials, or at least a pretence of concern for their fellow species members. Well according to the Online Dictionary, compassion is a deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it.

Well that doesn't leave very much room to equivocate does it? I personally don't see anything in that definition stating that you need to be the one who has inflicted the suffering upon the other before you feel the desire to relieve it. But judging by the way most of the world seems to function these days that seems to be the modern definition.

First we're going to bomb the crap out of you, then we're going to shake our heads at your pitiful state and maybe decide to have a benefit concert for you. If we don't do that we'll at least send our troops in and impose our way of life upon you. Then you get to experience all the benefits of either being a devout Muslim living under a totalitarian religious government, or enjoy becoming a slave labour force for Nike and The Gap. Either way it will be such an improvement and it will make us feel better about ourselves.

All sarcasm aside where has our compassion gone? I'm not just talking about foreign aid either; I mean day in and day out we just don't seem to feel it any more. Sure if there is some major disaster like Katrina or the tsunami of a few years back we can open our hearts and check books readily enough.

But unless we're hit over the head with something we've become so self-absorbed our heads are so far up inside ourselves we're naval gazing from the inside out. How else could we let the two of the wealthiest countries, Canada and the United States, in the world degenerate to the state they are in now?

The means for a person to support their family in dignity have been stripped from countless people as their jobs have been shipped to other countries. What is a person whose spent the last twenty five years of their life building cars supposed to do when the plant closes due to management inefficiency and union greed? Retrain to be a call centre operator? That might work as long as those jobs haven't been shipped out overseas as well.

Over a million children in Canada live below the poverty level, meaning that they aren't getting adequate food, shelter, and more often or not want for parental affection and attention as well. Even if we just went by relative population size, with the United States have roughly ten times the population of Canada, it means around ten million children in the U.S. are affected similarly.

How can we call ourselves a caring people if just one of those scenarios exists? Why aren't we more appalled to know that as we sit in the comfort of our home, or are heading to a job that people in our countries are going to bed hungry at night, with little or no chance of a proper meal the next day as well?

What kind of caring society allows people who are our parent's age to live on subsistent pensions that barely gets them a room in a hovel or a welfare hotel? What kind of dignity is that for a person to live out their supposed golden years sitting and watching paint peel in a room with mouldy carpet and a broken spring bed.

Instead of feeling pity when we see homeless people we stand in judgement wondering how they could have let themselves get in such a position. Or if a person is dying of AIDS instead of sorrow and compassion we judge them on what might have been their lifestyle when what should matter is why there is no cure for it after all these years.

What has happened to turn our hearts into unfeeling slabs of stone? So many of us when we are out in the world just plough straight through people on the sidewalk, knocking over people in walkers and complaining about them being in the way.

I have a hard time dealing with going out anymore, because it either gets me so angry to be around people that I might start hitting them with my cane, or it makes me so sad at how far we've fallen that I could cry.

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that people on the street have so little compassion. They take their lead from the attitudes that are prevalent in society. Our leaders are more concerned with passing judgement then with caring, and that's what is reported in the papers every day as the state of the world.

Compassion has somehow become an antiquated ideal very few people feel or understand. Until we can remember what it was it like to care about another person, and how our actions might affect them, the world will continue along on its present path.

I don't know how much longer we can keep it up, we've been lucky so far, but luck can change for the worse at any time and anywhere.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:41 AM | Permalink

Every year at this time the leaders of both the Church of England and the Catholic Church give a state of the world address to their flocks. According to the tenets of their faiths they will let the world know what they consider to be the most important issues of the day.

Of course they aren't the only ones who get to have their say, other religious leaders, national leaders, and the deep thinkers in the press all have their lists ready for consideration. Political events, war, terrorism, intergovernmental relationships, and all the other matters of importance which affect policy, economics, and the perceived balance of power in the world.

For people who share the same planet it is quite amazing how so few of them agree on what are the major issues facing the earth. They all have their own agendas and advocate what's important from their perspective: events that have helped fulfil their goals, events they are involved in, or things that challenge what they believe to be the way one should lead a life. Nothing that does not directly impact upon the objectives of their country or way of thinking seems to ever make it onto a lot of people's end of the year summations..

Some of them will offer platitudes about world peace, famine, and the scourge of AIDS in Africa but only in so far as it suits whatever social-political agenda they stand for. It's easy enough to say what a shame it is, but it's another thing all together to actually advocate doing something about it.

The pundits worry about where the next wave of terrorism is going to come from, but the answer is right in front of their faces and they don't seem to have noticed. But then again why should that be different from the way that Africa has been treated in the past. If the refugee camps of the Palestinians were hot beds for recruitment by the PLO and others in the 1960's what about the camps currently in Africa?

It's been the policies and beliefs over the years of the major powers of all persuasions that have allowed situations to get to the acute and chronic level they're at now. Why is there still fighting in Somalia when the Americans invaded it years ago to pacify the region? Why is there still the same border war between Ethiopia and Eritrea that filled refugee camps and led to famine in the 1980's?

How did the massacres in Rwanda occur when the United Nations' commander on the ground kept telling the world it was happening and nobody could spare any troops to help deal with the situation? Why are there people living in camps in Darfar when the American government declared it was a case of genocide in the making?

Because we still haven't clued in that matter what we consider the important events of the year, Africa has to be the story soon or we will all be paying the price for our neglect. What kind of anger and resentments must be brewing there that could easily be inflamed and brought to focus against us for real and perceived injustices?

What the reality is doesn't matter any more. Facts like the fundamental Muslim groups in Somalia being no more likely to agree to family planning practices when it comes to preventing the spread of AIDS then the Catholic Church or the current American Administration will be irrelevant in the face of emotional appeals for vengeance.

Unless we change our policies towards Africa from being where we are perceived as an exploiter, the one who caused all the problems, to being the compassionate friend who offers help with no strings attached, anti Western sentiment in Africa will begin to escalate. Any group that is looking to recruit for the "cause" probably won't have too much difficulty finding individuals to volunteer

It's not just a matter of us giving money or relieving debt; we need to be on the ground in the camps working with people on an almost one to one basis. Our governments need to be serious in their attempts to get AIDS medicines to African victims and push for the development of a free vaccine. Our presence needs to be felt above and beyond celebrities adopting cute black babies.

Compassion has to rule our dealings with Africa not profit or belief systems. We can no longer only consider the present, but have to take into consideration the future and how we can ensure there is one for the people of that continent. It shouldn't have to be for political reasons, we should be doing out of compassion for our fellow human beings who are suffering. But if nothing happens soon for whatever the reason, it might be too late.

Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Middle East are all current hot spots that we can't ignore of course, but neither can we continue to ignore the situation in the Sub-Sahara, and the rest of Africa. Maybe they don’t have to be on this year's listing of top events, but if we don't start making Africans important, they might just become so for all the wrong reasons.

That can't be allowed to happen.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:12 AM | Permalink

Thinking back over the past year in Canadian politics and looking for significant moments is an interesting exercise in trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. Everything is of deathly importance when it is receiving its fifteen minutes of fame in the news media, but a week later its long gone. In Canada is seems that issues are only important to politicians in relationship to the mileage they can get out of it.

With the Conservative Party of Canada having only a minority government it curtails their ability to impose their agenda to the extent they'd like. On the other hand the Liberal party has spent most of the year with a temporary leader and have not been eager to force an election. For the most part we've just seen a lot of jockeying for positions on either side of the fence so when the next election comes both sides hope to be ready

When the country is in that type of situation it's really quite hard to find events that can be considered in anyway significant beyond the moment. Yes the war in Afghanistan is an important issue today, and will always be important to those who have lost family and friends to the fighting, but it shouldn't have any lasting impact on the political landscape of Canada

In these circumstances it was difficult to come up with anything that had long-term significance for the country occurring during the past year. In the end I came up with two, one at each end of the year: Steven Harper's election as Prime Minister and Stephane Dion's selection as leader of the opposition Liberal Party.

Both those events marked significant changes in both the individual political parties and the potential for long-term changes on the political landscape of the country. While the election of Steven Harper marks a fairly obvious change in Canadian politics, Stephane Dion's selection is in some ways even more significant.

The entity known as the Conservative Party of Canada represents the merger of the two political parties on the right side of the political spectrum. The Reform party had changed its name to Alliance in an attempt to give the impression they were a unified right wing party, but the continued existence of the Progressive Conservative Party belayed that fact.

When the last leader of the Conservative Party went back on his promise never to merge with the Alliance, he won the leadership based on that promise; they dropped the Progressive from the name and became Conservative. Perhaps they hoped to preserve the illusion that they weren't that much different from the old Progressive Conservative party, which was of course a lie.

The Progressive Conservative party had been conservative in name only, socially they were as liberal as the Liberal government, and fiscally they weren't that much different either. The new political party is a completely different ball of wax. They are the first party in Canadian history to lead the country that is both fiscally and socially conservative.

Although the Liberal governments of the past twelve years have been gradually eroding the social safety net that made Canada one of the more humane places to live, they still played lip service to such things as the rights of women and minorities. If they cut spending from social programs they were always careful to be discreet about it and do it gradually so that services would seem to atrophy rather then vanish over night.

Steven Harper's government makes no bones about who and what they stand for. When they discovered a huge amount of money surplus to budgetary requirements, instead of restoring spending cuts to needed social programs, they earmarked the whole amount for debt relief and maybe lowering cooperate taxes.

The fact that they won a minority government in the last election was not a surprise as even Liberal party members were sick of their own party and wanted something done about it. What will be important is the next election and whether or not Canadians are willing to change the nature of their country as extremely as Steven Harper wants and give him a majority government.

The electorate has seen enough of him and knows how he would change Canada from a country to fourteen squabbling fiefdoms all fighting for their turn at the trough. Every province wants a better deal for itself: i.e. the federal government gives them more money but has less control over what the provinces do with that money.

Steven Harper has always been a big provincial rights advocate, so what remains to be seen is how much of the concept of Canada is he willing to sell in order to gain a majority government. He knows he can't win sufficient seats in any of the metropolitan areas of Ontario to form his majority that way. By offering Quebec increased powers, as well as the other provinces, he hopes to win enough seats away from the Quebec nationalist party, Bloc Quebecois, to get power.

Paul Martin and the Liberals were so despised leading into the last election that the only way Harper couldn't have won a minority was by being found in bed with a dead human or a live barnyard animal. What must be worrisome for him is that his negative image was still strong enough that even with a universally despised and obviously corrupt incumbent government, he wasn't able to win a majority.

What does that bode for the next election when he's running against a suddenly rejuvenated Liberal party? The Liberal convention in early December ran like clockwork, including a suspenseful final ballot victory for the dark horse Stephane Dion over the favoured Michael Ignatieff. Even better as far as they were concerned was the complete absence of the acrimony that's been swirling around the party since before Jean Chretian resigned as leader and Prime Minister.

Everybody is talking about how Mr. Dion represents a new face for the Liberal party and how the old guard are finally being swept out. What I don't think anybody realizes is how old that old guard might really have been. Before Mr. Dion's election there have only been four other leaders of the party since 1968 when Pierre Elliot Trudeau was elected. All of whom had connections to the party of that year.

Trudeau's successor was John Turner who had been minister of justice in Trudeau's government before leaving to go make a killing in corporate law. Jean Chretian who followed Turner had held a variety of Cabinet posts in Trudeau's government, and Paul Martin was the son of one of the men Trudeau defeated in 1968 to become leader.

For nearly forty years the Liberal party had been run by pretty much the same group of people and it was painfully obvious given their predilection for stabbing each other in the back that they all needed to make graceful exits and hand off the torch to a new generation of folk. Stephane Dion and the people he ran against, and is incorporating into his "team", have none of that old baggage. Even Dion who served as Cabinet minister for both Martin and Chretian was an outsider brought in to shore up the party intellectually.

Of the three men who finished closest to Dion in the leadership race, only Michael Ignatieff is currently in the House of Commons having won a seat for the first time last election. Edward Kennedy had been a provincial cabinet minister for the Ontario Liberal government, and before that the director of Toronto and Edmonton's food banks.Bob Rae had been out of politics since he went down to defeat as leader of the Provincial New Democratic Party in Ontario to Mike Harris' Conservatives in 1994. This was after he had been the first New Democratic premier in Ontario's history.

Even though they are all new to the corridors of power within the Liberal Party hierarchy they have substantial political experience that will stand them in good stead in the days to come. Of course their very newness could work against them, as the public has no idea who any of these guys really are.

If Steven Harper were to call a snap election, or propose a piece of legislature that would guarantee him losing a vote in the House of Commons, he could take advantage of that and perhaps take on a confused and unfocused political party. Although since all Canadian elections seem to be confused and the only real focus they'll need is to disagree with everything that Harper says, and maybe have some ideas of their own, it might not be the hindrance Harper hopes.

Sometime within early 2007 an election will be called and whether or not people realise it will be a vote on the shaping of Canada for the foreseeable future. A clear majority for Steven Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada could well lead to a complete restructuring of the way in which our country is governed, and might re-open the whole sovereignty issue in Quebec through the encouragement of "provincial rights".

Stephane Dion is an unknown quality for Canadians as he was never really in forefront of either previous government that he served. The pundits told us that he was a long shot to win the Liberal leadership, but he won the direct confrontation with the favoured Ignatief easily. What a win by Dion and the new Liberals means for Canada is anybody's guess and voting for them may require something of a leap of faith.

This years major story in Canadian politics started with the election of a new Prime Minister and was given a second chapter with the selection of his major opponent for the next election. It looks like we have to wait for next year to find out how the story ends. Who says politics and soap operas have nothing in common? They both always leave you hanging.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 10:00 AM | Permalink

Now's the time of year when reviewers and critics everywhere are compiling their best of lists for what ever it was they spent the year cataloguing. Some, more daring then others perhaps, are even selecting the one item in their field they consider to be a cut above all the rest, heaven forbid, the year's best.

Last year I participated and selected a favoured book and five favourite music discs for my editors at Blogcritics.org and was honoured to be asked my opinion. Since I've spent so much of 2006 reviewing books and music I wasn't surprised to receive the first email asking me for my best of 2006.

First out of the gate this year was the book's editor asking us to choose our favourite read of the past year. I marked it as unread and left it in the in box of my email program as a reminder; that wasn't a letter I was going to be able to hit reply to and answer immediately. I figured my best bet was to plant the idea in my brain and see if anything took root.

The next day I found myself idly contemplating the books that I had read since last January, trying to pay specific attention to those published in 2006, and waiting for one to jump out and say "I'm the best, pick me". Unfortunately all I ended up accomplishing was realizing I had no idea what to do this year when it came to selecting the year's best in either books or anything else.

I was sitting looking up at my book case where books have become piled up on top of each other for want of shelf space and the thought of even making a list of the books I had read over the last year seemed overwhelming. Trying to pick one of them from amidst the ruins of two shelving units bordered on insanity, but I started to make the attempt. I had nothing to lose by trying

Once I had weeded out everything that wasn't published in 2006 I was still left with what I considered far too many books for my own good. I was left thinking how am I ever going to accomplish this? And what am I going to do if they ask me to do anything for the music section?

Leave that alone for now; I'll blow up that bridge when I come to it. Anyway I'm still trying to deal with the book thing and not coping very well. The editor asked for our picks by Friday that just passed (Dec. 22nd) and it's now Sunday at 3:00am and I'm no closer to choosing one book then I was last Tuesday when I received her email.

What I do have are ten books or so (I keep adding to it every time I make the list as I remember another book that I can't ignore because of how much it moved me, made me think, or made a lasting impression on me) that made my world that much more exciting while I was reading it and the year a lot less interesting if they hadn't existed.

So, in no particular order, here's a listing of books (link to full review at Blogcritics included) that made a difference in my life in the year 2006. I still haven't been able to pick one out of this bunch yet, but I've still got a week before 2007 hits and I might get it together.

The Thousandfold Thought R. Scott Baker

The third book in Baker's sequence that traces the rise to power of a Prophet King on the backs of others fears and superstitions. Beautiful, horrifying, and intelligently written fantasy that makes me hope that I wasn't dreaming when I saw mention of a fourth book.

The Purity Of Blood Arturo Perez-Reverte

The second book of the adventures of Captain Alistride, swashbuckling anti-hero of Phillip IV's Spain: the sun may be setting of the Spanish empire and corruption spreading like a stain through the church and the aristocracy, but the Captain in the eyes of his young ward is proof of her former greatness. Translated into English with great flair, these books are to be read for the sheer pleasure of reading them.

The Bridge Of Rama and King Of Ayodhya Books Five and Six of The Ramayana Ashok K. Banker.

Two books by one author in the same series in the same year are almost too much to ask, but that’s what we got in 2006. With the publication of the fifth and sixth books of his modern adaptation of the 3000-year-old epic poem Ashok Banker brought to a conclusion his version of the story of one of India's most beloved hero's ascension to his throne. Masterful and inventive throughout, these two books brought the series to it's conclusion with the style and grace readers of the series had grown accustomed to.

The Ascendants of Estorea Book One: Cry Of The Newborn James Barclay

From the acclaimed author of The Raven Sequence came the first in his latest sequence. As usual Barclay seems to be able to deal with big stories; an empire at war or the world about to end, and never lose focus of the individuals who make up those events. From emperors down to the farmer in the field all are equally important. Here not only is an empire under siege, but a group of children who have been bred for their abilities come of age. A wonderful combination of adventure, philosophy and genetics, with a good dollop of religious intolerance thrown in for good measure; a great read.

A Dirty Job Christopher Moore

Christopher Moore's latest supernatural comedy has a mild mannered second hand storeowner become one of death's assistants. He's okay with that after the first little bit, until he realizes he's got to do battle with some mythological baddies who want the souls of the dead that he's collected for redistribution. It's actually a lot stranger then it sounds...which is typical of Moore's wonderfully twisted mind.

The Bonehunters Book Six of The Malazan Book Of The Fallen by Steven Erikson.

Erikson's epic ten volume series just keeps on getting better as it creeps towards it's conclusion. The Bonehunters begins the process of bringing the various threads together that have been introduced in the first five books, and creates new plot twists in the same breath. His trademark wonderful characterization and intricate plot designs are as good as ever.

Lessek's Key by Robert Scott and Jay Gordon.

The second book of their trilogy sees Robert's and Jay's characters continue their struggle to save Eldarn from the clutches of the spirit that's been controlling the world for thousands of years. Continuing where they had left off in the first book, a fine intelligent adventure story with great characters, and wonderful plot twists. One of the best stranger in a strange land series I've ever read.

A Tale Etched In Blood And Hard Black Pencil Christopher Brookmyre

Another masterpiece of social criticism wrapped in a mystery story by Scottish writer Christopher Brookmyre. This time he tackles grade school and its horrors as he flashes between a murder case in the present and the school days of all those involved in the case. Is there a clue to be found from whom they were back then to what has happened today? Or is it just a case of bad blood between old friends? A fascinating look into the psychology and politics of the playground and how it shapes who we become or what we have to do to overcome that environment.

A Short History Of Indians In Canada by Thomas King

This is a great collection of short stories by one of Canada's finest short story writers. That he also happens to be a Native Canadian means he has a whole other tradition of story telling to draw upon that we don't normally get to read. This is a great mixture of humour, pathos, and satire that offers commentary on contemporary Native and non-Native life in Canada.

Fragile Things by Neil Gaiman

Another collection of short stories, these ones run the gamut of Gaiman's stylistic repertoire. From the side splitting funny, the whimsical, the heart breaking, and the just plain fun, the stories in this collection are a pleasure. Gaiman at his finest.

Well there you go, my list of books that made this year a lot more entertaining then it would have been otherwise. I know I've probably already forgotten some, or you might not agree with some of the one's I've included. That's the beauty about lists like these, they're only one person's thoughts and don’t have to be agreed with at all.

But if you're looking for something to read, I'm sure you'll find something on this list that will make you happy. If not, then I'm even more out to lunch then I thought.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 05:24 AM | Permalink

I think I've always wanted there to be magic in the world. I'm sure that as a child I would have dreamed that there was something that could be called upon to change my life. If I could only discover it or find the right clue that would lead me to the place where it existed then everything would be perfect.

But the type of magic I was looking for and the type of magic that exists in the world have very little to do with each other. It wasn't until I was much older that I faced up to the fact that there are no magic wands we can wave to whisk us away when we wish.

Bad things happen to children, adults have to deal with their problems, and each of us is forced to bear the burden of our responsibilities. The avoidance techniques that we do have are far less wholesome than broomsticks and only delay the inevitable. But in spite of these reality checks I've managed to keep a tenacious hold on my belief in magic.

Maybe it was because of the fact that I worked in theatre for a period of time and in some ways we created magic each time we gave a performance. There's always been something about the theatre that is somewhat magical, perhaps because of it's previous association with travelling shows during the renaissance, or it's even earlier associations with the god Dionysus. Anyway what else would you call it when a person becomes someone else before your very eyes if not magic?

No matter what the reasons I am as certain of magic's existence as I am of the fact that I'm dependant on oxygen for survival. Does that make you uncomfortable to hear a supposedly rational man admit that he believes in magic? Well I can't say that I blame you, I have a fairly good idea how ridiculous that sounds. Like some new age psychobabble I 'm sure leading up to some stupid talk about guardian angles or something equally nauseating.

Fear not, it's nothing to do with guardian angles, whether you consider it new age psychobabble is another thing I guess, but that is something we'll all have to live with. Those of you who wince with embarrassment when you read this, will consider yourselves the most martyred I'm sure, but I think I've given fair warning and you've had plenty of time to turn aside so you've only yourself to blame.

However I don't think anyone really needs to worry that much because the magic I'm going to talk about is readily available to anyone with eyes and ears willing to use those senses and keep their mouth shut for a short period of time. In other words using your powers of observation not the ones for making observations.

Walk down almost any block in a residential neighbourhood and you'll see at least one or two front lawns adorned with some sort of ornamental hedge or shrubbery. As you approach from down the street, if you are paying attention, you may notice a fair amount of activity going on within and around the piece of topiary. The air is full of the small, feathered bodies of sparrows and the sound of their excited voices.

As soon as you get to within two feet of the bush it's as if something has pulled a plug. All the bird sound stops and nothing is moving. If you were to only give a causal glance, as you walked by you'd wonder where they all could have dispersed to? There's only one or two visible now.

But if you look closely you can see them all perched on the branches that shouldn't support even their weight. They are stock-still and not a sound can be heard save the occasional "peep" which is quickly hushed. Yet continue on only for a few feet and the air is once again filled with sound; a quick glance over your shoulder reveals that the action you had interrupted has continued as if it had never been interrupted.

If you were to continue to walk and head out onto a main street, you'll be grateful to see that because there are few buildings taller than four stories high that the sky is laid out for you like an expanse of ocean. Except of course no sea on this planet could be that colour blue or contain clouds that tower in quite that manner.

For just a second you see why the Hopi of the South West say the Kachina spirits live in a mountain range in the sky. It appears to be running on a diagonal over your head, magnificent piles of solid white flecked with grey. Streaming off to the side are the insubstantial veils that the sun is using to partially shield his face with today.

The unexpected sound of bus engine engaging almost pulls you back to the earth but out of the corner of your eye you see a ballet group of pigeons take flight in their tight spiral formation. Twenty, thirty, maybe even forty of them are attempting to scale the heights of the sky momentarily. But as if they are attached to a string, or are bound not to climb further, they invert the motion that took them aloft and settle back onto the roof they had been roosting on a moment before.

All the way down the street as far as you can see the same pattern is repeated as group after group respond to the flight of the one prior in line. Wave after wave crests against the lower breakwater of the sky before returning to their point of origin until all you see are black specks at the far end of your vision.

Continuing to walk you veer back away from the traffic onto another residential street and from nowhere appears a flock of starlings to settle in a tree some twenty feet from you. There is no way of knowing how many of them there in front of you, only that they blacken the tree and the sounds of their voices are a cacophony that mysteriously attracts no one else's attention.

At some unseen signal they lift off as one unit and if the pigeons were a dance troupe the starlings are a brigade on parade ground formation, so sharp and tight are their turns, and precise in their intent. This is no mere reaction flight; it is a deliberate manoeuvre that lifts the whole flock to their next feeding location or roost.

Ask yourself how can the sparrows know when to turn on and off; how do the pigeons take off into those spirals every time; and most especially how does a flock of starlings obey such precise movement commands?

In our pre rational days when we didn't look to science for every explanation, when we were dependant on the generosity of the planet's bounty for survival, we believed in the spirits of the game we hunted and that the earth beneath our feet was a living breathing entity. But in spite of our new ability to offer reasonable solutions to puzzles like those I've posed above, I can't help but wonder if we might not have been on the right track all along in our "primitive" times.

You can offer me any number of words of scientific explanation, but they won't quiet the feeling inside of me that when I watch these occurrences, I'm witnessing a type of magic that goes beyond anything a human being could hope to create. It may not be exactly what I hoped for as a child, but it does the trick now every time.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:20 AM | Permalink

Provence France is the sun kissed paradise of the south of France. Cookbook and travelogue writers have made a killing from writing about it, or even better getting their own television show set in it's environs. Its charms haven't been lost on some of the great painters either as both Van Gogh and Cézanne created some their best known masterpieces in the region.

Maybe it shouldn't be surprising to discover that it also saw some of the ancient world's bloodiest wars and clashes. Dating back to pre-empire Rome's earliest settlements outside of Italy, the conflicts between so-called barbaric Celts and civilized Romans, left the earth soaked in blood, and memories.

In the years since those earliest times other battles and other peoples have come and gone, raised monuments to their faiths and finally established permanent residency here among the olive groves of the Romans. The only invaders they need worry about now are the tourists who come to view the ruins and relics of people whose lives have all but vanished into the mists of time.

Ned Marriner is not a regular tourist on a two-week tour. He's accompanying his father, a world-renowned photographer, on his latest coffee table book shoot. At fifteen he's more grateful for the fact that he's been pulled out of school a month or so early in order to make the trip then anything else, but the of cool remoteness he strives for is sorely tested almost immediately upon arrival.

His father's first day of shooting is at the Cathedral in Aix en Provence and Ned wanders off into the interior of the chapel while his father and his crew set up. While resting in a nave he is surprised by Kate Wenger a girl of his own age studying in France on a student exchange program. Their conversation is interrupted by the sound of a metal grill being clanged into place, and investigating the sound is how they enter into a story older then the Cathedral they have met in.

The innocuous, everyday occurrence, of two awkwardly cool teenagers of the opposite sex meeting for the first time is the unlikely herald for subsequent events, but in the world of Guy Gavriel Kay's newest novel Ysabel nothing can be considered as normal anymore. Ned and Kate's world of I-Pod shuffles, mobile phones, and "Google is my midnight lover" is on a collision course with a love triangle that predates Christ.

The bald man with the knife that the two surprise leaving the underground passage of the church not only turns out not to be your average run of the mill tomb raider, their meeting triggers within Ned an awareness that begins to dissolve the barriers between him and another plane of existence.

At first it only manifests itself as an unexplained ability to know when the bald man is nearby, and to have access to information there is no way he should know. But gradually he becomes more and more in tune with the other two parts of the triangle and the endless sorrow that has been theirs to play for millennia.

For those of you familiar with Kay's earlier work, you'll notice some big differences between this book and pretty much anything that he's written before. First there's the fact that it is set primarily in our world. Only once before had our world ever entered into his books, and then only to set the stage for what was to come.

He's never, that I recall, given one character's viewpoint this much focus before. There have been central characters that we've followed around, but there have also been other perspectives of events aside from theirs that have coloured the narrative. Not only does he not do that in Ysabel he's also made the world so that is seen through the eyes of a fifteen year old male.

This is a decidedly risky thing to do, because it would be very easy to take a wrong step and jar the reader's ear sufficiently to make them lose interest in the proceedings. But Kay knows what he's doing and doesn't slip once in his creation of the character.Ned's reactions to circumstances are spot on and Kay has captured that bizarre mixture of bravado and fear that characterizes so many teenage males.

What makes this odd choice for a lead character work so well in this book is the contrast Kay is able to construct using a young person from today who takes things like text messaging computers and digital cameras for granted. To have him be forced to deal with the spirit world, particularly the spirit world that our lovers comes from, both increases the tension caused by such circumstances and makes the confusion felt by the character become more then just that of trying to sort out two worlds.

There's a point in the book when one of the spirit characters comments that a fifteen year old would have been considered a man in his time, that he could have been married and have children or even be a war leader for his tribe. In our world the same person spends the majority of his or her time rejecting responsibility while wondering why nobody takes them seriously.

As the story progresses and Ned gets drawn further and further into events the level of his responsibility increases to the point where he is the only one who is able to accomplish what needs to be done. Being cool becomes far less important as the stakes rise in until they include the fight for the survival of one of his dad's assistants. You learn a lot about yourself and your inner resources when a person's survival is dependant on your abilities.

In spite of Ned and Kate's ages this is not a book that would only interest young men and women. Neds character and the story line are developed so well that it should appeal to most people. Remember this is a fantasy story, so suspension of disbelief forms a good part of the requirement for reading it anyway, so no matter what your own beliefs are about "teenager novels" they shouldn't be relevant in these circumstances.

As is usual for Guy Gavriel Kay novel the research in this story is impeccable and the details of the history of the area are fascinating. The circumstance that he has created allows him to not only give us a history of that part of the world, but to do so without us noticing it happening. Each piece of history is like a piece of the jigsaw puzzle of the mystery the characters are trying to figure out.

That Kay has front loaded the answers to the character's questions in the book make it all the more interesting. I was too immersed in the story to bother with searching for the clues in the history that would solve the riddle, but if you wanted to you could take part in trying to solve the mystery.

Best of all as far as I'm concerned is Kay's unselfconsciousness when it comes to writing about love and what people can be driven to do by and for it. He displays his characteristic ability in those situations to make what could be potentially sentimental tripe moments of resplendent beauty.

Combined with his matter of fact attitude towards the spirit world while writing – it exists to be written about doesn't it? –and obvious love of the subject matter, this makes Ysabel one of his best works yet. It's as if like his character Ned, Kay has stepped over an invisible line and taken full responsibility for the emotions and feelings of his characters.

He exerts a tighter control then usual for him on the development of his characters so that none of the types who have appeared in the past show up again. By coming back to the world that he lives in, instead of writing about the past, Kay seems to have found a balance for previous extravagances. His work is far better, and more believable for it.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 01:02 AM | Permalink

Forty-five minutes ago the clock rolled over and it became officially December 21st, the winter solstice. Although my calendar says that December 20th was the first day of winter, I can't help but always think of the 21st as being the longest night of the year.

I realize given the inaccuracies inherent in our system of measuring the passage of time that dates jump around a bit. When your year is 365 days and a quarter long there are bound to be some variables that even a leap year can't correct. But since the difference in the length of the day on the 20th or 21st is so minimal I don't feel too badly for adhering to the date I've always associated with the event.

Now don't get me wrong, it's not that I'm about to go out and enact some archaic ritual to commemorate the event, I'll leave that to those who feel the need to do those things. It's just that I've always found this time of year to be extremely magical in a way that has nothing to do with the Christmas season.

One of the things I appreciate about living in a small city is the fact that there are very few small building to cut off my view of the sky and the ability to see large swaths of it at once. Because of this I get to experience one of the great pleasures of living in an area where there is a noticeable shift in the earth's position in terms of the sun and the quality of light.

Near the end of August is when I usually first begin to notice that the days have started to run out of steam, and the sun has started to set earlier. By the time the end of October roles around and we set the clocks back an hour, by six o'clock in the evening the sun has pretty much set.

But it's not until near the end of November that the real magic begins. As the earth has spun on it axis and taken the part of the world I live in further below the sun's line of sight the quality of our light has started to change. Not only do we receive less of it over the course of a twenty-four hour period, what we do receive comes to us on an angle such that it seems to cut across the path of the planet instead of shining right on to us.

I'm sure that people who are equal distance south of the equator to our position to the north will experience something similar. But I also think that there's something about the quality of the light in the Northern parts of the world that isn't replicated anywhere. Perhaps it's the cold air creating a thinning of the atmosphere, I don't know. All I do know is that it's one of the reason's I'd never move to a place where there's no winter.

It's the shadows that are the first indication of the change. With the sun tracking lower in the sky every day shadows are exaggerated in their elongation until they become as much part of the scenery as the object that cast them. Walk along beside a stand of trees and you are walking through them as well beside them. Or you are seeing their shadows prostrate, while your second self steps from one to the next, merging and separating, merging and separating, until you lose track of which is moving and which is stationary.

You often hear people complain about the brightness of the winter sun, what they are talking about is the sun shining off snow that has accumulated over a period of time, and been subjected to a deep freeze. These are the glass like conditions when combined with the angle of the sun that make the need for sunglasses or eye protection paramount. If you are around vast fields of snow then snow blindness can be a potential hazard. In fact winter is usually the only time that I find I'll need, or want to wear sunglasses for just that reason. Well maybe not snow blindness but the harshness of the glare at any rate.

But it's in the days leading up to the twenty first of December before too much snow has fallen and the temperature has had a chance to really dip below the freezing point too far that I'm talking about. It's those days when the sun has risen only so that he can begin to set, when it feels like it's permanent twilight, then the feeling you've entered into another world becomes really strong.

If somehow you are able to get away from the elements that distinguish the twenty-first century, traffic, buildings, and noise, to walk amidst the quiet of some trees or by the water, it feels like you've stepped out of anyone particular time. The light has been watered down enough on these days that shadows gather at the edges of everything, smoothing sharp edges into soft curves so that distinctiveness is blurred and objects seen at a distance become almost indistinguishable from their backgrounds.

I can see why earlier societies could believe this time was the end of the year as everything faded from view gradually each day earlier and earlier. The date that marked the reversal of that process, the longest night of the year when you could almost swear that the sun wasn't going to return, would be the day you celebrate the end of one year and the start of a new one.

To them it was if a new sun was being born on the midwinter day and the light would gradually start to return. It's an experience that we can still share today if we take the time to look around what is happening to the world beyond the rush of the artificial season we have created.

I personally find it much more satisfying to watch the year end in the physical world then on the calendar. In particular I enjoy the time leading up to the solstice because it's one of the moments of magic that bridge the span of years between us and those who lived on earth thousands of years earlier who watched the world do much the same things it does today

Posted by Richard Marcus at 03:16 AM | Permalink

Myths are the tales that existed long before the stories of once upon a time took place. They are the stories that explained the unexplainable and gave us the means to comprehend the world around us in terms that we're relevant to our awareness. As Christianity, Islam, Judea, Hinduism, Shinto, and Buddhism all explain the world to us today, Zeus, Odin, Thor, Isis, Ra, The Dagda, Anansi, Sky Woman, Coyote, and Bran explained, and still do for some people, the world in eons gone by.

Now they only exist as pleasant stories; quaint reminders of ancient civilizations and a means of separating our modern monotheistic culture from the primitive times of the past. But there is something about them, their means of explaining things that our religions don't dwell on, or perhaps their magical quality, that can still inspire flights of fancy.

The Myths series of books was created to celebrate that fact with authors from all over the world writing about a mythological being of their choice. The stories created are either tales associated with the god/goddess or the influence of their attributes in contemporary life. In Dream Angus author Alexander McCall Smith has taken the Celtic god of dreams and love and interwoven his story with modern tales of dreams, love, and dreams touched by love.

Dreams are the places where our hidden secrets come to life. They can be dark and fearful experiences that shake up our world leaving us agitated and afraid. The dreams that Angus leaves us with may not be the most frightening, but dealing with love as they do can make them as unsettling as any nightmare. But instead of turning this into an exercise in the macabre or some sort of psychological study, he creates a tone that carries the same bittersweet wonder and joy of the myth.

Angus is the illegitimate son of the head of the Celtic gods, The Dagda. (Referred to in this story as just plain Dagda) Like Zeus Dagda has a wandering eye for women and the river spirit Boann catches his eye one day and he proceeds to set up a successful seduction. From the moment Angus is born it is obvious that he is a gentle spirit and will be universally loved. Songbirds circle his head to serenade him to sleep as he rocks in his cradle, and the wildest hunting dog calms when in his presence.

Dagda steals Angus away from his mother when he is still an infant. Shortly after Angus comes to live with him he dreams of a day when his son will supplant him on the throne and cast him away. The following day Angus is sent to live with one of his stepbrothers as Dagda hopes that this will prevent his dream from coming to pass (We all know what happens in those instances don't we, how the thing we do to prevent something actually causes our worst fears to be realized).

Such is the gentle nature of Angus that all who meet him find they are filled with dreams of love. A good deal of the time they are dreams of love for Angus because of his nature, but he never returns their affections. But one day when he is older Angus is ensnared by a dream he has of a beautiful woman. For the longest time he wastes away, uninterested in food or drink for love of this woman.

Finally she is found, but as fate would have it she must spend alternate years as a swan. So strong is Angus' love for Caer that he himself transforms into a swan so that they can be together.

While McCall Smith is telling us these details, he is interspersing them with short stories of humans set in modern times. One of the stories details a boy whose life has a parallel path to Angus' in childhood. When his father sent Angus away, he went to live with his stepbrother who had a son a few years older then him.

The two boys became inseparable and in less you knew different, you weren't able to tell they weren’t really brothers. One night Angus had a dream, and he dreamt that his brother wasn't there any more, and it was so real that when he woke up he was nigh on inconsolable.

The story "My Brother" in set in rural Scotland in the depression of the 1930's when people were barely able to survive. Jamie idealized his older brother Davie and went everywhere with him if possible. He believed in all his heart that they would be together for the rest of their lives; he even imagined a time after their parents had died and they would share the house they grew up in.

So he is devastated when his brother receives an invitation to go to Canada to live with a cousin in Nova Scotia. The night after he finds out that his brother will be leaving he tries to convince Davie to let him come too. Instead of agreeing Davie tells Jamie to ask "Dream Angus" to bring him dreams of him in Canada. That night Jamie dreams of dark trees and white snow and knows it's Canada.

Dream Angus can help Jamie because he knows about the love between brothers and how much it hurts to lose that bond. In that first night he sends him a promise in the shape of a dream that he will keep them connected, even if only through their dreams. In the dream world we can have just as powerful feelings as we have in the waking world and Jamie can love his brother with as much intensity as he wants asleep and never have to worry about losing him.

The stories that run in our world's time have both literal and fantastical connections to the life of Angus. McCall Smith has woven elements of the nature of the god into the stories in a way that they reflect the spirit of gentleness and love that are the embodiment of Angus. When the young lady in "Is There A Place For Pigs There?" dreams about loving the simple young man who tends the pigs in the science lab where she works she is at first surprised at herself. But she also knows for certain that he is the one for her.

The way in which the scene is depicted is simple enough to be honest and unsentimental, but it's that very simplicity that makes it so magical. She doesn't tear her hair in fits of passion or analysis her dream of love to pieces. It is just a fact, like the colour of her eyes is a fact, making it all the more wondrous.

Each of the stories in this book tells the myth of Angus whether it's set in ancient Ireland and Scotland or in contemporary times. By imbuing the stories of our time with the gentleness of tone that he uses for the telling of the myth, and by being as factual in the world of the myth as he is in our time Alexander McCall Smith bridges the two worlds beautifully.

A story like this could have easily crossed the line over into sentimentality, but instead Smith has managed to create a world where the bittersweet of dreams is what guides our reality. Dreams of love are both a comfort and a pain, but if they are listened to carefully and believed, the voice of Angus can be heard whispering in our ear.

Alexander McCall Smith's Dream Angus is published by Knoff Canada a division of Random House Canada and you can pick up a copy at their web site, other online retailers or your local bookstore. It's a lovely way to spend a dreamy evening or afternoon when reality is just a little too much to bear.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 02:28 AM | Permalink

I'm not a big fan of the large benefit concerts for causes; multi-million dollar celebrities playing a couple of songs each for throngs of people who may or may not have any idea of why the music is being played. From Live Aid in 1985 to its sequel last year I've taken a pretty jaundiced view of it all.

Maybe it's because, no matter what platitudes issue from the stage, most of the people involved are so far removed from the reality that faces the people for whom the concert is being held that they can't even begin to understand it. They live in a world of mobile phones, personal assistants, faxes, and other goods and services whose value could easily supply clean water for millions of people.

But what I found most troubling about any of these concerts was the "one off" feeling they always seem to leave in their wake. There is this incredible build up of publicity leading up to the concert concerning the cause and who will be appearing, but two days latter nobody's talking about it anymore. We don't even know how much if any money was raised and what happened to it.

If the concerts are met to breed awareness how many people have gone home and pushed their governments to increase the amount of their GNP (Gross National Product) they give towards the reduction of world poverty? How many of them balk when they find out that it might come out of their pockets via an increase in taxes or an increase in how much they might have to pay for gasoline or some other thing they find they can't live without.

Maybe the first Live Aid concert was successful in raising money for famine relief in that year, but it hasn't changed the conditions that caused the famine or the refugee problems in the first place. War still plagues the Sub-Sahara and still displaces people. Women, children and men are still dying of starvation on a daily basis and aid workers are fighting a continual losing battle against disease. And that's only one place in the world where this situation exists.

In May of 2004 Quincy Jones organized the We Are The Future benefit concert in Rome Italy with the intent of it being a beginning not a one off thing. Working with The Glocal Forum a Non Governmental Organization based out of Italy, the proceeds from the concert through broadcast rights, and DVD sales will help to raise funds to build and maintain We Are The Future Child Centres.

The Centres will be located in the places they are needed most, cities and towns that have been affected by war where the populations are doing their best to recover but need outside aid. Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Iraq, the border towns of Israel and Palestine, are only a few of the afflicted areas that are in need.

An event that was organized to run in tandem with the concert was a meeting of mayors from small cities and towns through out those regions. At one point in the concert the proceedings were interrupted to bring the mayors of Rome, Jerusalem, and two or three of the border towns on either side of the West Bank to shake hands. The sight of these men, who we view as enemies, clasping hands together in agreement on anything at all, on stage, no matter if it was only purely symbolic, had more impact for me then anything Live Aid or its sequels ever did.

Musically speaking the event was far more international in flavour then these events usually are. Unfortunately the line-up lacked any really big mainstream stars from the United States or Great Britain, which, combined with their very inclusive attitude probably causing them political problems, prevented them from selling the broadcast rights in North America save for taped excerpts on MTV.

Which is a real pity, because people missed out on one of the most diverse line-ups for this type of show then I've seen in a long time. From the opening number featuring Angelique Kidjo and the Soundz Of South Afrika Choir singing "Afrika" all the way through to the finale of Carlos Santana joined by Mexican singer Fher and the house band singing a medley of "Oye Como Val El Pito and Sunshine Of Your Love" the music was from all over the world.

If you've never seen the British dance/music/anarchy ensemble Stomp, then their piece "Poles and Bins" will take your breath away. Creating rhythms with the poles and trash bins of the title they are part dance, part gymnastics, and part death defying feats with trashcan lids. Absolutely spellbinding.

More sedate, but equally mesmerizing was the work of Iraqi singer Kazem Al Sahir with his song "Oh Allah, Let It Be" While it starts off sounding like a traditional Arab song, it evolves into a world beat sound that's become very familiar, but in this case works really well. Near the end of the song Karina Pasian, a young woman signer from the Dominican Republic, joins him. At the age of twelve she has more poise and talent than many performers three times her age.

Karina makes a second appearance latter in the program in a duet with Italian tenor Andrea Bocelli making the best of a fairly schmaltzy song called "Prayer". Just prior to them two American singers had done the same song and had really chewed the scenery in an attempt to sound genuine and sincere. Pasian and Bocelli, by simply standing and singing with grace, are able to make far more of an impact without the histrionics.

The one big star of the night Carlos Santana ends the concert, and perhaps gives a clue in his opening remarks why this event was not widely publicized in North America. Indicating the people on stage behind him he says, " We are the other America, not the Bush America".

It was the only overt political statement throughout the whole show of that flavour, but it was obvious from the start that the ideals being expressed by those involved with the production were not in alignment with the current American administration's view of the world, so it really wasn't much of a surprise to hear that view expressed. It also wasn't much of a surprise that Carlos Santana is still one of the premier live performers around today.

He has such an infectious spirit that by the end of his set he had the members of the orchestra on stage that were no longer performing up and dancing in their seats. I can honestly say I've never seen that before during a concert.

As this was being broadcast live on Italian television and Al Jazeera the sound quality and picture quality are wonderful on the DVD The sound is available in DTS, 5.1 Surround, and regular stereo so it can played through almost any system out there. The special features include some rather lame interviews conducted by Italian MTV V-Jays who are even blanker than their American counterparts.

But the documentary on how the show came together is quite interesting because it's where you find out about how the show's impact will be felt after it's over, and it provides the footage of the historic handshake between the mayors. I think what I liked about the documentary was that it managed to avoid most of the self-aggrandisement that usually accompanies these making of features.

Of course it can't be avoided entirely but to a large extent we hear more about the work that's being attempted then about the "great thing" they are doing. It makes for a welcome change in these days of ego stroking and backslapping among stars and celebrities.

But that is the main difference between We Are The Future and other events like it all the way around. For a change the people seem committed to something beyond making sure all the stars are properly pampered and catered too. There is an undercurrent that runs through the whole DVD of genuine concern and maybe a little desperation too. As Quincy Jones said in his welcoming speech "The world's in quite a mess right now… and standing back and doing nothing is no longer an option"

Lets hope that We Are The Future is able to live up to its promise, and that their work continues today. Buying the disc is not only an investment in good music, but also an investment in the world's future generations. Two pretty good reason to shell out some money any time of the year.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 01:26 AM | Permalink

When it comes to music I can still appreciate a good surprise. Most of the time I'm quite content with my life being fairly uneventful, when the majority of surprises in the past have been unpleasant you gain an appreciation for anything resembling mundane. But with an overwhelming amount of music these days being predictable to the point of nausea almost anything even a little bit surprising is like a breath of fresh air.

Although I had already heard the title track of Candye Kane's 2005 release White Trash Girl and enjoyed it immensely, listening to the entire album was an eye opener. I already knew that she was more then capable of singing big and brassy blues' tunes but what I hadn't foreseen was the diversity of song styling she was capable of rendering and her refreshing attitude towards life.

If you go to her website or buy her disc you can find out about her life in detail, but in a nutshell she's managed to raise two children on her own, find the courage to risk following her dreams, and retain a healthy understanding and respect for who she is and where she came from. If half the so-called celebrities who claim to be musicians had an iota of the of this woman's integrity they might have enough respect for themselves and their music to be more than cogs in a marketing director's wheels.

Her music reflects both her honesty about who she is, and her amazing ability to laugh at herself while never once diminishing herself as a person. From the title track "White Trash Girl', where she laughs at all the stereotypes about poor single women, her admonishment to her fellow women to make the best of their situations and the gifts they were given in "Work What You Got", to her cover of Bull Moose Jackson's "Big Fat Mamas are Back In Style" where she glories in the fact that she's definitely not a petite.

But what I found most impressive about her, and which was the pleasant surprise, was the variety of music she not only performs, but also has the ability to write. She sites Jerry Lee Lewis as one of her old favourites, so "Work What You Got" being reminiscent of "Great Balls Of Fire" isn't too surprising, though her masterful delivery and timing during the song make it a whole lot of fun. It's her ability to do the non-traditional blues/rock and roll song that makes her disc much more interesting then the average disc of this type.

"It Must Be Love" is a great example of her ability to do Big-Band/Show tune type music with more panache and style then I've heard in ages. From the swing of the music, the horn section, and right down to the call and response of the background chorus of male singers, it sounds like it was written in another era. But she also makes it work as a contemporary piece with the lyrical content and the power of her personality.

For those types of songs to work the singer has to be able to "sell" it to the audience. They involve a lot more work then just standing up and making sure you sing in tune and on key. A singer has to be willing to perform the song like she was acting a role on stage, (hence the term "show tune" even if they aren't associated with a play), in order for it to work. To be able to carry a tune like that off as Candye does is an amazing in of itself. The fact that she also wrote the lyrics to work with the music is even more of an accomplishment.

It's an unfortunate reality that most ballads or slow songs today are ruined by the lack of sincerity in the performer's presentation. They swoop their voices up and down the scales with no real attention to what their doing other then trying to distract the audience with vocal pyrotechnics. On "I Could Fall For You" Candye shows them how it should be done, worrying more about the content of the song and ensuring the lyrics are sung with genuine feeling when it matters instead of beating them to death with a stick for the length and breadth of the song.

Of course she can also cut loose with the best of them, and on her barrelhouse type numbers like "Misunderstood" or her cover of Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller's "I Wanna Be More" it's impossible not to get caught up in her enthusiasm for the music and the song. Speaking of covers, she takes the old John Sebastian tune "What A Day For A Daydream" and makes it her own while preserving the original whimsy.

It's not often that we get performers anymore who have the combination of ability and strength of personality to carry off the types of songs and music that Candye Kane performs. Pick up a copy of White Trash Girl and be pleasantly surprised by what you hear, and how much you enjoy it. There's a lot more to this girl than just one dimension of the blues.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:37 AM | Permalink

In spite of all the transformations that the Science Fiction novel has undergone since it's early days of Rockets, Aliens, and interplanetary space travel, one of the original sub-genres has managed to come down through the years relatively intact. Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers may not have been the first of the interplanetary war stories, but it's influence on subsequent books of a similar kind can't be underestimated.

Not only did it set the standard for "space military" novels, it also served as a catalyst for books that refuted his view of the noble warrior. The Forever War by Joe Haldeman from the early 1970's was as much a reaction to Viet Nam as it was to Starship Troopers but it was one of the first overtly anti –war Science Fiction books where the main characters are soldiers,

Haldeman's story prompted a revision in the way the space-war novel was written, turning the characters into real people instead of clichés from the Cold War era. The lines between them and us were blurred and the morality of war was more openly questioned. Squads of homogenous humans have been replaced by multi species confederations that has allowed authors to have fun with creating character traits both amusing and alarming to the humans in their novels.

The sign of a good author is how matter of fact he or she can make the interspecies relationships. If we can be dropped into the story and feel like we've walked in on the middle of a conversation it's that much easier for the reader to get to know the characters without the distractions of species differences. In turn this allows the camaraderie in a unit of soldiers, so important to these types of books, to be developed quickly, easily, and with believability.

Tanya Huff has proven in her previous books that she is no slouch when it comes to creating unique, interesting, and believable characters. From werewolves and vampires, to princesses, wizards, and adventurers, she's peopled the pages of enough books, set in a variety of worlds to know her way around all the obstacles a space war story can offer.

The fact that Tanya's father was in the Canadian Navy and she served in the Navel reserve means that she is familiar enough with the reality of military life to be able to write about it with an air of authenticity. If anyone has any doubts about her ability to write in this genre they will be dispelled by picking up an omnibus edition of Valor's Choice and The Better Part Of Valor just released under the title of A Confederation Of Valor.

Staff – Sergeant Torin Kerr is everything a good Sergeant should be. Mother hen to her troop and baby sitter to young commissioned officers she does all that Sergeants have been doing probably since Roman times; know everything and be prepared to deal with everything else. Unfortunately for her, in both books, she has to deal with every soldier's worst nightmare, a two star general who's never seen action and wants a third star.

In Valor's Choice that involves being part of the diplomatic mission trying to convince a new species to join the Confederation side against the enemy, while in The Better Part Of Valor it involves being part of a team investigating a mysterious, seemingly empty, ship found floating near the border of known space. Of course, after being asked by the aforementioned general in advance of the first mission, what could go wrong, everything did.

But that was still no reason to be stupid enough to call a two star general a bastard to his face while spoiling his attempt for historical immortality and ensuring his nose was broken and eyes blackened. Not that it was her fist that did the breaking, but she did guide a large prehensile tail into doing the job for her.

Probably any one of the three would have been sufficient to engrave her on his memory, so she really shouldn't have been surprised when he picked her to be the ranking NCO (non commissioned officer) for the reconnaissance mission involving the mysterious space ship in The Better Part Of Valor. Although no one involved used any famous last words in the second mission, it still turned into something that stretched her abilities and ingenuity to the maximum.

As is usual for a Tanya Huff novel both stories are well written and well paced. While activity never slows to crawl – an inactive Marine is a bored Marine, and a bored Marine is asking for trouble – she has the good sense to modulate the speed of the action. When Kerr and her platoon come under attack in Valor's Choice Huff captures the chaos of a flurry of combat activity wonderfully, and uses the downtime between assaults to give us and the Marines a breather, continue to develop the story, and ratchet the tension up another level.

Although the small group of heroic soldiers facing numerous enemies is almost clichéd, it really depends on how well the author is able to depict the situation for it to be effective or not. In the case of Valor's Choice Huff has created characters who we like and whose company we enjoy. By having to experience them coming under heavy fire after we have spent the best portion of a book with them, she has created a situation where we are genuinely concerned for their welfare. In some small way we experience a little of the camaraderie that exists between such a group.

In the The Better Part Of Valor the circumstances are different, as Sergeant Kerr must take individuals from various units and form them into a working team for the mission. The easiest way for a group of people to come together is to unite against a common enemy and in this case it is the Captain who has been given the assignment of leading their mission.

His desire for publicity and to appear heroic has ensured the deaths of far too many soldiers for any foot soldier to like him. When they find out that one of the purposes of this mission is to add more lustre to his public image in order to ensure a political promotion for him, it only makes the team even unhappier with him being in charge.

The ship that they have been sent to investigate turns out to be investigating them. First of all it traps them on board by destroying the shuttlecraft that carried them there and then it took out the air lock they had parked at. In order for them to leave the ship they have to make their way through it to another air lock nearly five kilometres from their initial position.

That would be difficult enough in the first place as they have to carry wounded (including the captain who took a head injury and is thankfully unconscious) and shepherd civilian scientists, two reporters, and the salvage operator who discovered the ship and has come along to ensure nobody messes with his claim. But unlike tests set for white rats by humans where the maze is the only difficulty, Kerr and her group find that a platoon of "Others" are in similar circumstances.

As Torin bitterly remarks to herself at one point, if it was a movie this would be the moment the two opposing sides joined forces to combat against the mutual enemy. But since the team is under fire from snipers at the moment she knows there's not much chance of that happening.

That's what makes both these novels so successful. Huff's willingness to not be satisfied with just writing a really good space war story, but her ability to poke fun of the conventions and stereotypes of the genres, as she makes free use of some of them herself. Having one character openly complain that they might as well paint a target on another character, because he's such a friendly, likable guy whose always smiling, and they're the ones who always get killed, is one of the better pokes at convention.

Even the sergeant isn't immune to that, she has had herself surgically augmented so she can arch one eyebrow to enhance a look of withering scorn. It's those little things that run throughout both books in this omnibus that make them so much better then the average war story.

Tanya Huff is not your typical hard science fiction writer either; aside from these two books the rest of her writings has been either more fantastical or horror. Perhaps it's that sensibility that makes the tone of these books that slight bit off centre that makes them far more appealing then your run of the mill war story. Although both novels make no apologies for being very sympathetic to the military, they also make no concessions to that genre either.

The characters live in a world where sexuality and gender is not an issue; one species is described as having invented flavoured massage oil before the wheel, but neither is it all one big happy brother hood of species. The humans still have a hard time with the fact that one of their allies looks like a giant spider and there reaction on seeing them of thinking "get it off, get it off" is probably never going to change.

But those are the elements that make Tanya Huff a cut above most other writers to begin with, and it is what elevates the two novels contained in A Confederation Of Valor beyond the usual for what we'd expect in a space war story. If you like hard science fiction, but have grown tired of the attitudes and clichés that accompany it this is the perfect antidote.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 10:07 AM | Permalink

It's disconcerting to find out that no matter how liberal you consider yourself that occasionally you can find yourself guilty of stereotyping. It is said that awareness is the first step towards overcoming a character flaw and acceptance makes the task of doing so that much easier. So I guess I need to acknowledge a debt of gratitude to the two CD set Spirit Rising, Volumes I & II .

Prior to listening to these recordings I had succumbed to the notion that all Black gospel music was spiritually uplifting, musically exciting, and filled with genuine passion. So firmly did I believe this that all you needed do was mention the names of groups like Five Blind Boys of Alabama, or The Staple Singers to cause shivers to run up and down my spine.

Somehow or other I formed the impression that all Black gospel singers were like Mahalia Jackson, Al Green, Mavis Staples, or Paul Robeson. That man or woman their faith was so intense that they sang for the sheer joy and anguish of their belief. Listening to these people and others led me to reach the conclusion that Black gospel music could always appeal to anyone no matter what their faith, in the same way that any truly inspired work of art can touch your spirit whether or not you share the artist's belief.

Well I'm ashamed to say that's what I believed. I was too narrow minded to think it was possible for Black gospel music to be just as insipid and uninspired as anything Pat or Debbie Boone could come up with. But thanks to the two discs of Spirit Rising my eyes have been opened. Just because it's Black people singing gospel music doesn't guarantee that it's going to be wonderful.

Now I'm not saying that the performers on the Spirit Rising discs aren't talented or skilled, because they are. I'm not saying that the music isn't funky and polished, with a good beat and designed to make you move your feet, because it is. In fact pretty much every number included on the two discs is beautifully produced and expertly presented with fine musicianship and great singing.

That to me is the problem with the music on the disc; it's almost antiseptic in its cleanliness. In spite of all their demonstrative behaviour, their declamations of love for Jesus, and their proclamations of faith, there seems to be little or no real emotion behind any of it, none of the raw passion that I've come to expect from Black gospel music. Even the audience responses sound contrived, more like the studio audience for a daytime talk show than a roomful of the faithful.

When I listen to gospel music I'm not listening to the "message", but the manner in which it is delivered. As in any type of message song, the delivery needs to very compelling in order to first grab the listener's attention and then be able to hold it for the length of the song. The musicians, the lead, vocalist, and in the case of a lot of gospel music, the choir all need to be doing their job properly in order for the delivery to do both of those tasks.

The material on Spirit Rising Volumes I & II just wasn't given the delivery necessary to sustain my interest through out any of the numbers save for one track. "How I Got Over" is sung by Mahalia Jackson and her performance was nothing short of brilliant. Her voice is a great example of control and of shaping a song through volume, passion, and tempo.

Instead of, like so many others on the disc, starting at almost top volume and leaving no room to build to a climax if the song requires it. Mahalia knows that there is more to expressing passion than just volume and speed. A performer needs to know how to modulate what she or he does to best bring out a song's message.

Although she is only accompanied by a piano, her performance is far more compelling than that of anyone else on the disc. There is nothing elaborate or fancy about her performance, but the passion and emotion that can be heard in her voice demands our complete attention for the whole time she is singing. In some ways I think the producers of the album would have been better off leaving Mahalia off the disc as she only serves to emphasise what the other performers lack.

Spirit Rising Volume I & II was a major disappointment for me musically as it did not live up to the expectations I had developed regarding black gospel music. It did help me out personally though as I was able to rid myself of belief in the stereotype that Black gospel music is always passionate and full of the spirit of creation. Too many of the songs on these discs have the sound of top forty schmaltz for that generalization to ever be true again. Pity.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 09:00 AM | Permalink

As a lot of you might know I've been shopping a manuscript around for a while now. I've written about the difficulties involved in finding a publisher who is willing to even look at a previously unpublished author, especially one without representation. Judging by their reactions one would think that the market is flooded with books and there just isn't the audience for all that's being produced.

The reality is that the costs involved in publishing a book these days are so prohibitive that publishers aren't willing to take a risk on anything even slightly different from the mainstream. But publishers have no one to blame but themselves for the increased costs involved in getting a book out to the reading audience

First there's the ridiculous amounts of money they are paying to authors in the form of advances to the tune of millions of dollars. Then there is the amount of money they have to spend on publicity in the hopes of selling enough books to recoup that huge advance. If they're very lucky they might get a small piece of the movie money if the book makes it to the big screen, but that can sometimes be years after the book's publication so it's not an immediate return.

Of course they also compound the expense involved by not doing due diligence on their authors as well as they could. It's quite the costly when you end up with thousands of copies of a book that you didn't happen to notice the author copied word for word from a previously published work.

Heck that's probably even more expensive then having to run off a second edition of a work so you can insert the words "a Novel" into the title. You only have to do that when you try to cut costs by not doing some simple fact checking, and the autobiography you published turns out to more of an original piece of fiction then the first book.

In the fall of 2005 notices started appearing on the submission guidelines web pages of almost every major publisher in North America and Britain. We are no longer accepting unsolicited manuscripts unless through a reputable agent. It was almost word for word the same at each of them as if they had taken a meeting and decided they would all run the same announcement on the same day.

They blamed it on being inundated by so many bad unsolicited manuscripts from bloggers, who thought the world wanted to hear their life stories. They needed to set up another screening system because they couldn't cope with the amount being submitted. Having read some of the dreck that passed for writing on people's blogs, I admit that at first I could see some veracity in this claim.. But recently I've been having second thoughts about that assertion and have started wondering if there wasn't more to it then they've been claiming.

First of all there is the amazing coincidence of all those publishers from Orion in England to Random House in the Untied States deciding simultaneously to stop accepting manuscripts directly from authors. Did they all just happen to wake up on the same morning and call their web designers to request an addition to their web site? Or was this a deliberate and coordinated move to scale back publishing across the board?

If I were a cynical man I would say that it almost sounds like the heads of each of the major publishing houses and their flunkies got together at some previously arranged neutral site. Like a group of Mafia Dons, who would just as soon kill each other as talk, forced to deal with a common enemy they gathered to protect their turfs.

Promises were made and vows were exchanged, and the next day the announcement appears on all the web sites. America's, and some of Britain's, publishers are no longer open for new business unless accompanied by a recommendation from an agent we know on a first name basis. Even then, if the book won't play on Oprah, the chances of it being published are slim.

What amazes me is how they seem to have forgotten, or even worse not noticed, the potential audience beyond the confines of our continent and the British Isles. American companies could perhaps be excused on the grounds of ignorance, but for the Brits to forget about India and the rest of the Commonwealth countries (the countries that were formally colonies of England) is just silly. They were the ones who forced English down their throats in the first place for heaven's sake!

India has probably one of the largest, educated English speaking populations in the world right now. Its economy is booming and more and more of her people have the money to spend on books and other forms of leisure time activities. How hard would it be for an imprint to reach an agreement with an Indian press and start delivering titles for publication?

But with the exception of Penguin India no one seems to be doing anything much to take specific advantage of the market. Even Penguin only treats India like another foreign country and gives preference to American publications. What this means is that while Penguin can dump as many American published titles as it wants onto the Indian market, it only exports a few Indian published titles to the States.

While this does provide a market for whatever is being published in the States it does nothing to properly develop the Indian market. Penguin needs to remind itself that if it wants the world to know more than then the name of one or two authors from India it needs to start treating it with the respect it deserves as one of the largest English speaking markets in the world right now.

That means that her authors should be given the same treatment as their American counterparts and not be limited in the number of titles they are allowed to export to the American market. The best way to develop a solid audience base is to ensure that the authors of the home country are able to thrive. Keep their names in the public eye as much as possible as a reminder that Indian writers are just as important as American or British.

If American publishers would open their eyes to the fact that English is spoken in more then a few countries around the world these days they might find their sales figures rising. Sign a couple of India authors and publish them simultaneously in India and the United States. It might take a while for sales to develop in the United States, but that will be compensated for by sales in India.

At the encouragement of a friend of mine in India I sent my manuscript to Penguin India for consideration, I haven't heard anything back from them yet, but that doesn't bother me. When they publish the book I expect that it will be available in Canada because that's where I'm from, as well as India, but I doubt it will be for sale in the United States.

It used to be that without the American market your book couldn't really sell enough to make you much money. But times have changed and America is not the only large English speaking market anymore. American publishers need to remember that if they want their business to continue to grow. Otherwise they could find themselves being left behind and no longer as important as they think they are.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:07 AM | Permalink

Maybe it's the same sort of morbid fascination that causes people to slow their cars down as they drive by an accident scene. I don't know, but that's as good as guess as any to explain my interest whenever Statistics Canada releases their latest figures on the distribution of wealth in Canada.

These aren't annual reports, and in fact they don't seem to be released with any regard to patterns or regularity, they are more along the lines of a mechanic giving a car a 10,000 mile kick of the tires then a regular tune up. They don't usually enter the world of predicting how the motor will turn over in the future, but they sure give you a good idea of what your present circumstances are and how that compares to past performance.

I know before I even read one of these things my place in the bottom quarter of the chart isn't going to have changed from decade to decade. I never was in what would be called a high income profession before going off work, and now that I'm on a fixed income there's no way I'm going to be climbing the ladder to a higher rung.

What these reports are good for is too giving an overview of how evenly distributed our so-called economic boom is spread across the population at large, and what changes if any have taken place over the years. The study, "Revisiting Wealth Inequity" that was released yesterday, was part of an overall report, Perspectives On Labour And Income published in the Statistics Canada publication The Daily.

Now usually I content myself with just reading the highlights of these reports as they are reported in the press, but this year I was curious enough about it to check out the link above. I was happy to find that the authors of the report René Morissette and Xuelin Zhang didn't subscribe to the theory that unintelligibility equates to proof of intelligence and had written the report in clear and straightforward language.

While the purpose was to compare the dispersal of wealth among Canadians, and analyse how it broke down along various criteria over the past three decades, it also provided other interesting information that I hadn't considered. For example, how do you define wealth? We all have an idea of what it means in our heads, visions of splendid houses and fancy this and fancy that.

But for a report like this you need something a little more concrete; a formula that allows you to come up with an absolute figure. In this case it's a simple matter of deducting one's total debts from one's total assets and the resulting figure equals a person's true wealth. Items that are excluded from the assets side of the ledger because of either their depreciative qualities or the fact that they had been excluded from one year's survey were personal contents of a residence and income from private employee pension plans.

While I can see that the latter could play a significant role if it were factored into somebody's assets, because that information hadn't been collected in 1984, the first year used in the study for comparison purposes, it had to be omitted from the other two years for the sake of balance.

From personal experience the only way I could see private pension plans changing the results would be to further increase the gap between the lowest and the highest brackets. Usually the higher your income the greater the chance of having a high return private pension plan.

The first thing the report tells us (all figures have been adjusted for inflation) is that from 1984 to 2005 the median wealth of Canadians rose by 26%. Now that sounds promising until you read the but, which says that for the top 20% of families the median rose from $336,000 in 1984 to 551,000 in 2005, but for the bottom 20% the median which had been zero in 1984 had fallen to (-$1,000) by 2005.

Unfortunately these figures are borne out by the even more depressing details of how the distribution of wealth has changed in the same time period. In 1984 the top 10% of families owned 52% of the wealth in Canada, while the lower 50% controlled only 5%. (This table provides a complete breakdown of the distribution of wealth over the periods in question) By 2005 the upper 10% had increased their share to 58% while the lower 90% either remained the same or dropped.

So although the average wealth had increased over the course of time it was simply a matter of the rich getting richer. Unfortunately it was also a matter of more people becoming poorer. The percentage of people with zero or negative wealth increased from 18% in 1984 having zero wealth to 24% in 2005 and 11% being in the negative to 14% in the same period.

The report also breaks down the results even further by age and gender. These statistics substantiate quite a few commonly held beliefs: young people aged 24 to 35 saw their median wealth drop by 50% in the period covered by the study. Those in the next age bracket, 35 –54, who had a university degree saw their income rise by 39%. (By thirty-five most former university graduates would have paid off their student loans, which until that time would have obviously affected their total wealth)

Those without a degree were in the same boat as the people in the lower age bracket. If that isn't proof of the difference a degree can have on your earning power and your ability to generate sufficient income to accumulate real assets I don't know what is. It's also a pretty strong argument in favour of ensuring universal access to higher education through grants and loans.

If we limit higher education to those who already have sufficient wealth to pay for their children's education than we are ensuring that this financial disparity will continue, and only increase with time. As fewer people are able to attend post-secondary school, the fewer people who accumulate sufficient wealth to send their children to school, and so on. It's pretty hard to argue with numbers that show an almost 90% disparity in wealth between university and non university graduates in the same age range when discussing the merits of ensuring everybody capable and wanting it receive a post secondary education. It may not guarantee a better standing of living but it sure doesn't hurt.

This study also offers proof, for those who still need it, of the difficulties faced by a single woman. A woman, even if not a single mother, on her own is the most financially vulnerable individual in society. Over 40% of them are low income and have insufficient wealth to remove themselves from those circumstances. In other words they have no disposable assets that would allow them to change their situation.

With so many single women falling into the low-income category is it any wonder that there are still so many concerns about women not receiving equal pay as men? It also substantiates the claims that more day care spaces are needed to help single women with families get meaningful employment. Offering them $100 a moth towards paying for day care as the Conservative Party has done with their Day Care program is as insulting as it is useless. This is especially true as it comes in the form of a non-refundable tax credit that is only of use if you have a high enough taxable income to warrant using it and don't really need it.

In the opening preamble to the study the authors state that wealth allows us access to economic resources in times of need. It also allows the possessor the freedom to make choices on how they are going to live their lives. With sufficient wealth you can take early retirement, start your own business, and generally buy your freedom.

But for about 85% of the population few of those opportunities exist, and for almost 40% the idea is so far from reality they can barely even dream about it. While we are fed the myth as young people that anybody can grow up to be successful and wealthy, the statistics of the last twenty-one years dispute that idea. Since 1984 until present the top ten percent of the population have increased their grip on their share of the wealth from 52% to 58%. That may not sound like much, but remember that factors in inflation and population growth, so it is significantly larger then it appears at first glance.

I have no problem with people accumulating personal wealth, there has to be some reward for giving up the best years of your life. What I do have a problem with is the fact that more and more of the wealth is ending up in the hands of fewer and fewer people. There is something decidedly unfair about the fact that too many people at the end of the day are going to end up with nothing to show for their labour.

We need to ensure that there are sufficient safe guards in place to guarantee everyone's peace of mind that even without financial means they will not be denied opportunities for education, assistance with day care, and other essential services that only money can buy. Then maybe the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest won't matter as much.

Until that time don't let anyone tell you we live in an equal opportunity society – one only needs to look at the numbers to see how wrong that is. Like the old Woody Guthrie song says "If you ain't got the Do Re Me boy, if you ain't got the Do Re Me, It doesn't matter who you are, you won't get very far, if you ain't got the Do Re Me".

Posted by Richard Marcus at 07:13 AM | Permalink

I don't know about you, but normally when I hear about a government being taken to court for not obeying the laws of the land, it's not usually while they are still in power. But that's what's happening to Prime Minister Steven Harper's Conservative Party of Canada government.

I'm not talking about some nuisance suit or personal vendetta brought about by a vindictive ex politician with an axe to grind. This is a genuine suit aimed at forcing the government to live up to the letter of the law when it comes to the protection of Scientists warn the summer ice pack could vanish from the Arctic by the year 2040. At the same time the winter ice would be reduced from its current ten-foot thickness to three feet.

The impact this would have upon wildlife and the environment in not only the Arctic but the rest of North America as well is almost too severe to imagine. Already we are hearing reports of polar bears starving to death due to their inability to hunt during the summer season because of the thinning ice pack. One can imagine only too well what will happen to their population in the far North if the predictions for the next thirty years follow the patterns predicted by these scientists.

Given these circumstances and the others around the world, protection of habitant becomes more and more essential not just as a means for specific species preservation, but as a means of ensuring environmental integrity. Knowing all this it makes the government not complying with the act even more negligent.

They don't even deny the fact that of the past thirty recovery plans for endangered species, only five have included habitat protection, and three of those were in already protected areas. Their excuse that there are many interested parties in the land doesn't wash at all.

In fact I would think the fact that so people have "vested interests" in what's done with the land should be a clue to how necessary it is to supply the designation of critical habitat to an area. If so many people have a "vested interest" it means someone is going to want to do something with the land. If they are allowed the animal who was supposed to have been protected, will have far less chance at recovery because of the degradation of their environment.

I remember reading an interview with the late Gerald Durrell, the British Naturalist and Conservationist. In it he was talking about how governments pay lip service to the idea of endangered species preservation with laws that are meaningless. Unless they were prepared to ensure the survival of habitat as part of the law, the paper they are written would best off be used in an outhouse.

There have been many times when I've disagreed with various government policy decisions, and I consider that par for the course. But when a government enacts legislation that makes them look good on paper (and in the papers) that doesn't really do anything it's an entirely different matter. It means they don't have the integrity or the balls to stand up for their own beliefs, and feel compelled to sneak around behind everyone's back.

We aren't the only inhabitants of this world, we share it with numerous other creatures and plants. But we use up a disproportionate amount of space and energy compared to our neighbours. Only occasionally do they intrude upon us and that's usually only if we've built right on top of their homes, or in their territory, but they are the ones who either learn to adjust or move.

Don't you think it would be nice if on occasion we humans returned that favour, and left their homes alone so that they could get on with the business of living without having to worry about being shot, or dying from the drinking water?

Canada is one of the few countries in the world that has an endangered species program if properly implemented would allow an animal or plant under threat of extinction the opportunity to recover. Unfortunately our government doesn’t seem to want to live up to their obligation when it comes to this act and would be perfectly content with never protecting another square inch of habitat.

They are the loudest complainers when it comes to the courts of Canada "ruling the country instead of the legislature", but if they ever learned how to obey the laws of the country, or understand the constitution that wouldn't be such a problem. When the courts up hold the law of the land one more time and find against the government, maybe Steven Harper and the Conservatives will finally learn the difference between right and wrong.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 09:32 AM | Permalink

When do you think people are going to learn? How many times are they going to try and sell, or develop land that is claimed under treaty rights by a First Nations tribe. You'd have thought they'd have learnt from the mess that's happening in Caledonia in South Western Ontario where the Six Nations Reserve has set up a blockade around a housing development's construction site.

A report in the December issue of The Mohawk Nation Drummer tells how the town of Deseronto is doing just that. Located in Eastern Ontario, bordering the Tyendinaga Mohawk reserve, they are trying to illegally develop treaty land. Eight hundred and twenty-seven acres of land on the eastern edge of the reserve was illegally removed from the possession of the Mohawks in 1837. The Mohawks at the time had leased it to one man, who then left the land as an inheritance to his grandson. The government at the time illegally gave John Cullbertson, the grandson, a crown grant for the land.

In 1995 the Tyendinaga Band Council submitted a claim for the return of the land, which was upheld by the Department of Justice who agreed the land had never been surrendered nor had any compensation been awarded the Mohawks at the time. It was agreed a settlement would be negotiated with the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs in the year 2003. The Mohawks are still waiting.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 that stipulated all lands occupied by the First Nations people could only be purchased or leased from them by the Crown (read government now) has been accepted by the Supreme Court of Canada as the law regarding title to disputed territory. If you had any brains you'd consider any land that had an outstanding land claim against it as being unsuitable for anything.

Municipal governments and some provinces are still trying to play fast and loose with the treaties and illegally disposing of the lands for their own profit. Even when they are fully conversant with the circumstances, as were all parties involved in the Caledonia situation, they are going ahead and making deals with private interests. Perhaps they are hoping that if the courts see populated housing developments on the territory they won't cede it back to Native control, and allow the municipality to continue to collect all tax revenues.

Town councils, and other local governments need look no further than the most recent settlement in British Columbia where a whole subdivision has been returned to it's original Native owners. The people who own the houses are free to retain possession, but they now find themselves subject to the laws governing the reservation not the municipality, and their property taxes will be set and collected by the band council.

There has been the usual amount of complaining by the right wing about rights etc (non-band member can't vote in tribal council elections, so the owners of these houses can't vote in their "municipal elections" anymore) conveniently forgetting whose rights were originally ignored when the land was developed illegally. If you buy stolen property, unwitting or not, and it is recovered by it's original owner what kind of compensation do you usually get?

If it can be proven you knew it was stolen you can go to jail, other wise you're pretty much out of luck. These people should consider themselves fortunate that they are being allowed to keep the homes they purchased from someone who was dealing in stolen property. If anyone has a problem with the return of the land to the rightful owners, they should take it up with the people who committed the crime in the first place – those who sold it illegally.

But some people just aren't paying attention, and it sure seems like the Deseronto Town Council want to join the crowd. Just before their municipal election last November the mayor of the town, Clarence Zie, announced that construction would begin on a new housing development as of November 15th on one of tracts of land. Local media reported that he claimed 20% of the initial 60 lots were already sold, and that if all went well an additional 100 lots would be constructed.

As a reminder to any contractors who might not be aware of the circumstances surrounding the land in question, a group of Mohawk protesters from Tyendinaga showed up on November 15th. They erected a new sign proclaiming the area Mohawk territory and amended the for sale sign to read not for sale.

Nobody wishes to have a repeat of what is going on in Caledonia, Ontario right now with the blockades and confrontations, but at the same time nobody is going to surrender their land without a fight. The Government of Canada has tried to stay out of the protest in Caledonia, claiming it's a provincial issue due to the nature of the land under dispute, but they won't be able to hide from this one.

With the promise of a negotiated settlement on the books, now three years overdue, they have the responsibility of resolving the issue. Since the Justice Department has already stated that the land was illegally removed from the Mohawks there really isn't much to negotiate save for whether it will be the town or the developer who is going to have to refund those who have already plunked their money down.

It was one thing for Indian Agents and crooked politicians back in the 1800's to try and swindle Natives out of their land; they knew they would be able to get away with it. But now it's not only illegal, it's bad business practices. You trying selling people stolen property once and see if you ever get their business again?

Posted by Richard Marcus at 04:17 AM | Permalink

When I first started to write fiction I set out with the idea in mind that I would write stories that I liked to read. Of course there were a couple of obstacles in the way, technical and otherwise, but funnily enough the hardest the hardest one to figure out was something that you would have thought to be the easiest. What exactly do the stories I like have in common that makes them stories I like?

Obviously I had some sort of notion of what it was that appealed to me, but I didn't seem to be able to put my finger on it. It didn't deter from writing my first novel and sending it off to a publisher, but I have to admit that I still felt a faint feeling of dissatisfaction with my finished product for reasons I wasn't able to put my finger on.

Since I completed that piece I had begun work on something else that was going to be based on incidences in my own life. I had been utilizing some of that information in articles I had been writing for blog posts to help make points on various topics that interested me. This had led me into believing that I was comfortable with the idea of talking about these situations in more detail, and making them the main focus of a story.

In the past I had had what I considered valid reservations about making use of the material. Primarily it was my repulsion with what I considered an overabundance of people "sharing" their life stories on television at the drop of the hat. It seemed almost impossible to tune into one or another of the daytime talks shows and not find someone milking an audience with their particular tale of woe.

Perhaps it was because of the apparent superficiality of the shows and the people hosting them. Or maybe it was the way in which the audiences were eating the stories up like emotional vampires. Sucking whatever life they could out of the subjects and their stories so they could be "moved" and "inspired" by the heroic victims.

Of course those feelings of contempt were only accentuated by the whole circus surrounding James Frey and his false autobiographical book A Million Little Pieces. That people could be so hungry for details about people's troubles that they would make a hero out of someone because he had lived a dissolute lifestyle and recovered was beyond my understanding.

It seems to have escaped their notice that thousands of people have made the same journey without feeling the need to trumpet their accomplishments to the sky like they were some sort of superhero. That it turned out to be lies made the insult to people in recovery even greater. Even scarier was that Frey had been held up as an example of how one could go about recovering without professional help.

Putting those feelings aside I also had questions about my own ability to deal with the subject matter honestly. Some wounds are still more open than others and chances are that I wouldn't want or be prepared to deal with them properly. But I also remembered how much I appreciated some of the stories that I had read of other people's real and non-sensationalized accounts of their recovery when I was beginning my own process and thought I should at least try in case I could offer the same help to someone else.

For a while all seemed to be going well but then became dissatisfied with what I was writing. At first I thought it was because I was being too intellectual and not letting enough emotion show through, but I began to realize there was more to it then that. I would read over what I had written and while it was pretty good, I wasn't really that interested in reading it.

The story I was writing had nothing in common with any of the works I liked to read. There was something missing and I couldn't put my finger on it, in the same way that I hadn't been able to put my finger on the element of the stories I read that made them appeal to me.

Then yesterday afternoon I was just sitting thinking of nothing in particular when with a jolt I realized the obvious. The stories I really like are ones that have an element of magic in them. Not that they have wizards or magicians in them, although some of them do, but reading them is a magical experience somehow.

The author has created something that is able to carry you beyond the mundane and lift you out of reality. This has nothing to do with the subject matter of the story, but the author's ability to imbue his or her work with an element that isn't of this world. When you read their books it is with awe and wonder.

For me it's like the feeling I get when I walk in a particularly beautiful piece of forest and the sun is shining. Solitary beams are playing among the trees while the whole seems to glow with a yellowish/greenish light. I know I'm still right here on this planet living my life, but it's also a moment out of time that allows a brief respite from whatever cares or stress that I might have.

Even the stresses and the worries of characters in books like this take on that otherworldly glow that lets us know they aren't things we need to ever worry about. While it's true that the fantasy or science fiction genre lent themselves to this better than most, I've read detective and mystery stories that are able to light up from inside just like my forest clearing.

There's no way I can see myself writing about the subjects of childhood sexual abuse and chronic pain and be able to create that sort of atmosphere. I need to become a lot better a writer first. I think I was trying to achieve that while I was writing my attempt at autobiographical fiction, but it just wasn't working.

Last night I began working on chapter two of the sequel to my first book and I felt much happier. There is magic there just waiting to be created and I feel far better for it.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:33 AM | Permalink

It's been slightly more then four years since Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, was arrested by American security forces for suspicion of terrorist activity on the advice of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). The American's deported Mr. Arar to Syria, his country of birth, where he spent a year in jail being tortured for information about his non-existent ties with al-Qaeda.

This year Justice Dennis O'Connor, of the Canadian judiciary, led a commission of inquiry investigating how it was possible that an innocent man could have ended up being forced by Syrian torturers to confess to crimes he didn't commit. Those sections of the Mr. O'Connor's findings that the government has allowed to be released, parts being suppressed for reasons of "National Security", contained two very damning accusations.

The first was that the information the RCMP passed to American intelligence forces was not only false, but that it had never been properly vetted for accuracy before being handed over. The second was that before and after the time Mr. Arar was imprisoned Canadian officials "leaked" information to the press damaging to his reputation in order to cover their own asses.

The fallout from this report has started to be felt by the RCMP, Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli has resigned from the force, and Mr. O'Connor will be releasing a second report this coming week which will contain suggestions for increasing oversight of the force's activities.

Although there had been rumours of pressure on Mr. Zaccardelli to resign from the force this past fall, the axe finally fell this week when he decided to change the testimony he had given previously to a House of Commons committee investigating the incident. Back in the fall he had testified that the RCMP had discovered their mistake about Mr. Arar and had tried to correct the situation.

This week however he informed the same committee that he actually had no knowledge of whether such an attempt had taken place or not. He has been quoted as saying the O'Connor commission was causing events to take on a life of their own, leading one to suspect that there is information in the report that contradicts his earlier testimony. Perhaps it's part of what is still being suppressed, or that next week's list of recommendations will contradict him.

Either way, no matter how you spin it, the country's top cop lied to parliament last fall to cover his ass. He had been at the helm when Mr. Arar was arrested so he was responsible for what happened. The only reason he could have for telling the committee that they tried to correct their mistake would be to make it look like he was on top of things, and to reduce his culpability.

But, as Mr. Arar pointed out in a statement released in response to Mr. Zaccardelli's resignation, no action has been taken on finding out who were the mysterious Canadian officials who leaked information to the press that has destroyed his and his family's life. Although he was careful not to demand that journalists reveal their sources he did say that he hoped they would reveal the information in the event of an independent investigation into the leaks.

According to Mr. Arar's lawyer, Julian Falconer, his client's life, and the lives of his family, have been irreparably damaged by the leaks and events. Unlike other Muslims he will never again be able to make the pilgrimage to Mecca without fear of harassment or even arrest; a trucking company owned by his brother has been wiped out because they can no longer enter the United States because of their name; and Mr. Arar's parents suffered horrible anxieties while their son was jailed in the country they fled.

Mr. Arar also wonders why it is that Prime Minister Steven Harper is so reticent about issuing an apology on behalf of the Canadian government. He knows that Mr. Harper wasn't Prime Minister at the time, (although given Mr. Harper's allegiances that's probably fortunate) and bears no direct responsibility, he is now the voice and face of the Canadian government. The least he could do is apologise on behalf of the institutions that failed Mr. Arar.

Mr. Arar's concerns about the government's inaction were only partially assuaged by the resignation of Mr. Zaccardelli because as he points out there was more than just the RCMP involved in his case. Aside from the unknown government officials from some unknown department, the Canadian civilian spy agency, CSIS, was also involved in his case.

Mr Arar believes there is need for more than just the RCMP to be overseen, but all agencies responsible for the collection and dissemination of information concerning Canadian citizens. He claims such a step is needed in order to prevent a repeat of what happened to him and the three other men who have come forward to report the same things happening to them.

Mr. Arar has filed a civil suit against the government and its various agencies. The original amount was for 400 million dollars, but that has been whittled down to a figure in the mid – thirties as he begins to have meetings to settle the final amount. But Mr. Arar's real concern appears to be that the government take steps to ensure that no one need ever go through what he had to.

In Canada we believe that we don't have to worry about being arrested for no apparent reason. If we want that belief to be a reality, than we best hope that the government follows through on all the recommendations offered by Justice O'Connor. Otherwise there always will remain the chance of what happened to Mr. Arar happening to you and me.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 09:20 AM | Permalink

Ever since the repatriated Constitution of Canadian and its accompanying Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect in 1982 the Supreme Court of Canada has been kept busy with numerous court challenges. Various groups and individuals have mounted challenges to laws that they consider to impinge upon their basic human rights.

They have had to rule on all the fun ones; euthanasia, abortion, and same sex marriage. People who haven't agreed with their decisions complain about the Supreme Court governing the country, but all they have been doing is their job. Acting as final arbitrator in legal decisions and reaching conclusion based on the letter of our law.

When the law says that all people are to be treated equal under the eyes of the law no matter what their race, creed, colour, sex, or sexual preferences are, they interpret that as being final with no exceptions. That means if a same sex couple wants to get married they can. In the eyes of the court whatever the law and the Constitution say is final.

The areas that have been more problematic are those where there isn't an article in the constitution dealing directly with the subject. The thorniest of these has been the contentious issue of what constitutes aboriginal rights. Neither the Charter of Rights nor the Constitution spells out any specifics when it comes to this issue.

Section thirty-five of the constitution and twenty-five of the Charter of Rights are the only ones that deal with the issue at all, and they offer minimal guidance. In the latter it simply states that no part of the Charter can be seen to over rule any previous laws that guaranteed treaty rights and other rights and freedoms.

The Charter specifically cites the Royal Proclamation of 1763 as the major source defining any and all treaty rights that needed to be adhered to. The Constitution is even more vague in that all it says is that all previous treaty rights are still in effect and recognised. It also makes reference to section 91, class 24 of the constitutional act of 1867. Since all this part of the original Constitution states is that the passing of laws and the preservation of treaty lands as pertains to the indigenous peoples of Canada is now the responsibility of the legislative assembly of Canada instead of the British Government, it doesn't offer much assistance in defining Native rights according to law.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was one of those great documents that promised lots without guaranteeing anything. Prior to the American Revolution it guaranteed that all land west of the Appalachian Mountain range could only be taken from Indigenous people by treaty negotiated by the Crown. That was amended to reflect the reduction of Crown territory after the revolution so that it was enforced in the region now known as Canada.

For the Supreme Court of Canada what this means is that when faced with cases revolving around the rights of Native Canadians they are dealing with rights that were enshrined by treaty more then three hundred years ago when the world was a far different place. If a treaty from those times guaranteed a tribe of people the right to carry on their way of life, meaning hunting, fishing, and harvesting lumber as needed, how are those rights applied in today's world?

Does it mean that a native person can fish commercially all year round while other fishermen must adhere to strict seasonal guidelines? Does it mean that a native person can set up a forestry business and take wood from wherever he so chooses as long as its not privately owned land?

The Court has been trying to walk a fine line here with respect to adhering to the treaties while acknowledging there are significant differences in today's world. An example of this can be found in a ruling handed down yesterday in a case involving three Native men from New Brunswick who were charged with the illegal harvesting of lumber from Crown (government owned) land. While acquitting them of all charges by a unanimous vote of 9 – 0 the court did make certain provisos in order to try and set limits on the amount of lumber that is harvested and to establish precedent for future cases of a similar nature.

One of the conditions that the court stipulated was that in order for a native person of a particular tribe to harvest wood from public territory there had to be proof of either hereditary or treaty granted usage of that land for that purpose. The other control placed on the harvesting of lumber was that there could be no commercial use attached to the raw timber, it could only be put to personal use.

On the other side of the ledger the court said that they could not see the validity in the argument that would have only allowed native people to use the wood they harvested for so called traditional activities; making canoes and wigwams. The court stated that they would not allow native people to be restricted in their usage of the lumber by old cultural stereotypes. The lumber could be used for making furniture, house building, artwork, and pretty much any other personal use you could think of.

What the judges didn't do, or failed to address anyway, was set any sort of limit on how much wood a native could harvest for individual use. And although the ruling said that the wood itself couldn't be sold commercially, there was no mention of whether or not any products made from the lumber, furniture, boats, or pieces of sculpture, could be sold.

The reason for this most likely is that the court was primarily concerned with establishing just what aboriginal rights under the terms of past treaties and agreements mean. What they have been gradually coming to is that these rights entitle native people to continue to make use of resources for personal use on land, or water, that they can lay claim to via their nation or tribe's treaty rights.

They had previously ruled that natives could fish for personal use at any time in the year, but could only operate commercial practices during in season like any other fisherman. This ruling was made somewhat more complex due to the fact that nations on at least the West Coast of Canada have proof that they historically conducted a sizeable amount of trade in fish all year round, therefore making commercial fishing a "traditional practice".

The fact of the matter is that with today's technology combined with the severe reduction in fish stocks makes anyone's desire to run a commercial fishery year round seem stupid and wrong headed. I'd have to wonder at anyone demanding to be allowed to deplete fish stocks that much further by fishing them all year round.

No it isn't the fault of natives that the stocks have been almost depleted, but that isn't what matters now. What matters now is that your ancestors left you fish to eat, are you going to leave any for your descendants?

The Supreme Court of Canada has a duty and an obligation to see that the original treaties signed with the Native population of Canada are adhered to as much as possible. At the same time they also need to take into consideration the realities of today's world when reaching decisions. Sometimes this may mean expanding upon an original definition, other times apparently curtailing some activities.

What's important, and what I believe they are doing their best to achieve, is that the spirit of these treaties is adhered to if not the actual letter of the agreements. I'm sure people on both sides of the issue are never going to be completely happy with the decisions reached by the Court, and that points of contention will continue to linger long after verdicts are handed down.

But little by little, and for better or worse, (in my opinion usually better) the Supreme Court of Canada is defining Aboriginal rights in Canada. They will continue to listen to arguments over various issues from both sides. But now that the precedent of personal use based on historical access to resources has been established as the bar against which decisions will be weighed, at least everyone is beginning to figure out where they stand.

If the government shows a willingness to enact legislature that is reflective of those rulings, we may yet see an end to the repeated confrontations and arrests that have besmirched our dealings with folk who were here before us. Who knows we may even end up equal partners in the country.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:50 AM | Permalink

Welcome back to part two of the two-part interview that I conducted via email with Thomas Ruf, the force behind Ruf Records. In the past twelve years Thomas and his label have become one of the most active Blues labels in Europe, if not world wide. Even more important is the fact that they, unlike other labels, produce new recordings of working artists instead of merely reissuing older back catalogues.

Aside from taking on established Blues musicians from North America whose careers have been victimized by an industry that's more fickle than the weather, they have also helped to develop the careers of young European and North American players. What's even more impressive is their commitment to all the forms that the Blues can take. From the harder edge of Walter Trout who only knows one speed other than fast, faster; to the internationally flavoured acoustic sounds of Bob Brozman and the amazing sounds he pulls from a resonator guitar, Ruf records proves the Blues can be sung in as many ways as there are people.

The Blues are an individuals means of expressing emotions through music, so it makes sense that different people will have different ways of getting there message across. That's the real beauty of the Blues, and Ruf records. If one performer doesn't speak to you that's okay, because there is somebody else waiting in the wings that just might.

When did the Blues start to become popular in Germany? I know that in countries like France they have a history of African American musicians performing in Paris since the twenties and the thirties in the Jazz clubs. Obviously that wouldn't have been the case in Germany during the thirties so there is not the same history of having the music around and available for the population.

I am not too good with the historic stuff as I spend my time in the present and look into the future for new goals rather then trying to fight about the correct past re-calling with all the blues scholars…there are other people that know more about the past then I do. I know there was an underground swing club scene during the German Nazi years. After the war the GIs started bringing in their music.

There were American radio stations in the 40’s and 50’s broadcasting in Germany. American popular music became popular after the war coming into the country along with the Marshal Plan. The blues was made popular almost by one single man in the early 60’s: Horst Lippman from Llippman & Rau. They started the American folk blues festivals in I think 1962. Bringing over American blues performers on a yearly basis.

The artwork on their 60’s tour posters itself is legendary. I highly recommend watching the 2 volumes or the American folk blues festival DVDs. They are in fact much better in my opinion then the Scorsese blues film series. Because they are more simple and authentic: they just show great historic footage from all the performers – from Sonny Boy Williamson to John Lee Hooker to Muddy Waters.

They were all there during the 60’s, filmed by German television. And what the American folk blues festivals did to kick off the British blues boom is a piece of music history. Mick Jagger loves to tell the story how Fritz Rau – Lippman’s partner and a pretty tempered guy – kicked The Stones out of the venue when they tried to hang around during soundcheck and meet the performers that were their idols during the UK shows of the AFBF tour…

Alexis Corner – father of the British blues – was probably more popular in Germany then in the UK. The UK market is more trendy, Germany more conservative. Germany for many British R&B singers is the last territory where they find plenty of work after their stars descended during the 70’s when disco and the following eras drowned the British blues boom.. People like Chris Farlowe, Long John Baldry, The Yardbirds, Eric Burdon still could get a gig in Germany during the 80’s and 90’s – long after work dried up in England and the US for these guys. etc…

Why do you think the Blues seems to be more popular in Europe right now then in America where they come from? It seems like most a high percentage of your roster are North Americans, are they signing with you because there just isn't the interest in their work back home or are there other reasons?

Walter Trout could not get an American deal, nor find a booking agent. He was on a Dutch label with a European only career before he signed with Ruf and we developed his career on his home turf.

Luther was out of a deal when I started Ruf Records for him. More popular? I am not sure. The USA has more blues clubs and blues radio stations then Europe. The blues is part of the every day music culture, I think. And it’s not really a big deal when one of the performers comes through town. In Europe it’s more of a big deal, because not every act works over here; there are in total less bars and less US blues acts touring. Its more a concert event then a bar gig. The artists get therefore treated better. I think overall it goes in cycles.

The blues really had a bit of a comeback in the USA in the 90’s – right when Luther Allison came out there big time. The US has a great blues festival circuit. It’s the baby boomers that keep the blues scene alive there. Since a couple of years now it’s changing again. Bars close left and right or stop having live blues acts. Gigs are drying up stateside. The blues festival circuit in Europe is growing again. Right now it seems stronger over here; but it goes in cycles…

There seem to be more and more women playing Blues guitar these days, Erja Lyytinen from Finland for example, and you've just come from a recording in Minnesota with three women. There have always been women vocalists, but is this something new for there to be women guitar players?

Bonnie Raitt, Sue Foley, Debbie Davies, Deborah Coleman were among the first ones on the electric guitar in blues. The Blues Guitar Women CD gives a good overview of the current performers. It used to be a bit harder in the beginning for women; as the guitar was a man’s world. Nowadays I think it's easier for women. There are in fact more and more coming up. Basically because there are just too many GUYs out there wanting to make a living playing guitar. I mean thousands and thousands. And they are all good. More musicians then there is work…

The English Blues musician is nothing new, it dates back to early days of the Rolling Stones, but now it seems like more and more Europeans aside from the Brits are taking to it. Is this a recent development or are we in North America just finally hearing about it because of the efforts of people like you?

Well, I tried to promote a couple of European performers, but it does in fact not really work. You can sell American and British blues in the USA, Germany, France or Japan. But you cannot sell a French blues artist in Germany, or a German artist in Sweden, a Swedish in Spain. It doesn't work. There are hundreds of European blues bands and they are incredibly good, some of them truly original.

The small country of Norway for example must have at least 200 very solid blues bands. There is a young blues player in every town. Only you never hear about them, as they cannot be picked up by international labels. Erja and Ana are exceptions to the rule. They offer the press kind something of an exotic story, a new story to be told, paired with the right amount of sex appeal and pop appeal (this is the marketing guy talking now…)

What do you see as the future of Blues music, and what role do you envision Ruf records playing in helping that become a reality?

I used to use a crystal ball and got pretty good at it, until the market totally changed a few years ago. With the raise of the digital sales (downloads), the industry goes back to the early 60’s, when the record labels produced single songs, not albums. Why spend the money to produce a full album – 12-14 songs – when the consumer later on only picks one or 2 to download? The guy who used to spend 15 bucks for the entire CD, might now only spend 99 sent with us through I-tunes and download one song he likes. The existence of record labels per se in their traditional form as talent developing and career building service companies is changing.

So no, I haven't used my crystal ball too much lately. It's hard to predict. It's clear that the traditional stand alone retail store with a true music mission: we carry any new CD of any genre and also deep catalogue –is history with the decline of Tower Records, the most prominent chain of this old school record store concept. There are as few as maybe 200-300 record stores with a good full assortment of music around the globe. The rest is chains with selected limited stock (they carry hits, not blues), mom and pop stores for a specialist clientele – many of them carrying second hand - and the Internet.

The future of the blues is in crossover and evolution rather then preservation. The labels whose specialty was preservation of a traditional style are in trouble .I am not friends with those who constantly try to put blues music into a museum as an art form of the past.
In general, the blues lacks performers that qualify as heroes. We have many solid players, but few real star-personalities with charisma.

One final question, twelve years ago when you started Ruf Records you must have had an ideal of how you wanted things work out. (No, sorry this is wrong. I didn’t. I just did it because somebody needed to do it. And I worried about it later. Which was good. If I had predicted what I was in for, I might have changed my mind early on…smile.) Now twelve years later you have some the best known names in Blues music signed with you from across three or four generations of musicians, playing all sorts of different styles and have just been recognized with the Keeping The Blues Alive Award for 2007 from the Blues Foundation. You must feel some sense of, if not accomplishment (which you should, in my opinion you've done wonders) at least vindication. Did you see any of this coming?

My artist, partner and friend Luther Allison died very suddenly, one album short from breaking through the roof, receiving a Grammy and giving Buddy Guy and Robert Cray a serious run for their money.

At first sight, his passing stole the fruit we so long worked for minutes before harvest time. With time passing, I realized that actually the path was the way. It did not matter as much how long it lasted – it was actually important that it happened while it lasted. Its not about if we ever got there.

It's about the quality between you and your fellows while you walk. I never had a similar, quite as close, trust worthy relationship with another artist. And I consider myself pretty close friends with most of my fellow artists. But it kind of set a human standard that I will never want to miss, am grateful for and never will compromise, really. I don’t care how profitable a project potentially could be – if it's not worth spending my personal precious lifetime working on it, its waste of time for me.

Well that was the last question I posed to Thomas, and I can't think of a more appropriate place to end. It tells you a lot about the man and the label, and perhaps explains why they are having the success they are in signing quality performers. In 2007 Jeff Healy will be joining their roster as he makes his long awaited return to Blues from his foray in Jazz music, and we can look forward to new releases from Bob Brozman and Candye Kane and others as well in the new year.

I'd like to thank Thomas Ruf for taking the time out of his hectic schedule to answer my questions and for putting such obvious thought into his answers. It's not often we get to hear from the people who are responsible for producing the music we love and even less frequantly do we get such candid answers.

If there were more people like Thomas Ruf working in the music industry, people who can remember that's it is about the music first not about "celebrity" and fame, I think we'd be hearing a lot more about the songs, and a lot less about divorces and whose sleeping with who. Since that's not likely to happen in the near future I guess we should just be grateful that there are people like him still involved in the music industry.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 02:45 AM | Permalink

The end of November marked the end of Blogcritics' Blues Bash extravaganza as far as the calendar was concerned, but I'm pleased to say it appears that the Blues just don't know when to quit and are playing on well after closing time. I've been doing my share to keep the party going and will continue to do so as long as they let me.

In the past week or so I've been focusing on one record label in particular, Ruf Records from Germany. I've given you and overview of their history and reviewed their twelfth year anthology disc. So it seems to me only fitting that we hear from the founder of the label Thomas Ruf to conclude this mini-feature on Ruf Records.

Needless to say Thomas is a very busy man, and when I emailed him the series of questions I wanted him to answer he was actually in the United States at the end of November overseeing a recording session for their forthcoming Blues Caravan release. (This years is a Blues Women starring Sue Foley, Deborah Coleman and, Canadian newcomer Roxanne Potvin.) So it took him longer than he expected to send back his answers, but it's all worked out for the best.

Today will be the first half of the interview and you'll be able to read the final bits tomorrow at this same web log channel. Oh one final word; needless to say English isn't Thomas' first language, and he's asked us to correct any errors we think are too glaring. Aside from those few minor fixes, probably far less then editors have to do on my articles on far too many occasions, his answers are reprinted here verbatim. Enjoy.

Could you tell us a little about yourself, where you are from and your background?

I grew up in the Black Forest on a wine farm. I guess I learned about labour at a very early age as kids are a needed work force during harvest time on a family run farm – a model that still existed back in the 60’s & early 70’s before agriculture changed into a global speculation business at the mercy of the world’s stock markets.

I worked with a youth group of the church community when I was about 18 years old and started to promote concerts with the teenagers in my group. We rented the local town hall and booked blues artists. That kept the teenagers busy and off the street at least during the time of our projects. I left the farm with a new career plan after I promoted a concert of Luther Allison and personally got to meet him.

I started promoting more of his shows in other towns and ended up as his German booking agent during my time at university. My time at university ended when I made my side business (as Luther’s promoter) that was financing my stay at university a full time job. The label was a later baby down the road…

What about music? Was your family musical or did you just develop an interest in it on your own? Did you ever want to be a musician?

I am not a frustrated musician, sorry. I used to play the piano as a teenager a bit and have an idea about notes and scales. But I was always rather undisciplined and never really practised. My family were simple country people with little sense of art.

The only radio in the house was broken. The first music I heard was Johan Sebastian Bach chorals in church. I first heart the blues at age 14 when I saw the movie “Chicago blues”. Those old blues guys (Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, Willie Dixon, Sonny Boy Williamson, etc) fitted my social consciousness – they were underdogs that made it through their music.

The fact that they seemed so real and authentic left a huge impression on me. I guess that planted the seed…the first blues concert I ever attended (and the first blues man I ever promoted a show of) was Louisiana Red, who lived (and still does) in Germany.

Do you remember the first time you heard the Blues? Was it love at first "listen" or was it an acquired taste?

See above. I bought a turntable at age 14 and started buying albums of the featured artists in a Chicago blues film I saw. I also listened to stuff like Janis Joplin, The Animals and other artists of the 60’s era, whose intensity could meet the intensity of those blues guys.

Most children don't have the ambition to grow-up and own their own record label, or even to be a record producer. When did you first decide that' this is what you wanted to do? What was the path you took to becoming Ruf Records – were you already involved in music in some way or another?

Like I said I was a promoter, then a booking agent. Then the publisher for Luther Allison’s music – only because somebody I met said that was the thing to do – start your publishing company. I did it without actually knowing WHAT I did. It felt right and appealing and I learned to follow my instincts, & spontaneous gut feelings. It was all learning by doing.

I think it’s a privilege to actually get a chance to pay for your own mistakes and actually learn the ropes not through a teaching business class but through trying it out yourself and see what happens. Because it’s your passion you can actually manage to overcome all the obstacles.

Luther and his common-law wife Rocky, who used to manage him and traveled with him all the time, were real teachers. We created a tight work team based on personal trust and friendship. We all believed into what we were doing and promoting. He was a man on a mission and we organized what needed to be done. Promoting concerts, booking tours, publishing and protecting the music, publicity, travel logistics, and in the end produce and manufacture and distribute records around the globe.

The whole organization grew step by step and we learned something new every day as we tried to figure out what was the next step for us to go about…it really is essential to keep an open mind and never loose the feeling that you actually are a student in your job. I still feel like this today. I learn something new every day…it never stops.

Did you have a definite purpose in mind for Ruf – was it always going to be a Blues label – or has this just happened.

It really just happened. I had the thought of branching out and starting sub-divisions for other music genres. I learned early on that you need to focus on one thing and grow with it. That's the only way you get recognition. If you do too many things, you water down the quality of your core business. It’s best to stay true to your roots and core business, even if the routine becomes boring at times…

Who was the first act that you signed from the States, and how did you convince them that an American Blues musician would be better served by signing with a relatively unknown German label?

Luther Allison. He already lived in exile in Paris when I first met him. In the beginning it was strictly a European career building effort. But as we became more successful across Europe, Rocky and I started discussing the potential of a US comeback.

Which lead us to actually record 1994 ´s “Bad Love” album (aka: “Soul Fixin’ Man”-the US version on Alligator Records) back in the states (with producer Jim Gaines in Memphis, TN) His prior albums were European recordings, using European producers and musicians. It’s been word of mouth ever since.

After Luther, Joanna Conner was my next artist signed. Now it’s the artists that talk about and recommend each other. Aynsley Lister and Ian Parker were recommended to me through Walter Trout. Ana Popovic came through Bernard Allison, who of course was introduced to me through Luther. Walter Trout came to me on the recommendation of Jim Gaines.

It’s been an ongoing snowball ever since we started to have a real presence on the US markets and became the only real world wide career development oriented blues label originating out of Europe. There are hundreds of local and national labels around the world but only a handful actually operating globally.

Have you ever questioned your sanity for getting into the business?

Many times. I used to work with “Screaming” Jay Hawkins, who had sort of a brain injury that originated from the Korean War in which he served and got shot in the head. He took strong morphine EVERY DAY of his life. He was just as amazing on stage as he was crazy off stage.

He loved to threaten promoters demanding more cash beyond the agreed amount about 5 minutes before show time, when there’s a hall full of people screaming for the show to start. He didn’t care, he would have left a sold out venue for the hotel any time he wanted to. Certain times into the cycle of his medication’s side effects you could not even talk to him, he was too spaced out.

One day I had to come out on tour when his tour manager in charge quit in the middle of the night because Screaming Jay had pulled out a gun and held it against his head from behind on the tour bus; giving the guy the scare for life (the gun was not loaded, this was Screaming Jay style joke – he used to light magician style, flash pyrotechnic fires in restaurants for example, only to scare waiters and have a ball).

I quit working with Screaming Jay because it got too unpredictable. You never knew if he was going to go on stage or potentially cause a riot by not going on. He LOVED to see me and the local promoter sweat blood every night.

I used to come and complain about him with Luther and Rocky. “This guy is insane, he is out of control”. They would only laugh at me and tell me: compared to the logic of this business, Screaming Jay is SANE. This is a running joke between Rocky and I today still: whenever I visit her I keep telling her: you were right. I learned. Compared to what we do here every day, Screaming Jay seems pretty sane to me!

Well that seems a pretty good place to end part one of the interview, don't you think? And you thought running a record label would be all numbers and business didn't you? Tune in tomorrow for the rest of my conversation with Thomas Ruf.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 01:09 AM | Permalink

Once upon a time there was a young woman. The young women went for a walk one night just because she liked to go for walks. As she was walking she decided that she would like to get something to eat.

She discovered that she didn't have very much money so she thought she should go to the bank just in case, because as she very wisely said to herself you just never know. Now she knew the bank wouldn't be open because it was too late, but that was okay because she had a bank card and could use the machine.

When she got to the bank there was a sign on the door that said bank machines were only available to the public when the bank was open. At all other times customers were welcome to use the drive – by banking equipment provided for their convenience around the other side of the bank.

The young woman looked at her feet and wondered if she could still use the drive through window. She walked around to the side of the bank where the road went beside it to go and use the drive through bank machine. There was a big sign just in front of the driveway that said "Access Restricted To Vehicular Traffic". Underneath was another sign that said, in case you had missed the point the first time, "No Pedestrians"

Carefully she looked around and saw no cars coming so she walked down to see if she could use the bank machine without being in a car. Thankfully the machine could not tell that she wasn't in a vehicle and so it was very happy to give her the money she wanted. Well she thought, as she put her money away, that wasn't too bad.

All of a sudden she was pinned to the wall by a blinding spotlight. The next thing she knew a pick up truck was screeching to a halt just in front of her with its horn blaring loudly. Trying to see beyond the blaze of high beams she staggered away while from behind her she heard a belligerent voice swearing and yelling at her.

When she could see and hear again, and was able to get her bearings, she remembered that she was hungry. It being just after midnight she knew that only the fast food places in her neighbourhood would be open. She has read the sign on the door of the one across the street earlier and had declared themselves open late to serve you better. That meant tonight it was open to one in the morning so she could go there with plenty of time to spare.

A chicken sandwich, she thought would be just the thing to make her fell better about life, the universe and everything. After she crossed the large empty parking lot full of cold wind and paper that liked her ankles so much that all of it wrapped around her feet, she was even hungrier and quite a bit colder.

The first door she came to was locked, but as it was at the side of the building that was okay and she wasn't too worried. When the second door was locked as well she began to get puzzled and a little nervous – she was very hungry and cold after all. But when the third door was locked; the one with the sign on it saying they were open late to serve you better; until one in the morning tonight in fact, attached to the glass, she got angry.

It wasn't the angry of wanting to yell at people, it was the frustrated and near tears type of anger that happens when you don't understand what is going on. She decided to keep walking around the building, just because there was nothing else she could think of doing.

All of a sudden she saw a window that stuck out from the wall that looked out over a driveway that ran down along the fourth side of the restaurant. There was a very welcoming looking light shining out of the window. Not the type that said we've left the light on after we've all gone home, but one that said "hi we're still open". Well, she thought, a take out window is better than nothing, she could take her food home with her, or maybe find somewhere sheltered to sit outside and eat it.

She had only just begun to walk towards the window when she saw the sign: DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW: NO PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC. She came to a complete stop in the middle of the driveway just like she had run into a brick wall. She thought she was going to cry. It was so unfair; they said they were open to one in the morning, not open only for cars.

She didn't own a car; she didn't even know how to drive. Wasn't it bad enough that the sidewalks stopped for no apparent reason, that everywhere you went there were massive parking lots but nowhere for people to walk? Now, not only couldn't you get money out of banks after dark if you didn't drive a car, you also weren't allowed to buy food late at night.

She didn't know what she was going to do and she began pacing up and down in front of the window not realizing there was actually someone sitting behind the glass. It wasn't until she looked up in mid pace to see a young man's face looking out at her that she realized she wasn't alone.

She walked up to the window and he reached out and rolled it open. When she got there she looked up at him. "I know this isn't your fault, and I'm not mad at you or blaming you, but what the fuck is going on that I can't buy food here if I don't have a car? It says your open to one in the morning on your door but I can't buy anything because I don't know how to drive.

Don't you think that people who don't own cars might get hungry after dark? Is it so strange for people to go out for a walk that no one is prepared to feed or do anything for you if you don’t have a car?" She stopped talking then, because she did not want to start crying in front of the young man.

She had said earlier to him she didn't want to blame him and she had meant that. He was only working there; he didn't make company policy and didn't deserve to have some crazy woman burst into angry tears in front of him.

He looked over at her and said, "What would you like?"

Then she did start to cry, but quietly and not so anyone could notice when she talked. "A chicken sandwich please."

"You'll have to go to the next window to get it and pay for it," he said. He closed the window and they both walked along, him on the inside she in the driveway, until they got to the next window. He opened the window and took her money and started to give her back change.

As he was doing that she heard a voice from inside the restaurant start saying loudly, "What are you doing?" The young man was obviously ignoring it because he just reached out and handed her the chicken sandwich. "Have a good night" he said.

"Thank you" she said, and meant it. As she walked away to look for somewhere to eat her sandwich she hoped he wouldn't get into trouble for selling her a sandwich in the drive through. She found a spot under a Willow tree that was sheltered from the wind by a building and sat down to eat her sandwich.

All this trouble to get some money and a sandwich after dark because she didn't drive a car, and she wondered when had the world changed into being so unfriendly to people?
When had it become a world where you didn't exist if you didn't own a car? She really hoped the young man didn't lose his job.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 04:14 AM | Permalink

Ireland has been home to artists who have fled it's shores to find room to breath so that they could write clear of the oppressive atmosphere of both the heavy hand of the Catholic Church and the violence of its politics. James Joyce landed in France and then when the Germans came he left to end his days of exile in Switzerland.

Before him Oscar Wilde descended upon London who loved him until he was betrayed and forced into exile in Paris where he died a broken and sad man. After Joyce the playwright Samuel Beckett left Ireland for France, where aside from chauffeuring Andre the Giant to and from school, he wrote the masterpiece of existential theatre Waiting For Godot

Ireland the cold and clammy land of bogs and peat appears to be light years apart from the heat and desert sun of Tangiers and the International Zone of the fifties and the sixties. But in 1992 the artistic current that birthed the aforementioned luminaries extended its reach beyond its borders to celebrate and remind the world of the work produced in the land of sand, sun, and lawlessness.

From the end of World War Two to the time of independence in the 60's Tangier was divided up into three zones. The British had one, the French another, and the third was a neutral buffer zone between the two called the International zone. Nominally there was supposed to some sort rule of law, but pretty much a blind eye was turned to everything.

It became a Mecca for a couple types of people; artists looking for an inexpensive and inspirational place to live and those hangers on who always seem to appear where artists congregate. The rich and the thrill seekers who like to pretend they live the bohemian life style. They would "discover" an artist for a season and show him or her off to their friends, dabble in the free flow of drugs, and be delightedly shocked at the proliferation of both male and female prostitutes.

But amidst the parties and the hedonism there were the artists who were delving into the darkness that is so much a part of contemporary man but is studiously ignored by all but the brave and the insane. In some instances the line between the two became so blurred as to be indistinguishable.

The Here To Go Show in 1992 Dublin was a commemoration and celebration of the life and work of two of the minds and talents that were honed and refined in the hothouse atmosphere of Tangiers. William S. Burroughs and Brion Gysin.

While Burroughs is both famous for his writings, Naked Lunch, and infamous for his addictions and lifestyle (Naked Lunch was the synergy of both as it depicted his withdrawal from Heroin in prose that was both fragmented and potent), Brion Gysin has nowhere near the same impact. The Here To Go Show was an attempt to correct that lack of recognition.

Although Burroughs didn't attend the event he agreed to tape an interview that was broadcast at the opening of the gathering. Judging by the content of the interview it almost seems as though Burroughs saw this as one more chance to try and ensure that his long time collaborator and friend would receive some of the acclaim that he never achieved during his lifetime and still was being denied after his death.

The DVD Destroy All Rational Thought is an attempt to documents the happenings of the Here To Go Show. The focal point of the show was an exhibit of Gysin's artwork with pieces being contributed from private collection all over the world, including those that Burroughs' owned. But Gysin was more then just a man who painted static pictures to be hung on the walls of galleries.

While the documentary does fill in some details of his life, there are some fascinating clips from experimental films he and Burroughs made in the sixties, very little actual information about the man is imparted that will shed light on his work. Ostensibly about him it ends up being more about the people involved with putting the show on and the happenings and musical events that took place.

While the music of the Master Musicians of Joujouka from Morocco was fascinating and absorbing after a while I began to wonder what repeated footage of them playing with various Irish musicians in pubs, radio stations, and loft parties had to do with the supposed subject of the event. If the filmmakers have compiled an accurate picture of the event, than the objective of spreading the word about Brion Gysin seemed to be less important then the organizers celebrating themselves.

I was reminded all too vividly of descriptions I've read in the biography of Paul Bowles, The Dream At The End Of The World by Michelle Green, of the various parties and what not given by the dilatants and hangers on during the original times in Tangiers. Although I'm sure there were nights of music and impromptu poetry readings in those times, the ones filmed from this event felt too contrived to have any level of believable spontaneity.

Far too often while watching Destroy All Rational Thought I found myself thinking that people were trying too hard to establish their "cool" credentials instead of being concerned about the art that was being displayed or the artist himself. Did the Here To Go Show really have so little to do directly with Brion Gysin? If not, why did this documentary about the show have relatively little to say about what was done specifically about Mr. Gysin. It was if the film makers had made the assumption that you already knew about Gysin and explanations weren't needed for more then a few of his ideas, and even than they were just tantalizing tidbits.

While watching the movie there was something nagging at me the whole way through that was disturbing me. I wasn't able to put my finger on it until this moment as I was writing this review and I realized what had led to my disquiet. Two men who had openly spurned success and the limelight to be as true to themselves and their art as possible were being treated like celebrities. It wasn't because of the quality of their work that they were being commemorated, but because they were something that others wanted to emulate.

William S. Burroughs and Brion Gysin were cut from the same cloth as the men who had been born and bred in Ireland and the city that was supposed to be celebrating them in 1992. But like the Bloomsday events that now honour the memory of James Joyce have more to do with Joyce the celebrity than honouring his work, the documentary Destroy All Rational Thought gives the same impression of the Here To Go Show in regards to them.

If that was truly what the Here To Go Show was like than it did a two giants of the twentieth century a disservice. If the creators of Destroy All Rational Thought has simply created that impression from the way they've put the film together, than they have lived up to their title for all the wrong reasons.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 02:28 AM | Permalink

When did emotion become a dirty word? Okay I know with our uptight society people, especially men, have always been encouraged to suppress their emotions, but now a-days it seems to be bordering on the ridiculous.

While doctors have always had that old stand by valium to hand out to women with "nerves" they now have a plethora of anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, and a cornucopia of other mood altering drugs. In the old days if you wanted that variety of ways to alter your perceptions you'd have to hope to know a good chemist, now all you need is a doctor and a prescription pad.

Of course there are differences now; nasty occurrences while taking the medications are no longer called bummers or bad trips, but are given the lovely euphemism of side effects. No matter what you call them, cramps, headaches, bathroom troubles, and the risk of nightmares seem to be a heavy price to pay just to control your emotions.

Before I go any further let me say that there are times when these types of medications are a necessity. For the person who just can't cope with whatever their own personal demons are they can provide the needed respite that will allow them to work with a therapist. Anti-anxiety medications are especially beneficial in those instances as they allow the patient and doctor to work at finding the underlying cause without increasing the symptoms.

Of course there are also those people whose only chance at normalcy comes from taking medications. Those who have been correctly diagnosed with schizophrenia and bi-polar disorders must rely on drugs or find themselves institutionalized, where the drugs are guaranteed to steal more then they give back.

But there comes a time when we have to deal with emotions, and not suppress them or we loss a part of our humanity. Compassion grows out of empathy and empathy can only exist if we experience emotions. How can you empathise with someone's tears if you have never felt sadness, or their joy if you've never felt happiness?

When you're walking down the street and you see a child in tears your first instinct is usually find out if its hurt, lost, or anything else that could be bothering it. Why is it so different when we see an adult in the same circumstance? How many of us can honestly say they don't feel a little twinge of fear if they see an adult they don't know, or even one they do know in some sort of extremity of emotion?

Or if not fear how about embarrassment; doesn't some part of you wish they just wouldn't make a scene in public? Conversely why is it if a person laughing is fit to burst, laughing until tears are running out of their eyes, people will ask him or her if they are alright? Or if they are with the person, look on with a bemused, almost tolerant expression on their face that comes as close to denying acquaintance as you can get without actually running away.

I hate to sound trendy, but maybe the blame for it lies with Freud, or at least as far as women are concerned. He was the one who decided there was such an illness as hysteria, most often found in women of course because they were weaker and has less control over their base emotions. But of course he was just writing about his society and the ways people were "abnormal", what the causes were and how to integrate them back into being useful members of society.

Early twentieth century middle class/upper middle class society in most of Europe and North America was hideously repressed and it was considered bad form to show any extreme of emotion. This in spite of the world just having been through the biggest trauma ever jointly experienced by most of humanity: World War 1. Very few countries escaped that conflict without some scarring, yet everyone was insisting that showing emotions was wrong, or a sign that you were ill.

After an event like that would you think that a few tears, or even constant sobbing, would actually be a healthy reaction? Don't you think that some anger would be justified on the part of those who had lost their children or their husbands for reasons no one could really adequately explain? Then there were the tens of thousands who lost family members due to the outbreak of the flu that followed right after the war.

But it was in this atmosphere that Freud and others of the new psychoanalysis profession came up with their theories of hysteria and what is normal and abnormal emotional behaviour. Even though a lot of his work and theories have been discredited Freud's legacy lives on with doctors today in their motivations. Their job still remains trying to make you as an individual become a comfortable, functional cog in the wheel.

You can go to a zillion encounter groups that teach you to get in touch with your feelings and it won't change the fact that someone else's display of emotion will make you feel uncomfortable. Once you've gotten in touch with your feelings it's supposed to ensure that you know where they come from so that you can control them.

Control is the name of the game these days, with public displays of emotion only allowed for reasons of patriotism and in other large sanctioned gatherings. But one person crying their eyes out on the street, because some grief or other overcomes them, is seen as a pariah. One person laughing uproariously at some joke or thought that tickles their funny bone is considered either unwell or perhaps drunk.

Was it Freud who decided it wasn't proper for people to be demonstrative in their displays of emotion? Or was he just searching for the means to explain why were emotional and what could be done to control it? How is it that after two world wars, countless genocides, famines, and other horrors that the world has witnessed in the past hundred years that instead of becoming more empathetic to other people's emotional reactions we have made emotions more and more of a abnormality?

What are we so afraid of, that we may actually see there is something about our lives that isn't perfect? That there is a very good reason to cry almost every day of the week but we don't? How much longer can we continue to cover everything under the rug of medication and pretend there's nothing wrong with the world, but something wrong with the person honest enough to cry? How much longer are we going to continue to be afraid?

Posted by Richard Marcus at 09:18 AM | Permalink

Last week the pundits were saying that it was a two-man race for the leadership of the federal Liberal party of Canada. The election that would decide who was going to lead the party back from the wilderness of opposition in the next campaign against Steven Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada did come down to being a race between two men, just not the two men everyone was predicting.

While former Harvard professor Michael Ignatieff's name was on the final ballot of the evening his competition, and the eventual winner of the night, was not Bob Rae –the ex socialist premier of Ontario- but Stephane Dion the former Montreal political science professor. Going into the weekend's vote Dion was considered a long shot who at best might finish in third.

After Saturday's first ballot everything looked to be playing out according to the script. Ignatieff was leading Rae by around 500 hundred votes, and Dion squeaked into third just two votes in front of the fourth place Gerald Kennedy. The second ballot did nothing much to change the standings, and that's when the serious deal making began behind the scenes which would see the beginning of the push that put Dion over the top.

With the person finishing last on each ballot being forced to drop out, Kennedy knew that he would be done after the third ballot, so instead of waiting for the inevitable, he announced his withdrawal and threw his support and that of his delegates behind Mr. Dion. Not only did it give Mr. Dion a boost in terms of votes, it also brought him the intangible support of Justine Trudeau. The charismatic son of former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau is the man many have anointed as the leader of the future and is beginning to attract a substantial following among the youth wing of the party.

This was enough of a swing in momentum and votes for Dion to take the lead after the third ballot. Still short of the majority needed to win the day, with Bob Rae having to drop out as the lowest vote getter, Dion's victory began to look like a reality. Even Ignatieff's people said later that they couldn't see their man coming back on the fourth ballot to overtake Dion.

What's surprising is how few people took Dion's campaign seriously. He had been a cabinet minister in John Chretian's government, dealing with the tricky portfolio of intergovernmental affairs and being the government's point man in the fight against Quebec Nationalism. He stayed in the cabinet when Paul Martin took over as leader and Prime Minister, and became the federal Minister of the Environment, meaning he was responsible for trying to ensure Canada's compliance with the Kyoto accord.

But in spite of this extensive experience in government most weren't prepared to give him a chance because of a decided lack of charisma and questions surrounding his ability to win in Quebec where he had alienated the nationalists. But Quebec nationalists don't vote in the Liberal leadership convention (in fact they don't vote Liberal at all so I can't see how it matters that he has alienated them) so their impact wasn't felt in the final tally.

In the end it came down to there being too many people who couldn't bring themselves to trust Ignatieff due mainly to his support of the war in Iraq, and his equivocations over the issue of torture. An early indication that those positions might haunt him was the huge ovation that greeted a mention of former Prime Minister Chretian's decision to keep Canadian troops out of the Iraqi conflict.

On the final ballot runoff between the two men, it was almost no contest as Dion easily captured the majority of the vote to finally bring the contest to its final conclusion. Almost immediately the naysayers were out in force proclaiming a variety of reasons why he wouldn't be able to win an election. Everything from the fact that he was the Liberal party's third Quebec leader in row to Quebecer's wouldn't support him because he is a federalist would work against him in the upcoming election.

Of course they also said he didn't stand a chance against heavy weights like Bob Rae or Michael Ignatieff, that he was too boring a speaker to hold crowds, and that nobody wanted an intellectual as leader. Whoever they are they don't have a very good track record when it comes to predicting Stephane Dion's future.

In fact early indications are that he is going to defy the so-called experts yet again. A poll taken shortly after he was elected leader on Sunday shows that for the first time since their defeat in last January's election the Liberals are ahead of the Conservative Party of Canada. Asked who they would vote for if an election were held today 36% favoured the Liberals, 31% the Conservatives, The New Democratic Party 14%, The Bloc Quebecois 11%, and the Green Party 7%.

Even better was the news from Quebec where 62% of those responding thought Dion was a good choice for the party. That should go a long way in erasing doubts that people have about his ability to win in Quebec. In other good new for Mr. Dion from those polling results, Allan Greg of the Strategic Council who conducted the poll, said the numbers for the Liberals were the highest in Ontario since they won in 2004.

Of course this is the bounce after the convention and it remains to be seen how long Dion can sustain those types of numbers once he settles into the day-to-day grind of parliament. Although there may not be that much of break judging by his rhetoric. At one point he said point blank that the Conservative Party of Canada is too far to the right of the rest of the house to survive. As of now it looks like the Liberal party are set for any surprise election that either Steven Harper wants to call or one they want to force.

Stephane Dion surprised everyone by winning the Liberal leadership when all considered his attempt hopeless. Currently he's ridding higher in the polls then Steven Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada and could very well be the man to lead the Liberals back to power.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 08:11 AM | Permalink

Sometimes the best way to get to know a performer who's music your not familiar with, is to buy a greatest hit package that spans the length and breadth of his or her career. Ideally the package will have pieces that reflect any and all changes and evolutions that his or her music went through. After listening to the anthology not only should you have a good idea of what the person is capable of, but also be able to decide what if any other of his or her music you want to buy.

This is especially helpful when you are dealing with an exceptionally prolific musician whose career has seen a good deal of changes. Recently there has been an expansion on the way in which anthologies are used where they are now coming out as themed packages as well as retrospectives of a career.

In the last couple of years there has been at least two discs that have focused on women in music; Blues Guitar Women and La Guitara which encompassed more than just rock and roll to include Jazz and Classical guitar women as well. Although there was some duplication between the recordings they both managed to offer introductions to figures who on their own might not have received the amount of attention that the collections earned.

Along lines similar to those of the previously mentioned collections, combined with a desire to celebrate their twelfth anniversary Ruf Records of Germany has released Ruf Records Anthology: 12 Years Of The Blues Crossing Over. This is a two disc set, a CD plus a DVD that represents the highlights of each of the twelve years of their existence.

In his liner notes for the compilation, Thomas Ruf, founder of the label, says that he wanted to select a song from what he considered each of the twelve years' most significant recordings. Those familiar with the label will recognize some of the songs as being on releases they may have heard before but others represent some of the less heralded performers on the label who may have flown under their radar or some old favourites who have found new life across the ocean.

For instance, although the opening track on the CD, "Working Overtime" is from Walter Trout's highly successful Full Circle disc (fifteen weeks on the Billboard charts and going strong) that features a duet between Walter and his new label mate Jeff Healy, the disc also includes such gems as "White Trash Girl" from Candye Kane's release of the same name.

Candye is larger then life with a voice like sandpaper mixed with honey that cuts like a chainsaw through all the shit that's not important. If this song is anything to go by she's blues in the tradition of the old style blues woman whose voice demands your respect, no matter what else you may think of her. Like Bessie Smith and Big Momma Thornton before her she has presence so out of the ordinary that it is extraordinary.
Candye is not the only surprise gem on this disc. The other one that astounded me was Kevin Coyne. This unassuming white haired guy looking for all the world like a high school English teacher, sings "Whispering Desert" taken from his year 2000 release Room Full Of Fools. On first hearing I was amazed at the poetic flow of his lyrics with their almost stream of conscience feel.

While so many singers feel they have to moan and contort their bodies and voices in order to prove the sincerity or depth of their emotion, Kevin manages to carry the listener deeper into the heart of something on the back of his words. His voice rarely raises above a conversational level, but he is more convincing than most of those who appear to be making twice the effort.

It was no surprise to learn that Mr. Coyne is also a painter and a poet, but what did shock me was the fact that he had completely improvised the lyrics to this and all the other songs on his disc. I would be fascinated to hear the remainder of Room Full Of Fools to hear whether or not he was able to maintain the quality of "Whispering Desert" for a whole disc.

If you ever had wondered where Omar and the Howlers and Canned Heat have gone to record, while the answer is Germany, and although a Belgian re-release label, Music Avenue owns their back catalogue, anything that Canned Heat still holds the rights to or is creating new is being released by Ruf. The Song "See These Tears" is from their first disc with Ruf, the 1999 Canned Heat Blues Band while this year saw a compilation disc Instrumental: 1966 –1996 released for the first time.

Omar and the Howler's contribution is from their first Ruf album as well, 2003's Boogie Man. The song "White Crosses" was not at all what I expected, much more subdued and thoughtful then I remember the band being, and an almost Latin undertone to the music. It was quite an interesting departure from the bar band blues that I had expected, and intriguing enough to make me interested in what else they are doing now.

Over on the DVD half of the anthology tracks have been lifted from a variety of concert discs that Ruff has released over the years. For me the highlights were seeing the three young musicians who made up 2006s Blues Caravan, Ian Parker, Aynsley Lister, and Erja Lyytinen playing "All The Time". They are all kick ass guitar players, but they also show a nice vocal touch with some great harmonies at the end of the song. There is also something truly infectious about the fun the three of them are having on stage together which didn't come across as much on the CD they recorded together.

Having already watched the Bob Brozman concert DVD I knew what to expect, but if you have never experienced watching Bob, his performance of "Rolling Through The World" will leave you stunned. The sounds he is able to generate from his un - amplified Resonator guitar are astounding. He epitomises the labels adage of the Blues Crossing Over like few others do. The title of the song refers to the numerous genres of music he incorporates seamlessly into the one song. From the sound of the sitar to a taste of Spain, but always centred in the Blues, he literally crosses over continents and oceans while playing this one song.

Like the anthology, there's no way I can do justice to all the performers who are on the Ruf label. These two discs provide a sampling of what Thomas Ruf considers the highlights of twelve years of music. Of course no compilation from Ruf would be complete without cuts from Luther Allison, the man for whom the label originally was formed, and each of the discs ends with the old master's work.

Thomas Ruf says that he started the label as a response to Luther challenging him to put his money where his mouth is, (it's only fitting that the CD closes with Luther's song of that name) judging by this compilation disc one would have to say that Thomas Ruf has given answer to that challenge.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 02:33 AM | Permalink

Everyday we can count on at least one if not more stories about Iraq in the pages of our newspapers. Whether debates on when the troops are withdrawn or recitations of the latest casualty figures it remains the dominant story across the media. But amidst everything else one aspect of the story is being ignored.

According to figures kept by the United Nations High Commission On Refugees (UNHCR) between January and mid November of 2006 about 425,000 Iraqis have been displaced from their homes. At mid-year the displacement rate had reached the level of 50,000 people a month.

These numbers have increased the numbers of Iraqi refugees to 1.6 million people displaced internally, and 1.8 million forced to leave the country. The majority of these people have crossed over into one of Syria, Jordan, or Egypt. Once there they either seek permanent residency (over 150,000 Iraqis have applied in Egypt) if allowed, or continue their journey onwards to either Europe or North America.

The UNHCR's has specific concerns for each of these populations, but primary among them is the strain being placed on those who are currently looking after the refugees inside and outside the country. The continued violence in Iraq itself is making it next to impossible for any aid agency, including the UNHCR to reach those people in most need.

Although we mostly read about the sectarian violence between the Shiite and the Sunni sects, the groups that are actually most at risk are those who comprise minority elements within the country. Christian Iraqis and an estimated 20,000 Palestinians who live on the Iraqi Syrian border are two groups considered at high risk currently. The former are considered to because of violence directed against them, and the latter because of the inability of aid workers to supply them on any consistent basis with essential necessities.

Aside from the violence that impedes their efforts the UNHCR is also being placed under huge financial strain. With an annual budget of only 29 million dollars they have already reached a point of such overextension that they are almost broke. If that happens what little they are able to do will come to a halt and cause even worse hardship and raise even higher barriers for those wishing to emigrate to safety.

One of the services the Centre offers is to act as a referral agency for people wishing to be considered refugee claimants in those countries recognising Iraqis as refugees. Without sponsorship it's almost impossible for a person to even apply to be considered as a refugee in countries like Canada. In Canada the ministry responsible for reviewing applications demands either a recommendation from UNHCR or sponsorship from private individuals who already reside in Canada for a person to even apply for refugee status.

One of the reasons that the UNHCR is so over extended in trying to assist and feed so many refugees is the fact that far too many countries are refusing to designate the displaced people of Iraq as refugees. According to the organization Human Rights Watch that in spite of their being over a million people displaced from their homes since the invasion the United States, Great Britain, and the majority of Iraq's neighbours refuse to recognise them as refugees.

Without that recognition they are unable to apply for legal admission to any of these countries. Jordan, which has one of the larger numbers of expatriate Iraqi populations in the Middle East, never granted them refugee status but allowed them to take up residency. But when the hotel bombings in Amman occurred they started to arrest and deport any that didn't have legal status.

For those who are being deported their options are limited to either returning to Iraq or hoping to find another country to take them in. The problem is that with the system breaking down, UNHCR running out of money, avenues for legal applications are becoming virtually impossible to negotiate.

According to one immigration lawyer in Canada those wishing to apply for refugee status in Canada are far better off getting to the country one way or another, even if illegally, and filling their application here. Even though Canada has accepted over 80% of those who have been referred by UNHCR as refugee applicants that means is no longer viable.

Working in favour of those who do make it to Canada illegally is the fact that since 2003 Canada has introduced a policy of "no return" for those already over here. The situation in Iraq is considered so extreme that no one will be sent back even if their application is refused at first hearing. This way they are at least guaranteed safety and a chance to appeal the decision.

Canada doesn’t have the most unblemished record in the world when it comes to treatment of refugees in general. Depending on the government in power qualifications for approval can change at random. But it seems like even the Conservative Party of Canada can show compassion on occasion, by allowing the no return policy to stand after they took power has probably saved quite a few lives.

I have no idea why the United States is refusing to allow Iraqi people to claim refugee status in their country, it's the least they can do for the people whose lives they have turned upside for the last three years. Sure declaring them as refugees would be to admit that the country is pretty much uninhabitable in places, but isn't it a good thing to show a little compassion at the expense of face?

Pride may come before the fall, but is it really fair to inflict you're unwillingness to admit that not everything has turned out how you planned on the innocent? Wouldn't if be nice if the reason that the headlines didn’t talk about a refugee problem was the fact that the problem really didn't exist instead of no one wanting to talk it.

Paying attention may not necessarily save people's lives, but the chances are better them if we ignore them. Perhaps if all of those who gave such wholehearted support to the war would each invite a refugee to stay with them for the duration a good portion of the problem would be solved. We all have to make sacrifices in wartime.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 05:29 AM | Permalink

I sometimes wonder where we humans ever come up with our ideas. How we can look at a set of circumstances, or a reality and then posit something completely opposite to what the facts suggest is one of our biggest deficiencies as a species. It's not even as if conclusions our reached out of ignorance, which could at least be an excuse, for all the evidence is usually right there for any and all to see.

In some ways it's a rather extreme form of denial; a wilful blindness that allows people to ignore reality in order that their vision of the world remains intact. One of the worst examples of this that I have come across is the manner so many new age folk have taken to viewing the natural world. In spite of all evidence to the contrary they have created some Pollyanna world where everything is bright and beautiful and all live in harmony in bucolic splendour.

They have their books to tell them how to go about finding their animal totem to act as their guide. They will learn how the animal's attributes and characteristic behaviour will be their clues to leading a better life. A person who has a beaver for a totem, for instance, is industrious but needs to watch that they don't create bottlenecks of their emotions by damming them up.

Since they are an aquatic mammal that can stay submerged for great lengths of time there is some sort of lesson to be learned from that, just like there is from the big flat tail and the ability to chew through wood. Of course the fact that they wouldn't recognize a beaver in the wild state if it walked up and shook their hand is far less relevant than the fact that going in and out of the beaver lodge is similar to travelling the birth canal repeatedly.

Of course they need to learn how to invoke the "teachings" of the beaver in order to fully integrate its important attributes. Don't worry if you are at a loss as to how to go about doing this, the book will explain all about creating a ritual to fully realize the potential of the beaver within you.

Now, aside from the cultural appropriation of vision questing from the Native Americans, without the bother of actually questing, it's all pretty much harmless. The real problems start to arise when they start thinking of nature as something beautiful and idyllic. Images of happy nature spirits frolicking in fields of wildflowers surrounded by happy birch maidens and gentle beech men.

The problem with that image is how far removed from even the reality of the old stories they think they are worshiping as to be ridiculous. The old nature gods were untamed and fierce as befits things that are far beyond our control. Ask anyone whose ever lived through a hurricane or even a tropical storm how sweet and gentle nature can be.

That is the tip of the iceberg as far as their misconceptions and silliness goes. They don't see why animals like the Coyote, lynx, and wolf have to hunt and kill that lovely wide-eyed faun or eat the bird that was just talking to them. They've sentimentalized nature to the point where it's nothing but a Walt Disney animation.

While that may not sound like such a bad thing, the problem is that they have developed expectations about how the natural world should be that are no different from the way those who believe that nature is man's to exploit. For all their supposed spiritual connection to the natural world they are no more connected to the way things really are then anyone else.

Of all the species in the world the only one whose extinction would have no affect on the natural order of things is man. We do not exist inside any of the food chains or do anything but take from the planet for our own personal gain without giving back. As it stands now if man were to cease to exist at this very moment it would take probably a few thousand years for the world to completely heal from our occupation.

Now while that may sound like quite a length of time, in relation to how the long the earth has existed it's a mere blink of the eye. In spite of everything we are still of really no importance in the bigger scheme of things. The only ways in which we make impressions on the planet is the extent of the damage we inflict, and thankfully as soon as we're gone it will begin to recover.

All through the history of man we have done nothing but try and bend nature to our will, with generally little or no success. Look down at the sidewalk you walk along in your city and you can usually see grasses or small plants growing up between the cracks. It would take very little time for nature to reclaim everything that we've built.

We do things like try and change the flow of the Mississippi river and build farmland in the areas that we've supposedly drained. But the river remembers where it ran for years and years before men showed up and periodically attempts to follow its old path. The ensuing flooding is called a tragedy and human's rail against nature and her cruelty.

But there's nothing cruel about her. She only does what she would do whether we were here or not. Any time that we have ever pitted ourselves against her or tried to coerce her into doing something that serves our purposes we end up suffering for it in the long run. The fault lies not with nature in those instances but with us for thinking that we are able to work against her or even control her.

Anybody who believes that nature is here to serve us in someway, or that the natural world gives us any consideration is at best misguided. You can have as many totem animals as you want but you are no more harnessing the power of the natural world for your benefit then anybody else.

We can only lose when we come into conflict with nature. If we do end up somehow subduing her the cost is so great that the area we have exerted our "dominion" over will become uninhabitable by any life form within a very short period of time. In all other cases the chances are what we have built will either be swallowed, washed away, or somehow or other destroyed.

Posted by Richard Marcus at 09:36 AM | Permalink

Lest anyone accuse me of unfairness and one sidedness today's look into the pit of despair that is Canadian politics will focus on the Liberal Party of Canada. Before I go any further I should explain something to readers from beyond Canada's borders who may not be familiar with our political parties.

While the Conservative Party of Canada can be counted on to be conservative, the Liberals are a bizarre mixture of conservative and liberal policies. While it's tempting to say that the Liberals are fiscally conservative and socially liberal it really is impossible to be both at the same time.

How can you claim to be a liberal socially when you gleefully cut spending on social programs? You can win the hearts and minds of the financial district in only one way and that's balancing the books. Since they don't want you taxing their clients, those wealthy enough to use the investment brokers and bankers who you're trying to please, in order to increase revenues, you cut spending.

The majority of money that our federal government spends is on social programming so we all know where a fiscal conservative government is going to make its cuts. Which is exactly what the Liberals did for the first ten or so years of their twelve-year reign. Through the simple expedient of not keeping up with inflation they were able to decrease spending across the board, but of course that wasn't nearly enough for those thirsting to see their profits rise.

The Liberal party precipitated the health care crises that we are currently digging out from through either direct cuts to the system or by reducing the amount of money provinces received from the federal treasury that would have covered costs. In fact it was The Liberal party's cuts to these transfer payments that led to the lowering of standards across the board when it comes to a slew of social issues.

Education, social assistance, infrastructure, and provincial environmental testing facilities all suffered accordingly. With former Prime Minister Paul Martin wielding the scissors as Minister of Finance under his predecessor Jean Chretian, the Liberals were far more reminiscent of a conservative party then anything even remotely liberal.

It's important that you keep this in mind over the course of the net few days as the Liberals gather to choose Paul Martin's replacement as leader of federal party. I'm sure that over the next few days we will be hearing all about how the Conservative Party of Canada is destroying the social fabric of Canada. I'd advice adjusting the flavour of those remarks with as many grains of salt that you deem necessary considering the Liberal party's own history.

It will be interesting to hear how each of the four front runners for the position of party leader and potentially Prime Minster of Canada have to say about the matter of the Conservative party. Will any of Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Stephane Dion, and George Kennedy at least have the integrity to not blame all the social woes on the guys who inherited their predecessor's mess?

Already we've heard from the Liberal Women's Caucus about how badly the Conservatives treat women, while they ignored their own record of making the lot of single mother's more difficult through the Liberal party's cuts. It stands to reason that they are just the warm up act for the heavy hitters running for leader.

Of the four only Stephane Dion was actually a member of the previous Liberal government. He was Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs and was responsible for negotiating some of the financial deals and arrangements with the provinces and territories.

Only Michael Ignatieff of the remainder even has a seat in the House of Commons, while Bob Rae is former Premier of Ontario as a member of the New Democratic Party, and George Kennedy was Minister for Education in Ontario's current Liberal government. All of which means is that these three guys at least aren't going to feel any compunctions about going after the Conservative record.

While not having been part of the government that implemented the policies of the mid to late nineties releases them from direct responsibility for their results, it doesn't mean they should be treated like they have a clean slate. By choosing to seek the leadership of the Liberal party they must accept responsibility for the party's legacy.

Of the four political parties that have members of the House of Commons; the New Democratic Party, The Conservative Party of Canada, and the Bloc Quebecois are fairly easy to predict as to what type of policy statements they will come up with. The Liberal party on the other hand is far more difficult to predict.

While they make noises about big-ticket programs, they are just as reluctant as any conservative to spend money on them. They will not hesitate to cut spending no matter how it may affect those who they claim to represent. Sometimes when dealing with the Liberal Party of Canada is like dealing with a creature with two brains; one that thinks like a conservative and cuts spending with abandon, and the other who preaches spending on social programming.

The problem is you're never quite sure which brain you're going to be dealing with on a daily basis so voting Liberal is always a risky endeavour. I wonder if a new leader will make any difference, or if the party will just continue on suffering from a split personality?

Posted by Richard Marcus at 06:19 AM | Permalink