Posts - April 2007

This obituary of the composer Zalvader Ipako has got to be an April Fool’s joke, according to the New Yorker’s Alex Ross. (Especially since there are no previous Google results for him.) It’s enjoyable on a highbrow level.

Born in 1903, in Valletta, he began his musical career almost a century ago, when—so the story goes—at the age of seven he was heard by a priest as he sang folksongs to draw customers to the sardines he was selling at the quayside.

…

He worked his way into the theatre when he knew Diaghilev’s company was rehearsing, came to the notice of the great impresario, and in 1922 gained a commission to write a ballet of his own. Diaghilev appears to have intended a satirical-sentimental treatment of the Russian Revolution—the title was to be Lenine!—for which Ipako was to create an orchestral score out of songs by Brahms.

…

After his break with Thibaud, Ipako withdrew more and more into himself. From this point the chronology becomes hazy, but it was probably in 1928 or 1929 that he embarked on what would be the major endeavour of his Paris years, though probably not completed until after he had gone back to Valletta on the outbreak of war: his Tristan Mass. Far more ambitious than the Tosca violin concerto in every way, this was a setting for eight voices (it is not clear whether Ipako intended eight soloists, or four soloists with a four-part chorus, or an eight-part chorus), seemingly prompted by the conviction that Wagner’s music could expand—had to expand—into harmonic realms the original composer did not begin to envisage.

Ipako’s Tristan Mass starts exactly as Wagner’s opera does, but with the opening phrase setting the words ‘Kyrie eleison’. From there it gradually unfolds into its own universe while maintaining, all the time, its connection with Wagner’s material. The entire ‘Credo’ is built as an eight-part fugue lasting forty minutes, with complex mensuration procedures used with almost incredible skill to preserve the intervallic outlines of the themes within the consistently developing harmony. No less remarkable is the second ‘Agnus Dei’, in just two parts: a coloratura soprano line that stays always above the treble staff and goes up as high as an A in altissimo, and a basso profundo part that, conversely, lies always below the bass staff. These two voices, as they interlock and counter each other, imply a great abundance of harmonic movement in the middle of the texture—of harmonic movement that is not actually heard.

Too bad it’s not real. I’d love to hear it.

Bush Defies Democrats With 3 Appointments – New York Times

President Bush used Congress’s Easter break today to defy Democratic lawmakers and appoint three officials who have already drawn heavy criticism on Capitol Hill…

Naming the three while Congress is in recess allows Mr. Bush to avoid the Senate confirmation process. The recess appointments allow the three to remain in their posts until the end of 2008, virtually the end of Mr. Bush’s second term.

This was the last straw for me today.

Past presidents have used the recess appointment power before. Clinton famously did it to appoint the first openly gay U.S. ambassador, to Luxemburg, over Republican objections. (Interestingly enough, one of today’s recess appointments is the ambassadorship to neighboring Belgium. Bush appointed Sam Fox, who gave $50,000 to the anti-Kerry “Swift Boat Veterans” group in 2004.)

But on top of everything else Bush is doing, this put me over the edge. It’s not enough that he has to be an ass regarding the Iraqi civil war – using totally unhelpful phrases today such as “pure evil” and defying the will of the American people. No; on top of that, he has to go ahead and pull a stunt like this.

Not that I should be at all surprised.

GOD, I can’t wait until 1/20/09.

They seem to be under the impression that longer is better, that short, quick posts are somehow necessarily uncivilized, as though it’s a physical property of them. But blogs just don’t work like that. Often in the blog world, short and sweet is what’s required. Moreover, with the medium’s requirement that people post often (daily or more), long isn’t always possible.

I really want to blog more. I’ve been blogging less often lately because I want to be a good employee. I should write more short, quick posts – better than nothing at all.

There are way more important things going in the world right now. But anyway:

Al Roker blogged yesterday that Don Imus must go. (Now it turns out Imus is gone, permanently, at least from MSNBC.) Today, in response to feedback, he wrote:

My freedom of speech was questioned. Some of the complaints that came in fell in that same category; I was denying Don Imus his freedom of speech. Far from it. Don Imus has the right to say whatever he wants, however hateful, stupid or uncaring. He DOES NOT have the right to say it on public airwaves or on the cable broadcast of a publicly owned company. That is a privilege, just as you do not have the right to have a license to drive a car. It is a privilege. Privileges can be revoked if certain criteria are not met.

Amen. I can’t read Don Imus’s mind and don’t know what the appropriate response is. But I am happy when people correctly point out that freedom of speech is a right that is enforced against governments, not against private entities. A private entity can do whatever the hell it wants when it comes to speech. If a private entity bans your speech, you still have freedom of speech — the freedom to speak somewhere else. If a government bans your speech, you don’t have any alternatives. (This leaves out the issue of what happens when a government bans speech in only a certain venue, of course.)

Granted, freedom of speech is more than just part of the Bill of Rights in this country, it’s a principle that pervades our culture; when people yell “freedom of speech!” they’re usually arguing for the principle.

That’s fine – as long as they realize that that principle holds no water as a legal argument.

For the third time this decade, New Jersey has an acting governor, following Gov. Jon Corzine’s serious car accident (in which he stupidly wasn’t wearing a seatbelt). First Governor Whitman resigned to take over the EPA, then Governor McGreevey resigned in the wake of the state homeland security debacle, and now this. Corzine won’t be able to resume his duties as governor for “days to weeks,” and he could be in a wheelchair for six months.

New Jersey really needs a lieutenant governor. Fortunately, in November 2005, New Jersey voters passed a constitutional amendment to create a lieutenant governship – although it doesn’t go into effect until the 2009 elections. Until then, the state will continue to muddle through.

At any rate, everyone seemed to like Acting Governor Dick Codey last time around, and he’s the acting governor again now, so things aren’t so bad.

From the New York Times: 2 Months After New Jersey’s Civil Union Law, Problems Finding True Equality.

I’m not sure what to make of this article, even though I did learn things from it.

Its thesis seems to be that civil unions are causing problems for gay couples that would be solved if they had access to marriage. It begins with several anecdotes about people who are being denied health insurance coverage by their civil-union spouses’ employers, when married spouses would be granted coverage. The nut graf states that these problems “rais[e] questions about whether the new arrangement adequately fulfills the promise of the State Supreme Court ruling that led to it.” The writer of the article seems to have an agenda, which is often the case when an article states that something “raises questions.”

[R]esidents who work for companies headquartered in other states, and those whose insurers are based outside New Jersey, have found it difficult if not impossible to sign their partners up for health insurance. Unions and employers whose self-insured plans are federally regulated have also denied coverage in some cases. Staff members in doctors’ offices and emergency rooms have questioned partners’ role in decision-making. Confusion abounds over the interplay of state and federal laws governing taxes, inheritance and property.

Can you really blame a law on the fact that people disobey it or don’t understand it?

The article also deals with several instances of unequal treatment that would persist even if the New Jersey legislature had granted marriage rights, and not just civil union rights, to same-sex couples.

For example, some companies provide only “self-insured” health care plans, which are financed by employers rather than purchased from state-regulated insurers. Because self-insured plans are governed by a federal law – ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act – apparently insurers and employers think the plans are also subject to DOMA. But apparently that’s not true:

[G]ay-rights advocates said federal law did not prohibit self-insured companies from providing benefits to same-sex couples. A 2006 report by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation found that more than half the Fortune 500 companies, most of which have self-insured plans, offered benefits to domestic partners.

“It’s the employer’s own choice to decide who’s a beneficiary, and the federal government doesn’t prevent employers from doing the right thing,” said Michele Granda, a staff lawyer with the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. “Those employers are purposefully choosing to discriminate against their employees.”

Which would be the case even if New Jersey allowed gay couples to get married. Because DOMA theoretically applies to them, too.

The article does point out the problems inherent in divergent state/federal marriage schemes, though – problems involving taxes, Medicaid, and bankruptcy.

Civil union partners filing taxes jointly in New Jersey have to file federal tax returns as if they were single, then calculate what they would owe on a joint federal return to figure their state credits and deductions, said Stephen J. Hyland, a lawyer and writer of “New Jersey Domestic Partners: A Legal Guide.”

“Civil union couples will most likely be treated as if they are single for purposes of qualifying for Medicaid, which can jeopardize the couple’s home if one partner needs nursing home care,” Mr. Hyland said.

Bankruptcy is governed by federal law, although state law determines how married and civil union couples hold title to their property.

There’s a real tension between federal schemes and traditional states’-rights theory. Federal programs are so much more a part of Americans’ personal lives than they used to be. What’s the solution? Either the federal government should recognize all marriages that a particular state recognizes, or state-married (and state CU’d) couples just have to deal with two different schemes until we get a more enlightened Congress and president.

It’s probably going to be the latter. Whenever that happens.

Oh. And so much for my trying to write short blog entries.

According to my stack of Playbills, this the list of the shows I’ve seen so far this year:

January 18 – Regrets Only
February 8 – Follies at Encores!
February 11 – The Coast of Utopia, Part I
February 28 – 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee (2nd time; 1st time was Off-Broadway)
March 3 – Prelude to a Kiss
March 8 – Talk Radio
March 9 – Journey’s End
March 18 – Grey Gardens (2nd time; 1st time was Off-Broadway)
March 29 – The Coast of Utopia, Part II
April 8 – Legally Blonde
April 12 – LoveMusik

Also a production of Violet, in Brooklyn, that a member of my chorus was in.

This is actually not as many shows as I’d thought.

Because I’m feeling rather emotionally open today, here’s a story.

About two years ago, Matt and I befriended a group of gay guys. We already knew one of them, but somehow we got to know the rest. They had a weekly Friday night ritual where they’d go out for drinks and then go over to one guy’s apartment and watch the Sci-Fi channel’s Friday night lineup. Sometimes they’d go out to a movie or just do a bar night.

We became a part of their circle, and it was great – a real improvement in our social lives. It gave us automatic plans for Friday night and we always looked forward to it.

Then last spring, something happened. For some reason – and to this day I have no idea what that reason was – the “leader” of the group, the guy who hosted us at his apartment every Friday night, turned on me. Matt and I stopped receiving weekly invites, and the guy de-linked me from his blog and took me off his Friendster list. All without ever contacting me directly. I emailed him to ask what was going on, and he never responded.

His behavior was totally passive-aggressive. A real sign of stunted emotional growth. He used to joke that he lacked a heart, that he wasn’t comfortable with emotion, and these actions made me realize he was right. He seemed to wear his lack of emotion as a badge of honor, but I think that’s because he was too scared to deal with what was underneath. Actually, I have no right to say that, because I don’t know him well enough, but he wouldn’t be the first person on the planet to drown his fear in an affect of bitterness.

After Matt and I were kicked out of the group, we managed to keep in touch with a couple of the guys. One of them was the friend we already knew; the other one was a friend we made in the group. As for the rest, we lost all contact. We’d never really hung out with most of the guys on their own, but there was a gay couple in the group that we used to have brunch with occasionally. The brunches stopped. It was like we’d become totally ostracized. It’s amazing what kind of power one person has. One person decides he doesn’t like you, and suddenly your social life changes. Nobody ever contacted us to say they felt bad about us being kicked out. Nothing. Of course, this was just a sign that we’d never really had close ties to the other guys in the first place. I guess we never really belonged there. Or at least I didn’t.

This all came rushing back this weekend, because the friend we’d made in the group, who is moving away, threw a going-away party. Several members of the group were there, although the group leader wasn’t. I hadn’t seen most of them in almost a year. It was awkward for me. They seemed friendly and conversational, but I have no idea what they were really thinking. The group leader had often been quite vocal about the things he disliked, and God only knows what he ever said about me over drinks behind my back and how much he might have influenced the other guys’ opinions of me.

When all of this happened last spring, it hurt. I soon realized that it wasn’t worth worrying over, because you shouldn’t value the opinion of someone unless there’s a reason to. I feel only contempt for him, zero admiration (and actually a bit of pity), so why waste the time? And yet, paradoxically, it still kind of hurts, almost a year later. The reasons for what happened have nothing to do with me — what other people think of you is none of your business — but it still happened.

I’ve been wanting to write about this for a long time. It feels good to have done so.

This is horrible. Virginia Tech was our main rival school – I went to UVA, three hours away, but I never visited Tech’s campus. My heart goes out to everyone who’s lost someone and to everyone who had to go through what sounds like a harrowing ordeal. I can’t imagine how long it will take the campus to recover from something like this. Virginia Tech has probably been marked forever. So sad.

Here’s a statement from UVA president John Casteen on today’s events at Virginia Tech.

The shootings this morning at Virginia Tech have turned a seemingly normal day into one filled with grief and disbelief. For U.Va., especially on this day, Virginia Tech is family…

Um, in addition to all the other stuff going on in the news, the Supreme Court issued a major abortion ruling this morning, upholding a federal ban on partial-birth abortion, 5-4. O’Connor’s replacement by Alito made the difference.

Painted on Beta Bridge at UVA: “Hoos for Hokies.” (Other photos.)

Beta Bridge is a bridge at UVA that’s constantly painted and repainted to publicize an event or sentiment or whatnot, from political rallies to 21st birthdays to fundraisers to concerts. (Who knows how thick the layers of paint are after all these years.)

‘Hoos are UVA students, Hokies are Tech students, and we/they have a big, longtime rivalry.

This story is not about UVA, of course. But the outpourings of sympathy from my fellow ‘Hoos for their longtime rivals keeps making me want to cry, in a good way. From UVA’s student newspaper, the Cavalier Daily: “University students dug through their closets to find anything maroon and orange — two colors all Hoos had previously tried to avoid — to demonstrate their support of Virginia Tech at the vigil held last night.” That makes me want to cry, too.

The killer sends a package to NBC news containing video, and NBC News AIRS some of it?

Tucker Carlson called it pornography. Figuratively, but he’s right.

I watched it, but I shouldn’t have been able to. They shouldn’t have broadcast it. It’s just going to encourage other potential killers/narcissists. Commit mass murder and send your video to the national news and you’ll get a nationwide platform!

It’s hard to satirize reality when it does such a good job of satirizing itself.

Sick, sick, sick.

[Further thought: How is this any different from Fox potentially airing the O.J. Simpson interview? At least they had the decency (Fox? decency? yeah, I know) to reverse their decision to do so.]

Next year, New Hampshire will become the fourth state to allow civil unions. Hooray!

Repeal the Second Amendment.

As one commenter says, this is a great way to cut the Gordian knot of this issue. It would take years to happen, but the debate should occur. Let the NRA and other gun supporters defend their position on the merits.

As another commenter points out: if people want to defend themselves against government tyranny, do they really think their guns would be any match for U.S. military tanks? And if the government decides to abrogate the Constitution, how will the Second Amendment help you in the first place?

Oh, please.

Scott Rudin, the producer of “The Year of Magical Thinking” on Broadway, is pissed at the New York Times for allowing readers of its website to post “Reader’s Reviews” while a show is still in previews. He got back at the Times by taking out ads in the paper, quoting one of those “Reader’s Reviews,” which said, “An evening of magical theater. Get yourself a ticket to the Booth Theatre,” and Rudin purposely and misleadingly attributed the quote to “The New York Times Online.” And the Times is not happy. Letters ensued.

For those who don’t know, before a show’s official opening, there are usually a few weeks of previews, which is an opportunity for the creators of the show to see what works in front of an audience and what doesn’t and to adjust things accordingly. From night to night, entire songs might be added or removed, scenes might be rearranged or taken out or whatever. The show doesn’t get “frozen” until opening night. Anyone can see a preview; the ticket prices are usually the same; you still get a Playbill. The average theatergoer would have no idea whether he or she was attending a preview.

Here is the page on the New York Times website where you post Readers’ Reviews. There’s no indication of whether a show is in previews or not. Savvy readers can tell that a listing without a New York Times review is probably still in previews, but the average reader won’t catch that. It’s probably a good idea for the Times to designate shows in previews as such.

But if Scott Rudin’s pissed at the New York Times for allowing readers’ reviews before a show has opened, he may as well go after All That Chat, and the entire Intarweb for that matter.

If you’re going to charge audience members full price to see a preview of your show, they have the right to know what they’re getting into beforehand, and that includes hearing about the show from others. If Rudin’s unhappy with the Times policy, he should, um, TELL THEM, instead of acting passive-aggressively.

Thank you, Dick Cavett, for pointing out something that bothered me this week:

Could someone please inform our lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary Committee that Attorney General Gonzales is not a general? Was it sixth or was it seventh grade when we all learned that “general” is the adjective? He is a general attorney, Senator Grassley (even the inspector general has no stars on his shoulders), and every time you call him “General Gonzales” you embarrass your home state of Iowa. And all of us.

Yesterday I saw Frost/Nixon, a new Broadway play, originally produced in London, about David Frost’s interviews with Richard Nixon, three years after Nixon resigned. The most famous line from those interviews: “[W]hen the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.”

Nixon died thirteen years ago today, and coincidentally (or not), the play officially opens on Broadway tonight.

From the show’s producers: “How did David Frost, a famous British talk-show host with a playboy reputation, elicit the apology that the rest of the world was waiting to hear from former President Richard Nixon? The fast-paced new play shows the determination, conviction and cunning of two men as they square off in one of the most monumental political interviews of all time.”

It has a classic structure: a dual character study. Two characters meet in a confrontation, and we get to see both of their motivations. Frost actually seems to be the more important character than Nixon here — after all, Frost’s name comes first in the title. I was fascinated by the play, even though it was hard to hear Frank Langella, who portrays Nixon. He mumbles and swallows his words. Fortunately, the mezzanine wasn’t very full, so at one point I got up and moved closer, and after that I could hear him better.

The play set my mind going, and I started to think about how an ex-presidency has a life of its own. I realized that even on January 20, 2009, we won’t have heard the last of George W. Bush. He’ll be 62 when he leaves office. Will he pull a Gerald Ford, never to be seen again except at golf tournaments? Will he pull a Carter or Clinton, setting up a foundation and trying to change the world – in his case, by spreading Christianity or trying to export democracy abroad? I doubt he’ll pull a Nixon, writing memoirs and trying to rehabilitate his reputation. In his mind, he probably has nothing to atone for.

I wonder if he’ll ever sit down with an interviewer like Nixon did with Frost and try to explain himself and his actions.

For some reason I found myself looking up information about “You Can’t Do That on Television,” which ran on Nickelodeon in the 80s. I used to love that show when I was a kid. And I used to have a big crush on Alasdair.

Here’s what he looks like today, or at least five years ago. Not too bad. Not too bad at all.

I was a big fan of “Growing Pains” when I was younger. The end of the final episode actually made me cry.

I especially liked the show’s theme song. But what I loved was the little-remembered a cappella version of the theme, which was used only toward the end of the series. Well-sung a cappella music has such nice and tight harmonies.

I’ve never been able to find any clips of the a cappella theme online. The show even runs on TV in syndication, but whenever I caught an episode, it had the regular opening. I began to wonder if they’d dumped the a cappella opening in syndication.

That made me sad.

Lo and behold, the other night our TiVo recorded a late episode of “Growing Pains” as a suggestion, and the episode used the a cappella opening! I was so excited that I transferred the episode to my computer and made a clip of the theme. Here it is.

Pure happiness.

Oh, jeez… this comes out next week.

It doesn’t end, does it.

I’m in one of the inter-book chasms right now. I finished reading a history book a couple of weeks ago, and I can’t seem to settle on a new book. I bought Michael Chabon’s new book, The Yiddish Policemen’s Union, read the first two chapters, didn’t like it, and returned it. This was disappointing, because I loved Chabon’s first two novels, The Mysteries of Pittsburgh and Wonder Boys, and really enjoyed The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay.

After returning the book, I bought Orhan Pamuk’s Snow. It was supposed to be good, and the author won the Nobel Prize. I’ve been reading it this week, but I’m 100 pages into it and I’m bored. I’m giving up, because I can.

Then I was thinking I might read something like Anna Karenina, which is supposed to be one of the greatest novels ever. But I’ve read the first few pages online and I don’t think I’m in the mood for it.

I think I feel like reading something more American, more modern, more fresh. So I’m leaning right now toward either Don DeLillo’s Libra or Philip Roth’s I Married a Communist. DeLillo’s book supposedly does neat things with history; as for Roth, I’ve read three of his novels, and although he can be old and cranky and hetero, I love his prose.

I’m also very curious about this. But it’s not out for a few weeks.

So we’ll see.

Rudy Giuliani, surprise surprise, has come out against New Hampshire’s new civil union law. [via Mike]

“Mayor Giuliani believes marriage is between one man and one woman. Domestic partnerships are the appropriate way to ensure that people are treated fairly,” the Giuliani campaign said in a written response to a question from the Sun. “In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states. This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it.”

What a hack. Is there anything he won’t say? Is there any member of the base he won’t pander to? First he flip-flops on abortion, then he goes all Karl Rove and says that a Democratic president will lead to another 9/11, and now this. He’s totally going into crazy base world.

Except for a few days in September 2001, Rudy Giuliani has always been an asshole. Here’s the real Rudy. New Yorkers had to put up with his crap for eight years. Had I been a New York City voter in the ’90s, I would, in fact, have voted for him – I liked his anti-crime policies, and the Disneyfication of Times Square doesn’t bother me. But back then, he was a northeastern, socially liberal Republican. Ever since he started believing his own 9/11 hype, he’s been bonkers.

What the hell does America see in him?

I just realized that as of yesterday, I am one-third of the way through with my 30s.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!

Could someone please explain what the deal is with “Watergate Sue,” currently being serialized in the New York Times Magazine? It has no plot. What point is it trying to make?