CAREER MOVES

tenured by the streets
A few years ago, I was at an academic conference in Atlanta, catching up with some acquaintances from grad school, and we were exchanging stories that could be summed up as, "how academics are a bizarre bunch of folks." And I can't remember who made this observation but one of us noted: you have to be, just at least a little dysfunctional (read: nutty) to become an academic since what kind of rational person gives up 5-10 years of their life to study an arcane topic that, almost by design, no one knows a thing about (and probably doesn't care to). Meanwhile, you're skating by on what slim fellowship and teaching money you can grift and surrounded by other people just like you, many of whom have never spent an adult day outside of the academy. To be in the midst of that has to make you just a little off-axis too, if not straight up on TILT.

Keep all this in mind while you read the comments for this story from The Chronicle of Higher Education (more or less, the leading weekly publication amongst academics)Inside Higher Education. The story itself finds musicologist Phil Ford taking Biggie's "Ten Crack Commandments" and applying them to rules that any junior faculty member (read: untenured, aka me) should follow to survive through until tenure.

Personally, I'm ambivalent on the actual article since the application of Biggie's song to the tenure process is likely to divide the hip-hop-friendly as either inspired or insipid. That said, some of it did make me laugh, such as:

Number six: That goddamn credit, dead it/You think a crackhead payin’ you back, shit, forget it. For “crackhead,” think “student with a late paper.” For “credit,” think “extension.”

However, whatever your feelings about the actual article, it's the comments by other folks - presumably also academics - that's really the more fascinating reading and makes you realize how severely detached from quotidian reality many people in my profession (self included) can be, not to mention completely bereft of a sense of humor. To wit:

•No time for profanity

I can’t believe Inside Higher Ed would subject the unsuspecting public to this outrageous profane diatribe with no warning or disclaimer! Disgusting! The decent thing to do would have been to put a disclaimer so that the reader could be warned that what follows is “profane and has absolutely no educational value.

Shameful!

•I really find this posting troubling! What is the point! At a time when “racial profiling” is at an all-time-high, this kind of sharing simply reinforces stereotypes.

Might I suggest sharing the comments of several successful, African American academics from both private and public higher education institutions who have navigated the tenure and promotion process.

This posting is neither helpful nor tasteful.

•It would have been better without the vulgarity. “Fuck” and “Shit” were not necessary to get the point across, but try telling that to your students. And I don’t believe the use of vulgarity is a generational divide, it is an educational/professional divide.

•What’s the point of legitimizing gansta culture by pretending it has “wisdom” for academics? I think people make themselves ridiculous when they listen to this stuff, much less pretend it has anything of value to say to anyone.

•What’s fun about this piece? It strikes me as ugly and negative, and much of the advice is just plain wrong.

My students are diverse (mostly Hispanic and Asian) and do not follow hip hop. They wouldn’t respond to this stuff.

There is a larger question about whether you need to pander to youth culture in order to present a fun class. I think you don’t and that you can make yourself look ridiculous by doing so.

I realize this is parody (of what I’m not really sure), but hip hop itself glorifies violence, misogyny, perpetuates negative stereotypes and is profoundly anti-intellectual. Why would anyone think it would enhance the classroom? The age issue is a red herring.

My students come to class in order to learn, often at considerable personal sacrifice. It insults their aspirations to present them with this crap.

Just so we're clear, it wasn't all like this...in fact, Ford's piece inspired other commenters to quote their own favorite hip-hop types, including Suge Knight, Ol Dirty Bastard, Cormega and...Deltron 3030.

(Credit: Daddy in a Strange Land)

---

In terms of my other profession, I saw this over at Jeff's blog: a useful breakdown of how to write a newspaper culture article in ten easy steps. I have to say: this is pretty good in terms of how it distills the basics of how most articles get written. Of course, just because you get the structure down doesn't mean you've mastered the prose but it's not a bad way for a beginning writer to get a sense of basic narrative flow.

--O.W.

VANS ARE SO 2006

I swear to god, this isn't my attempt to turn Poplicks into all things Pinoy-related or what not, but this song is pretty funny/silly:

The City Kid: Tsinelas

--O.W.

America's Shame: Two Years Later

This ain't America, is it? Where can I be?
(photo: Diane Lent)
Putting aside, for a moment, talk of Alberto, Owen and Michael, let's consider that today marks the 2 year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina hitting the Gulf Coast, thereby setting off the worst moment in modern U.S. history (sorry 9/11, you don't come remotely close). It's still hard to contemplate the complete disaster that the aftermath wrought and by this, of course, I mean our response as a government and society.

NPR's coverage has been exemplary (especially for the attention challenged) and I'd draw special focus to a story that ran on Monday about how evacuees are faring in Houston. You get a visceral sense of how people are still suffering, especially at the hands of a social safety net that, while arguably being overwhelmed, still hasn't gotten it's sh-- together for thousands.

Last Sunday, the Washington Post published this editorial from Rice University professor Douglas Brinkley, who wrote The Great Deluge, a history of the Katrina disaster. Brinkley's discussion of the continued abandonment of the Ninth Ward is especially stomach turning. The fact that Chertoff still has a job - let alone is being considered to take over as Attorney General - only highlight the unbelievable levels of (un)accountability that exist within the current administration.

Reckless Abandonment

By Douglas Brinkley
Sunday, August 26, 2007; B01

Over the past two years since Hurricane Katrina, I've seen waves of hardworking volunteers from nonprofits, faith-based groups and college campuses descend on New Orleans, full of compassion and hope.

They arrive in the city's Ninth Ward to painstakingly gut houses one by one. Their jaws drop as they wander around afflicted zones, gazing at the towering mounds of debris and uprooted infrastructure.

After weeks of grueling labor, they realize that they are running in place, toiling in a surreal vacuum.

Two full years after the hurricane, the Big Easy is barely limping along, unable to make truly meaningful reconstruction progress. The most important issues concerning the city's long-term survival are still up in the air. Why is no Herculean clean-up effort underway? Why hasn't President Bush named a high-profile czar such as Colin Powell or James Baker to oversee the ongoing disaster? Where is the U.S. government's participation in the rebuilding?

And why are volunteers practically the only ones working to reconstruct homes in communities that may never again have sewage service, garbage collection or electricity?

Eventually, the volunteers' altruism turns to bewilderment and finally to outrage. They've been hoodwinked. The stalled recovery can't be blamed on bureaucratic inertia or red tape alone. Many volunteers come to understand what I've concluded is the heartless reality: The Bush administration actually wants these neighborhoods below sea level to die on the vine.

These days a stiff Caribbean breeze causes residents to jerk into a high-alert state of anxiety. Still unfinished is the overhaul of what some call the "Lego levees," the notoriously flawed 350-mile "flood protection system" that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers starting building in 1965.

The Corps has been busy fixing the three principal holes that opened in August 2005. Its hard work has, in fact, paid a partial dividend. A decent defensive floodwall is now on the east side of the Industrial Canal, attempting to protect the Lower Ninth Ward.

Unfortunately, that is where the upbeat news nosedives. The federal government has refused to shut the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet canal that helped cause the Katrina "funnel effect" flooding two years ago. In addition, entire neglected neighborhoods still have no adequate flood control.

The answer to New Orleans's levee woes is painfully obvious: money and willpower. Common sense dictates that the endangered areas -- if repopulated (and that is a big if) -- demand levees that can sustain Category 5 storms. It's a national obligation. Entire blocks are moldering away while the federal government lifts only a cursory hand to reverse the desultory trend.

Unfortunately, one of the biggest misperceptions the American public harbors is that Katrina was a week-long catastrophe. In truth, it's better to view it as an era. Remember, the Dust Bowl of the 1930s lasted eight or nine years. We're still in the middle of the Katrina saga.

Bold action has been needed for two years now, yet all that the White House has offered is an inadequate trickle of billion-dollar Band-aids and placebo directives. Too often in the United States we forget that "inaction" can be a policy initiative. Every day the White House must decide what not to do.

The stubborn inaction appears to fall under the paternalistic guise of helping the storm victims. Bush's general attitude -- a Catch-22 recipe if ever there was one -- appears to be that only rank fools would return when the first line of hurricane defense are the levees that this administration so far refuses to fix.

New Orleans appears to be largely abandoned by the Department of Homeland Security, except for its safeguarding of the Port Authority (port traffic is at 90 percent of pre-Katrina numbers) and tourist districts above sea level, such as the French Quarter and Uptown. These areas are kept alive largely by the wild success of Harrah's casino and a steady flow of undaunted conventioneers.

The brutal Galveston Hurricane of 1900 may be a historical guide to the administration's thinking. Most survivors of that deadly Texas storm moved to higher land. Administration policies seem to tacitly encourage those who live below sea level in New Orleans to relocate permanently, to leave the dangerous water's edge for more prosperous inland cities such as Shreveport or Baton Rouge.

After the 1900 hurricane, in fact, Galveston, which had been a large, thriving port, was essentially abandoned for Houston, transforming that then-sleepy backwater into the financial center for the entire Gulf South. Galveston devolved into a smallish port-tourist center, one easy to evacuate when hurricanes rear their ugly heads.

To be fair, Bush's apparent post-Katrina inaction policy makes some cold, pragmatic sense. If the U.S. government is not going to rebuild the levees to survive a Category 5 storm -- to be finished at the earliest in 2015 and at an estimated cost of $40 billion, far eclipsing the extravagant bill for the entire Interstate Highway System -- then options are limited.

But what makes the current inaction plan so infuriating is that it's deceptive, offering up this open-armed spin to storm victims: "Come back to New Orleans." Why can't Bush look his fellow citizens in the eye and tell them what seems to be the ugly truth? That as long as he's commander in chief, there won't be an entirely reconstructed levee system.

Shortly after Katrina hit, former House speaker J. Dennis Hastert declared that a lot of New Orleans could be "bulldozed." He was shot down by an outraged public and media, which deemed such remarks insensitive and callous. Two years have shown that Hastert may have articulated what appears to have become the White House's de facto policy. He may have retreated, but the inaction remains.

The White House keeps spinning Bush's abysmal poll numbers by claiming that his legacy will rise decades from now the way Harry S. Truman's did. But Truman had a reputation for straight talk and bold vision. If Bush wants history to perceive him as Trumanesque, then he must act Trumanesque.

Bush's predecessors moved mountains. Theodore Roosevelt set aside 230 million acres for wildlife conservation (plus built the Panama Canal). Franklin D. Roosevelt began a kaleidoscope of New Deal programs to calm the Great Depression and Truman oversaw the Marshall Plan rebuilding of Western Europe after World War II. Bush could seize the initiative and announce a real plan to rebuild, a partnership between the government, Fortune 500 companies and faith-based groups.

Unfortunately, right now New Orleans is having a hard time lobbying on its own behalf. Minnesota's Twin Cities have about 20 Fortune 500 companies to draw in private-sector money to help rebuild the bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis. New Orleans has one, Entergy, which is verging on bankruptcy. So besides U.S. taxpayers and port fees, New Orleans must count on spiked-up tourist dollars to jumpstart the post-Katrina rebuild.

But this is where the bizarre paradox of living in a city of ruins comes into play. Out of one side of its mouth the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce says, "Come on down, folks! We're not underwater!" Yet these same civic boosters -- viscerally aware that the Bush administration is treating the desperate plight of New Orleans in an out-of-sight, out-of-mind fashion -- don't want to bite the hand that feeds them large chunks of reconstruction cash. New Orleans is both bragging about normalcy and poor-mouthing itself, confusing Americans about what the real state of the city is.

Recently Mayor C. Ray Nagin, born with the proverbial foot in his mouth, tried to explain why the homicide rate in New Orleans is so appallingly high. When a TV reporter asked, Nagin merely shrugged: "It's not good for us, but it also keeps the New Orleans brand out there." This absurd comment -- and dozens like it -- hurts New Orleans's recovery almost as much as Bush's policy of inaction.

Everywhere I travel in the United States, people ask, "Why did you guys reelect such a doofus?" There is a feeling that any community that reelected a "first responder" who stayed in a Hyatt Regency suite during Hurricane Katrina, never delivered a speech to the homeless at the Superdome or Convention Center in New Orleans, and played the "chocolate city" race card at a historic moment when black-white healing was needed probably deserves to get stiffed by the federal government.

And Nagin isn't the only bad ambassador New Orleans has. It also has City Council member Oliver Thomas, Sen. David Vitter and Rep. William J. Jefferson -- all currently in deep trouble for potentially breaking the law. Dismayed by such political buffoonery, Americans have simply turned a blind eye to New Orleans's reconstruction plight. There is a scolding sentiment around the country that Louisiana needs to get its own house in order before looking for fresh levee handouts.

Then there are egregious contractor crimes such as over-billing and price-gouging. The medical infrastructure has largely collapsed. Mercy and Charity hospitals remain closed. A severe crisis in mental health care has erupted and gang violence is on the rise. The Environmental Protection Agency refuses to clearly state that it's safe to live in the metro area. Young professionals, recognizing that there are greener pastures all over the nation, are fleeing in droves.

Even with our trillion-dollar debt and excessive military expenses in Iraq, the American people, if presented with a bold plan, might be ready to save the beleaguered city. Perhaps the people haven't lost their good Samaritan grit.

Let's, for once, put New Orleans on the front burner. After all, Katrina exposed all the ills of urban America -- endemic poverty, institutionalized racism, failing public schools and much more. New Orleans is just a microcosm of Newark and Detroit and hundreds of other troubled urban locales.

How we deal with New Orleans's future will tell us a lot about our nation's future. In 2008 it should really be an up or down vote. Category 5 levees or not? An independent FEMA or a FEMA still ensconced in Homeland Security? Do we pour $40 billion into grandiose Louisiana engineering projects or do we instead put up "no trespassing" signs in the areas below sea level? All are hard choices with various merits and pains.

The important thing, however, is for America to decide whether the current policy of inaction is really the way we want to deal with the worst natural disaster in our history.

--O.W.

QUESTION OF THE WEEK #116

Shove it, America.

This Week's Question:

Now that he's announced his resignation, what should Attorney General Alberto Gonzales do next?

--Junichi

BABY SCRATCHES

This video came courtesy my man Todd I., who quipped, "why isn't he Pinoy?"

--O.W.

FRIDAY FEEDBACK: M.I.A.

M.I.A.'s left foot is bigger than her album sales

This week's Friday Feedback track is:

"20 Dollar" by M.I.A.
from the new LP Kala

Here is an album track from M.I.A.'s latest, complete with gunshot noises, syncopated synthesizer nonsense, and New Order bass lines. Can you think of better songs named after hte price of AK-47s in Africa? Is "20 Dollar" twice as good as "10 Dollar" on her first album? Can you make sense of phrases like "My stains hang low", "We goat rich", and "Born out of dirt like I'm porn in a skirt"?

Leave your comments below.

--Junichi

A MESSAGE TO THOSE OUTRAGED BY MICHAEL VICK

Tackle Cruelty = Kick Vick

It's not that I don't understand all the indignation over Michael Vick's alleged crimes against dogs.

I oppose pointless animal cruelty and find the story altogether disturbing.

But to you incensed protesters and inflamed radio show callers who can't stop barking about how Michael Vick should be mercilessly punished: where were you after the news of Abu Ghraib broke?

What is it that allows you to become so impassioned over the torture of several dogs but totally apathetic, at best, when it comes to our federal government torturing other human beings?

I find both the act of drowning dogs and drowning humans disgusting.

But drowning dogs is illegal.

Drowning humans, on the other hand, in the form of water boarding, can be permitted at the directive of the President of the United States. (Several news outlets have reported that the White House has explicitly approved water boarding as an interrogation technique.)

Don't get me wrong. I feel sorry for the dogs. But our head of state has not incorporated animal torture into his foreign policy. Our elected leaders are not attempting to block Amnesty International or the United Nations from observing alleged acts of canine torture.

Which is to say, so long as our tax dollars fund the torture of human beings, how can anybody possibly spend any energy protesting the alleged crimes of Michael Vick?

Get your priorities straight.

--Junichi

QUESTION OF THE WEEK #115

These people are either playing poker or reading Poplicks.com

This Week's Question:

If you were a college or grad school professor, would you allow your students to use laptops in class during your lectures?

(Assume students have a free wireless connection while in the classroom and that there's no way to shut it off for temporary periods of time.)

--Junichi

WHO SAYS ASIAN MEN HAVE NO HEROES?

--O.W.

A MESSAGE FROM IDI AMIN, JR.

--Junichi

FRIDAY FEEDBACK: will.i.am

ill, I am.

This week's Friday Feedback track is:

"Songs About Girls" by will.i.am
from the forthcoming LP Songs About Girls

This is BEP's will.i.am's latest solo effort, which includes the following poetic masterpiece of a quatrain:

Everyday should be your birthday, hun.
You make the guys all dumb.
Maybe cause you’re blessed with the beautiful buns.
Maybe cause your beauty keep the dudes on sprung.

Did Pablo Neruda ghostwrite this song? Do you appreciate the lesson in the hereditary properties of beauty? Or do you think I might be enjoying this song simply because I got my body from my mama?

Leave your comments below.

--Junichi

GUESS WHO'S NOT YOUNG ANYMORE?

Happy Birthday, O-Dub.

--Junichi

OH SH--

I heart R. Kelly.

New chapters!

--O.W.

COMIC SEGREGATION

Someone over at Soulstrut.com sent me a link to this: scans of a 1960 comic book touting then-segregationist George Wallace for Alabama governor. An interesting artifact from America's pop culture + political past. Not surprisingly, most copies of this were destroyed years ago but you can't escape the digital archive (something I will, no doubt, be saying years from now over certain Poplicks' posts).

Also check out the same site's archive of 1940s syphillis awareness posters.

--O.W.

POPCAST #2 - JOURNALIST LING LIU

For Poplicks' second "Pop"cast, I interview a friend and colleague, Ling Woo Liu, currently a reporter stationed in Hong Kong, working for TIME Asia. I met Ling a few years back when we were both at UC Berkeley - I was finishing up my PhD around the same time Ling was completing her masters in the Journalism School. She had already worked in China - doing a stint at the Beijing-based CCTV back at the beginning of the decade (she was also an erstwhile co-host of the Asian American news/culture show, "Stir TV," on the AZN network). During her time at the J-School, Ling also directed and produced the short, Officer Tsukamoto, a documentary about the death of a Japanese American policeman in the 1970s. (It's airing next weekend at the Asian Film Festival of Dallas).

Surprisingly, there aren't as many Asian American reporters working in China as you'd think, putting Ling in rarefied company. She's recently joined the ranks of TIME Asia's China bloggers (you need to post more though!), adding her own take on some of the cultural changes that have been taking place there over the last ten years.

In our conversation, we talk about her interest in working in Asia, her impressions of China's tumultuous social and cultural shifts, the symbolic importance of the 2008 Olympics and why Beijing cabbies are more likely to think she's from Korea than California.

---

By the way, if anyone out there can help explain the steps Junichi and I need to take to put our podcasts on iTunes, I'd really appreciate a walkthrough. I consider myself fairly computer literate but when it comes to scripts and servers, I'm strictly in terra incognito.

--O.W.

FREE THE JENA 6

More information on the Jena case.

One of the quotes by James Baldwin that has stuck with me through the years comes from Another Country, spoken by Ida: "Some days, honey, I wish I could turn myself into one big fist and grind this miserable country to powder."

That anger, that palpable fury that Baldwin, through Ida, articulates isn't directed at America as in idea or as a nation of people, but rather is directed at America as an unequal society, as one where racial inequality and White Supremacy continue to thrive.

Read about the Jena 6 case and you'll understand where Baldwin was coming from.

--O.W.

ON THE EXODUS OF TURD BLOSSOM

Rove. Out.

You might assume that I've been celebrating, or perhaps masturbating to, the news that Karl Rove is leaving the White House at the end of this month.

But you'd be wrong.

In my opinion, free time for Karl Rove is not a good thing.

While he claims he will spend more time with his family -- Karl Rove has a family?!? -- the Architect will undoubtedly be busy calculating which reactionary GOP candidate to prop up in the White House to make his Death Star operational for another eight years.

Plus, if he's not in the Oval Office, he has even more wiggle room to leak the names of undercover operatives, not to mention spread fear, smear the record of veterans, set back gay rights another decade, fix the next election, and snack on puppies.

More importantly, with MC Rove out of DC, the Bush Administration has a better chance of deflecting calls for accountability and avoiding embarrassing subpoenas.

Scariest of all, here's the math for the remaining 17 months of the Bush Administration:

Bush - Bush's Brain = Brainless Bush = Dick Cheney in total control

So there isn't much celebration happening on my end.

You can, however, count on me cheering when I see this ...

or this ...



and maybe this.

--Junichi

QUESTION OF THE WEEK #114

Not the 19 sexiest people alive

This Week's Question:

If you were forced to vote on a 2008 presidential candidate solely based on appearances (e.g., how they dress, their physical appeal, and the image they exude), whom would you support?

--Junichi

FRIDAY FEEDBACK: COMMON

To save money on touring expenses, Common handles crowd control himself.

This week's Friday Feedback track is:

"Drivin' Me Wild" by Common feat. Lily Allen
from the new LP Finding Forever

Kanye West paired up Common and Lily Allen to produce this track that seems to reference everything from the crazy astronaut with diapers, OK Go's "Here I Go Again" video, and the breakup of Reese Witherspoon and Ryan Philippe.

What do you think? Would you have preferred that the hook be sung by a different British chanteuse with three nipples? Are you still unable to forgive Common for Electric Circus and the Gap commercials?

Leave your comments below.

--Junichi

L.A.'S FILIPINO INV(ASIAN)?

icy cool
A friend sent over a link to this story in this week's L.A. Weekly: "The Fil-Am Invasion," where author Sam Slovick looks at how the Hollywood club scene in Southern Cal has become dominated by Filipino party crews.

Obviously, this is a subject that I have some vested interest in, though I am, by no means, that knowledgeable about the local scene down here. Most of what I do know has come about from 1) a story I wrote on the Beat Junkies, also for the L.A. Weekly, back in 2002, 2) Lakandiwa De Leon's excellent history of L.A. Filipino DJ scene from Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou's Asian American Youth anthology and 3) Bangele Alsaybar's illuminating essay, "Deconstructing Deviance: Filipino American Youth Gangs, "Party Culture," and Ethnic Identity in Los Angeles" from the Amerasia Journal (25,1: 1999).

As a piece of journalism focusing on a nightlife scene, I think the piece is decent - it gives you a sense of the scene, mentions both historical and contemporary players within it, and tries to take you "inside" with a lot of thick description (my friend found it a bit too "gonzo" but it didn't go too overboard in my opinion).

However, in terms of delivering on what I thought would be the heart of the story - discussing the Fil-Am angle to the "invasion," a few concerns did crop up as well as a few other small issues:

1) Minor point, but either Slovick or his editor misspelled J-Rocc's name as J-Roc. Don't deny my man his extra "c"!

2) I never got a sense of "why Hollywood?" Is it simply that it's the biggest club scene in Los Angeles? Is there something aspirational about Filipino party crews crashing a scene that they used to be kept out of? After all, it's not like the Pinoy party crews lacked a scene of their own for most of the '80s and '90s. So why Hollywood? Why now?

3) Slovick quotes party promoter Mark Neflas as saying:

"“Back in the ’80s every race was doing their own thing. It was segregated. Now everyone’s collaborating. Now hip-hop is one race."

I could be wrong but I always thought one of the things that really distinguished, for example, the Cerritos hip-hop scene back in the 1980s was how integrated/mixed it was. In fact, I would think that the L.A. hip-hop scene, relative to what you saw in other parts of the U.S., would have been more mixed from jump, especially given the presence of Black, Chicano, Samoan, and Filipino communities within these environments. For those who know: true, untrue? (Note: Neflas is only 24 so it might be that his sense of the "past" is colored by his youth).

4) One of the very interesting things the article notes is this:

"Recent successful themes include booty-shorts night, short-skirts night, a booty-shaking contest and lingerie night. Apparently it’s been a very successful business model, this booty thing."

Let's just be clear: club nights selling sex is old as dirt. It's nothing unique to the Pinoy/Asian party scene. BUT, to me, it raises important questions about the intersection between the party scene, race and gender. At the very least, I wonder how Asian female sexuality - so heavily exploited in other parts of American popular culture - functions similarly or differently within the Filipino party scene, especially one that is purportedly coming out of the Filipino L.A. hip-hop scene, which I always thought had more, shall we say...slightly more enlightened perspectives on women and sexuality?

5) Slovick closes by writing,

"Hip-hop doesn’t mean what it used to. It’s come a long way from Public Enemy’s first gig at the World, in downtown Manhattan in the mid-’80s. Militant uniforms with berets referencing the Black Panthers. Melle Mel standing a few feet away trying to make sense of his presence in a room full of gender-challenged club kids and hip-hoppers as worlds collided. Jean-Michel Basquiat looming on the periphery like Gee Cee at Cinespace. Now, nobody controls the brand. It’s free market. Wide-open road."

It's an intriguing point but I don't know if it's remotely true. Who was controlling the brand back in the 1980s? Seems to me hip-hop has always been a wide-open road...that's part of its inherent appeal to people, not just across America but across the world. And in any case, the Filipino presence in hip-hop - arguably - goes back as far as Joe Bataan in 1979. At the very least, the hip-hop scene in L.A. in the 1980s was thick with Filipino breakers, DJs, rappers, etc. A takeover of the Hollywood club scene strikes me as something very, very different than discussing a hip-hop scene. Again, I'm no expert on this, especially having been gone from So Cal between 1990 - 2006, but what role has Hollywood (the city, not the "concept") played in the L.A. hip-hop scene...ever?

6) Most seriously, for a story focusing on group of promoters and DJs linked by a common ethnic heritage, I didn't get a sense, at all, about what role race and ethnicity actually play here. The only mentions are here:

"...the Fil-Am party scene moved out of the garage and into the clubs in L.A., San Francisco and Southern California, where the voice of disenfranchised ethnic America resonated with these first-generation Cali teens — who, though many in number, felt outside the American mainstream."

"These Fil-Am kids are serious about having a good time, and that’s about it. It’s cultural. It came from the islands. The celebratory communal music and dance go way back to tribal roots."

The latter quote raises all kinds of questions:
What about Filipino culture influences the scene or their interest in these kinds of parties?
Is this more of a Filipino American phenom? If not, what exactly are its roots in the "islands," let alone its *cough cough* "tribal roots"?

There's this pseudo-anthropological attitude being espoused here that's troubling. To write that the Pinoy party scene goes back to "the islands" (which ones? Luzon? Visayays? One of the other 7000?) is like saying, "the Black hip-hop scene goes back to Africa" and then leaving it at that.

Is there an argument to be made about cultural traditions passed down through the generations? Of course. But that's not what's being explained or described here. Moreover, the Fil-Am party scene has distinct, unique connections to American experiences such as patterns of migration, settlement, family/social networks and the challenges of forging an ethnic identity outside the Black/White paradigm. None of these factors enter into the discussion. At best, what the author does have to say on the issue is rather journalistically lazy, especially given that it's supposed to be rather central to the piece itself (at least, the title suggests it!)

At worst, the article's use of a loaded phrase like "tribal roots" reinforces a century-old tradition of treating Filipinos as the repositories of "primitive" culture, as if their interest in hip-hop has nothing to do with their experiences with modernity but instead, are simply carryovers from some ancient, unknowable past.

I certainly think the Filipino party scene in Los Angeles is well worthy to be written about. I just wish there had been more attention paid to what about it being Filipino is actually important - both to the L.A. music/nightlife scene as well as to the participants and their followers.

--O.W.

STILL WASHED OUT

not so sweet home
NPR's Alix Spiegel has a multi-part series on how, two years post-Katrina/Rita, Gulf Coast residents are still struggling to recover. It's a powerful piece of radio journalism, especially in hearing the voices of people who sound desperate to escape the poverty they've become mired in. Equally notable was one of the quotes from a FEMA rep who basically said, "Katrina is what caused people's depression...living in FEMA's trailer parks is not a factor," when, clearly, everything else in the story points to the fact that the "recovery' has been, in many ways, as bad as the disaster itself. At the very least, the shortcomings of the government (state and federal) to address the continued suffering of Katrina/Rita survivors is laid bare - once again.

I wonder if any of the main candidates for 2008 really has any kind of comprehensive plan to address poverty (Edwards' aside and even then...) in America. The free market method of neglect clearly isn't going to do much to help out people who can't afford the cost of rent on minimum wage.

In more hopeful news, there was an extraordinary story in today's NY Times about Donnie Andrews and Fran Boyd, a former armed robber and drug addict, respectively, who are connected to the universe of The Wire: Andrews was the inspiration behind Omar Little's character (arguably one of the greatest gangsters in popular culture history) and Boyd was the real-life subject of both the book and mini-series, The Corner, which The Wire grew out of. Basically, the two pulled each other out of their respective private hells: Andrews helped Boyd escape the cycle of addiction while Boyd was instrumental is helping Andrews get paroled after serving 17 years of a life sentence for killing a drug dealer. As the story explicitly says, it's not a "happily ever after" tale but it does offer a sense of hope amidst an ocean of despair. (Credit: HHH)

And since we're on the media bent anyways, Sasha Frere-Jones disassembles just what makes Lil Weezy the greatest rapper alive for The New Yorker.

--O.W.

7-5-6

San Quinn: Knock It Out, Barry Bonds

(Credit: HHH)

--O.W.

QUESTION OF THE WEEK #113

Hmmmph. Rent me for a weekend, you can.

This Week's Question:

What do you think about FlexPetz, a new business similar to Netflix, except that instead of renting DVDs, people can rent dogs "from just a few hours to a number of days"?

--Junichi

PHOTO OF UNCLE AL ON GOOGLE MAPS

Google Maps is watching

Dear Uncle Al:

I am inspired that you get up at the crack of dawn and jog every morning.

I agree that it's good to get your heart rate up and enjoy the gorgeous views that the Richmond District has to offer.

I was also blown away by the Google Maps' "Street View" link you sent of your starting point in Golden Gate Park.

How crazy is it that Google's cameras captured the photo (above) of you stretching at Spreckles Lake?

I was disappointed, however, when I zoomed in on the photo of you and learned your true motivation for leaving the house every morning:

Now that I see the "gorgeous views" you take in, I understand why your heart rate is up and know why you get up at the crack of dawn.

Pervert.

Hopefully, Dawn doesn't realize you're staring at her crack.

Your nephew,

Junichi

P.S. Aunt Kimi bought you a treadmill.

--Junichi

SOON TO BE SOLD AT A PINKBERRY NEAR YOU

Just when you thought the era of...


was dead...the fine folks at Alessi bring us...



The "Mr. Chin Egg Timer."

--O.W.

FRIDAY FEEDBACK: FLIGHT OF THE CONCHORDS

From the folk ghettos of New Zealand

This week's Friday Feedback track is:

"Hip-Hopopotamus vs. Rhymenocerous" by Flight of the Conchords
unfortunately not from the forthcoming EP The Distant Future

This track/video is from Episode 3 of HBO's Flight of the Conchords and arguably one of the better hip hop songs of 2007. (2007, thus far = bad year for hip hop, again.)

Do their rhymes make you pregnant? Do you submit that the Hip Hop Hippo's "bottomless" lyrics are ten times better than whatever verses Yung Berg or Mims might spit? Did Steve tell you that, perchance? Steve.

Leave your comments below. And be more constructive with your feedback, please.

--Junichi

ARE ZOMBIES POST-RACE?

I'm not ashamed of admitting that I played Resident Evil 4 many times over...on two different platforms no less. I've been looking forward to the fifth sequel in the series...until I saw the trailer:


A White protagonist gunning down hordes of African zombies? What the f--- were the folks at Capcom thinking?

Commentators at the Village Voice have been one of several sites to comment on what seems to be a supremely problematic set of images and ideologies being stirred up here. One comment is quoted as noting: "Is it just me, or is there something subtly racist about gunning down mobs of angry Africans?" I'd suggest there's nothing remotely "subtle" going on here. White hero. Evil Black zombies. KILL KILL KILL.

Not surprisingly, as what happens when anything obviously racist (or sexist or homophobic or...) gets noted, the chorus of denialists responds quickly and loudly. There's the common, though pathetically limp defense: "it's just a game." People who think they're more clever try to argue, "all the previous RE games have involved White zombies yet no one was complaining about that" which is pure red herring since it's not addressing the core question of whether or not the images themselves are racist.

I was jabbering about this with some folks yesterday, and we were joking that a more theoretical defense would be that zombies, since they're not human (anymore) could be considered post-race as well. This is also known as the "evil, mind-destroying zombie viruses see no color" defense.

In all seriousness though, I can't wait to see how Capcom tries to spin this one.

Read more at the GameSpot summary.

--O.W.

WHAT DOES IT FOR YOU?

"I double dare you..."
From "The Whys of Mating: 237 Reasons and Counting"

1. I was “in the heat of the moment.”
2. It just happened.
3. I was bored.
4. It just seemed like “the thing to do.”
5. Someone dared me. (It's that easy? Man!)
6. I desired emotional closeness (i.e., intimacy).
7. I wanted to feel closer to God. (...in a tight situation. Sorry, as a Mobb Deep fan, I couldn't help it).
8. I wanted to gain acceptance from friends.
9. It’s exciting, adventurous.
10. I wanted to make up after a fight.
11. I wanted to get rid of aggression.
12. I was under the influence of drugs.
13. I wanted to try to get a better mate than my current mate.
14. I wanted to express my love for the person.
15. I wanted to experience the physical pleasure.
16. I wanted to show my affection to the person.
17. I felt like I owed it to the person.
18. I was attracted to the person.
19. I was sexually aroused and wanted the release.
20. My friends were having sex and I wanted to fit in.
21. It feels good.
22. My partner kept insisting.
23. The person was famous and I wanted to be able to say I had sex with him/her. (What Junichi often hears in the morning).
24. I was physically forced to.
25. I was verbally coerced into it.
26. I wanted the person to love me.
27. I wanted to have a child.
28. I wanted to make someone else jealous.
29. I wanted to have more sex than my friends.
30. I was married and you’re supposed to.
31. I was tired of being a virgin.
32. I was “horny.”
33. I wanted to feel loved.
34. I was feeling lonely.
35. Everyone else was having sex.
36. I wanted the attention.
37. It was easier to “go all the way” than to stop.
38. I wanted to ensure the relationship was “committed.”
39. I was competing with someone else to “get the person.”
40. I wanted to “gain control” of the person.
41. I was curious about what the person was like in bed.
42. I was curious about sex.
43. I wanted to feel attractive.
44. I wanted to please my partner.
45. I wanted to display submission.
46. I wanted to release anxiety/stress
47. I didn’t know how to say “no.”
48. I felt like it was my duty.
49. I wanted to end the relationship.
50. My friends pressured me into it.
51. I wanted the adventure/excitement.
52. I wanted the experience.
53. I felt obligated to.
54. It’s fun.
55. I wanted to get even with someone (i.e., revenge).
56. I wanted to be popular.
57. It would get me gifts.
58. I wanted to act out a fantasy.
59. I hadn’t had sex for a while.
60. The person was “available.”
61. I didn’t want to “lose” the person.
62. I thought it would help “trap” a new partner.
63. I wanted to capture someone else’s mate.
64. I felt sorry for the person.
65. I wanted to feel powerful.
66. I wanted to “possess” the person.
67. I wanted to release tension.
68. I wanted to feel good about myself.
69. I was slumming. (Also what Junichi often hears in the morning).
70. I felt rebellious.
71. I wanted to intensify my relationship.
72. It seemed like the natural next step in my relationship.
73. I wanted to be nice.
74. I wanted to feel connected to the person.
75. I wanted to feel young.
76. I wanted to manipulate him/her into doing something for me.
77. I wanted him/her to stop bugging me about sex.
78. I wanted to hurt/humiliate the person.
79. I wanted the person to feel good about himself/herself.
80. I didn’t want to disappoint the person.
81. I was trying to “get over” an earlier person/relationship.
82. I wanted to reaffirm my sexual orientation.
83. I wanted to try out new sexual techniques or positions.
84. I felt guilty.
85. My hormones were out of control.
86. It was the only way my partner would spend time with me.
87. It became a habit. (Obviously, not a married person).
88. I wanted to keep my partner happy.
89. I had no self-control.
90. I wanted to communicate at a "deeper" level.
91. I was afraid my partner would have an affair if I didn't have sex with him/her.
92. I was curious about my sexual abilities.
93. I wanted a "spiritual" experience.
94. It was just part of the relationship "routine."
95. I wanted to lose my inhibitions.
96. I got "carried away."
97. I needed another "notch on my belt."
98. The person demanded that I have sex with him/her.
99. The opportunity presented itself.
100. I wanted to see what it would be like to have sex while stoned (e.g., on marijuana or some other drug).
101. It's considered “taboo” by society.
102. I wanted to increase the number of sex partners I had experienced.
103. The person was too “hot” (sexy) to resist. (What I often hear in the morning...but then I wake up and the dream ends).
104. I thought it would relax me.
105. I thought it would make me feel healthy.
106. I wanted to experiment with new experiences.
107. I wanted to see what it would be like to have sex with another person.
108. I thought it would help me to fall asleep.
109. I could brag to other people about my sexual experience.
110. It would allow me to “get sex out of my system” so that I could focus on other things. (Other things? There are other things to focus on?)
111. I wanted to decrease my partner’s desire to have sex with someone else.
112. It would damage my reputation if I said “no.”
113. The other person was too physically attractive to resist.
114. I wanted to celebrate something.
115. I was seduced.
116. I wanted to make the person feel better about herself/himself.
117. I wanted to increase the emotional bond by having sex.
118. I wanted to see whether sex with a different partner would feel different or better.
119. I was mad at my partner, so I had sex with someone else.
120. I wanted to fulfill a previous promise to my partner.
121. It was expected of me.
122. I wanted to keep my partner from straying.
123. I wanted the pure pleasure.
124. I wanted to dominate the other person.
125. I wanted to make a conquest.
126. I’m addicted to sex.
127. It was a favor to someone. ("Hey, can you do me this solid and sleep with ______? Thanks, I'll owe you one.")
128. I wanted to be used or degraded.
129. Someone offered me money to do it.
130. I was drunk.
131. It seemed like good exercise.
132. I was pressured into doing it.
133. The person offered to give me drugs for doing it.
134. I was frustrated and needed relief.
135. It was a romantic setting.
136. I felt insecure.
137. My regular partner is boring, so I had sex with someone else.
138. I was on the “rebound” from another relationship.
139. I wanted to boost my self-esteem
140. I wanted to get my partner to stay with me.
141. Because of a bet.
142. It was a special occasion.
143. It was the next step in the relationship.
144. I wanted to get a special favor from someone.
145. I wanted to get back at my partner for having cheated on me.
146. I wanted to enhance my reputation.
147. I wanted to keep warm. (The ol' Inuit bar line).
148. I wanted to punish myself.
149. I wanted to break up a rival’s relationship by having sex with his/her partner.
150. I wanted to stop my partners’ nagging.
151. I wanted to achieve an orgasm.
152. I wanted to brag to friends about my conquests.
153. I wanted to improve my sexual skills.
154. I wanted to get a job.
155. I wanted to get a raise.
156. I wanted to get a promotion.
157. I wanted to satisfy a compulsion.
158. I wanted to make money.
159. I wanted to keep my partner satisfied.
160. I wanted to change the topic of conversation.
161. I wanted to get out of doing something.
162. I wanted to test my compatibility with a new partner.
163. I wanted to get a partner to express love.
164. I wanted to put passion back into my relationship.
165. I wanted to prevent a breakup.
166. I wanted to become one with another person.
167. I wanted to get a favor from someone.
168. I wanted to breakup my relationship.
169. I wanted to give someone else a sexually transmitted disease (e.g., herpes, AIDS).
170. I wanted to breakup another’s relationship.
171. I wanted to avoid hurting someone’s feelings.
172. I wanted to make myself feel better about myself.
173. I wanted to get rid of a headache. (It does work. Just saying).
174. I was afraid to say "no" due to the possibility of physical harm.
175. I wanted to keep my partner from straying.
176. I wanted to burn calories.
177. I wanted to even the score with a cheating partner.
178. I wanted to hurt an enemy.
179. I wanted to feel older.
180. It is my genetic imperative.
181. It was an initiation rite to a club or organization. (Presumably not the Rotary Association).
182. I wanted to become more focused on work - sexual thoughts are distracting.
183. I wanted to say "I’ve missed you."
184. I wanted to celebrate a birthday or anniversary or special occasion.
185. I wanted to say "I’m sorry."
186. I wanted to return a favor.
187. I wanted to say "Thank You."
188. I wanted to welcome someone home.
189. I wanted to say "goodbye."
190. I wanted to defy my parents.
191. I wanted to relieve menstrual cramps.
192. I wanted to relieve “blue balls.”
193. I wanted to get the most out of life.
194. I wanted to feel feminine.
195. I wanted to feel masculine.
196. I am a sex addict.
197. I wanted to see what all the fuss is about.
198. I thought it would boost my social status.
199. The person had a lot of money.
200. The person’s physical appearance turned me on.
201. The person was a good dancer.
202. Someone had told me that this person was good in bed.
203. The person had beautiful eyes.
204. The person made me feel sexy.
205. An erotic movie had turned me on.
206. The person had taken me out to an expensive dinner.
207. The person was a good kisser.
208. The person had bought me jewelry.
209. The person had a great sense of humor.
210. The person seemed self-confident.
211. The person really desired me.
212. The person was really desired by others.
213. I wanted to gain access to that person’s friend.
214. I felt jealous.
215. The person flattered me.
216. I wanted to see if I could get the other person into bed.
217. The person had a desirable body.
218. I had not had sex in a long time.
219. The person smelled nice.
220. The person had an attractive face.
221. I saw the person naked and could not resist.
222. I was turned on by the sexual conversation.
223. The person was intelligent.
224. The person caressed me.
225. The person wore revealing clothes.
226. The person had too much to drink and I was able to take advantage of him/her.
227. I knew the person was usually “out of my league.”
228. The person was mysterious.
229. I realized I was in love.
230. I wanted to forget about my problems.
231. I wanted to reproduce.
232. I/she was ovulating.
233. I wanted my partner to notice me.
234. I wanted to help my partner forget about his/her problems.
235. I wanted to lift my partner's spirits.
236. I wanted to submit to my partner.
237. I wanted to make my partner feel powerful.

--O.W.