In honor of Jones’s on November 3, 2024 at the age of 91, I’d like to retell the story of this groundbreaking partnership.

Something in my head

Jones was on the film set of , a film version of a Broadway musical based on the 1939 film, , starring an all-black cast. Diana Ross played Dorothy, originally Judy Garland’s role. Jackson, part of the Jacksons, was also in the film. At the time, he was a known commodity, but far from being the world-renowned figure he became.

Director Sidney Lumet was a friend of Jones’s and wanted the composer/producer to provide orchestral gravitas for The Wiz’s soundtrack. Jones wasn’t impressed by the musical, but apparently felt he owed Lumet a favor or two. He and Jackson didn’t know each other before the film but struck up a serviceable working relationship. Jones later The Hollywood Reporter’s Seth Abramovitch that he remembered Jackson approached him with a task: “I need you to help me find a producer,” he said. “I’m getting ready to do my first solo album.” (Truthfully, he had made two previous solo albums.)

The two men discussed the possibility of renewing that relationship again on the projected solo album for which Jackson had already written three songs. Jones became curious about how Jackson was able to write songs without a musical instrument. According to Time’s Steve Knopper, the went something like: “I hear something in my head. I make the sounds with my mouth.”

On hearing this, Jones grew interested. “There’s an instrument that can make the sounds you want. I can write anything down on paper,” Jones replied. “If you can hear it, I can write it down.” We’ll never know whether Jackson’s career would have soared and crackled like a rocket or merely hissed like a squib had Jones not been intrigued and agreed to work on the mooted album.

Transformation

All the same, inviting Jones to take the weighty role of producer carried some risk. Like any entertainer, Jackson must have been aware of audience expectations: they must have been sharpened to a point by the then-popular Philadelphia Sound and the Saturday Night Fever disco that captivated the public in the mid-1970s. The sweet-sounding Jacksons were perfect for the late 1960s and early 1970s. But against a background of Sylvester’s thumping synth on “” or Chic’s twanging bass lines on “,” the brothers sounded tame and, perhaps worse, quaint.

The last thing Jackson wanted at his pivotal stage in his professional life was to sound old-fashioned. So, Jones, for all his mastery, wasn’t an obvious choice. He was 45 in 1978. Five years earlier, he had produced Aretha Franklin’s “,” which lacked Franklin’s gutsy blues quality and hadn’t overly impressed critics or consumers. His own double-album, , had been released to little impact in 1976.

Somehow, Jackson became convinced Jones could provide him with the kind of transformative makeover he wanted. Perhaps it was a compelling incongruity, like casting Charlize Theron as prostitute-cum-serial killer prostitute Aileen Wuornos in Patty Jenkins’s 2003 film, . It looked so odd, it might just work. Known for her glamor, Theron gained weight, wore false teeth and turned herself into a believable Wuornos. Jones seemed such an unusual producer for Jackson’s project, it too might yield something surprising.

George Benson, once a guitar prodigy who grew to prominence with his distinctive style of soul-infused jazz, once reflected on his own particular relationship with Jones. For years, Benson was discouraged from singing by his record company. Jones produced his breakthrough album in 1980 and issued contradictory advice. “Quincy Jones looked at me and said: ‘I know you better than you know yourself.’ This made me feel angry, though I didn’t say anything. But he was pushing me to do things that didn’t come naturally to me,” Benson the Financial Times’ David Cheal. “He was always pushing me to do things. He persuaded me to sing in a way that didn’t feel comfortable.”

Once outside his comfort zone, Benson sang in the unnatural way Jones suggested and the process yielded a record. “And it was a smash,” he said. The album won him three Grammys in 1981. Jackson never said Jones pushed him in the way Benson described, though the product of the collaboration suggests Jackson might also have been displaced from his comfort zone — with similarly agreeable results.

Life ain’t so bad at all

Those results were well-received, though not ecstatically. Rolling Stone’s Stephen Holden their album, , “A slick, sophisticated R&B-pop showcase with a definite disco slant … A triumph for producer Quincy Jones as well as for Michael Jackson.”

There was disagreement over Jackson’s voice. New Republic’s Jim Miller that, “Jackson’s voice has deepened without losing its boyish energy. He phrases with delicacy, sings ballads with a feather touch.” But the Los Angeles Times’sDennis Hunt , “The adolescent frailties that linger in Jackson’s voice are nagging enough to, if uncontrolled, undermine good material and production.” In the end, though, he commented, “Thanks to producer Quincy Jones, that didn’t happen here. The result is one of the year’s best R&B albums.” Presciently, Hunt wondered, “Is it possible that he’s outgrown the Jacksons?”

Between them, Jackson and Jones captured the audacity of a notionally prosperous, upwardly mobile African-American population. They were willing to take risks, avoiding a disco saturation but absorbing enough of the euphoria that animated dancefloors around the world. They added lush arrangements that might, with another artist, have sounded too sickly, or worse, clichéd. Here, they sounded innovative and sophisticated.

Even the cover art radiated aplomb: 21-year-old Jackson was wearing black tie, tuxedo and loafers. He seemed to be searching for something. His right to be free from his brothers? Or family, perhaps? Or more likely, self-validation: with Jones, he seemed to discover a license to be a fully-fledged independent artist.

Sure, he had released four solo albums before. But none came close to Off the Wall in terms of artistry and imagination — and maybe irony. The expression “off the wall” meant unusual or strange, and the chorus of the title song was, “Life ain’t so bad at all if you live it off the wall.”

Reviews for The Wiz bore no resemblance to the warm approval Off the Wall had drawn. Time expressed the film critics’ consensus in its , “Nowhere Over the Rainbow.”

Off the Wall is regarded as a classic. It won a Grammy in 1980, multiple American Music Awards in the same year. It was into the Grammy musical Hall of Fame in 2007. It reached on the Billboard Hot 100 and spawned four Top 10 , including “Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough” and “Rock with You” — both number ones.

Yet, as often happens when two artists collaborate and produce a creation for the ages, they had a falling out.

The sour aftermath

“Mr. Jones and Mr. Jackson had worked together for years, forging one of the most productive and profitable relationships in pop music,” The New York Times’s Colin Moynihan . “The two worked together on albums … that sold tens of millions of copies and catapulted Jackson — already famous from his days in the Jackson 5 — into superstardom.” And yet, years after Jackson’s death, Jones found himself in court, head-to-head with the Jackson family.

They had continued to work together. Jones produced two more Jackson albums: 1982’s , which became the best-selling album of all time; and 1987’s , which was the first album to have five consecutive singles reach number one on the Billboard Hot 100. Cumulatively, they have sold over 100 million copies.

The three albums were made and released at a time when music videos were hitting their stride and practically every record had a short companion movie. Jackson and Jones never fought or, as far as we know, even argued. But the release of Kenny Ortega’s 2009 film, , a documentary feature based on rehearsal footage shot while Jackson was preparing for his proposed comeback in 2009, brought conflict. Jackson on June 25 of that year and never made a comeback, of course.

Songs originally produced by Jones were included in the film’s soundtrack album. Jones filed suit against the Jackson estate, claiming, as Rolling Stone’s Miriam Coleman , “under the contracts, he [Jones] should have been given the first opportunity to re-edit or re-mix any of the master recordings and that he was entitled to producer credit for the master recordings, as well as additional compensation if the masters were remixed.” Obviously, no one could have foreseen how such an opulently smooth album could lead to legal convulsions decades later.

In 2013, Jones Sony Music Entertainment and Jackson’s estate owed him close to $30 million in royalties for edits and remixes of music he produced with Jackson during their collaboration. Four years later, in 2017, a jury in Los Angeles County Superior Court decided that Jones had not been sufficiently rewarded by the Jackson estate for the use of records Jones had produced and which were featured in This is It. The court awarded him $9.4 million in 2017.

Three years later, a California appellate court reduced this to $2.5 million, this being the amount due to Jones for the use of his master recording and other fees. It seemed a bitter conclusion to a relationship that, in many ways, remolded Jackson into a legitimate icon. While Jones maintained his dispute was not with Jackson himself, journalist Martín Macías, Jr. the Jackson estate’s attorney as saying: “Quincy Jones was the last person we thought would try to take advantage of Michael Jackson by filing a lawsuit three years after he died asking for tens of millions of dollars he wasn’t entitled to.”

Jones too seemed to turn vindictive. While he’d enjoyed an amicable relationship with Jackson over many years in the 1970s and 1980s, he later reflected, “He [Jackson] was as Machiavellian as they come.” In a 2018 with Vulture’s David Marchese, he declared, “Michael stole a lot of stuff,” meaning his compositions incorporated passages from other artists’ music.

It was a sour end to an artistic collaboration that ranks with the greatest of modern times. Nothing will, in practice, diminish the significance of Off the Wall. It is established in pop music’s pantheon. For all his colossal contribution to music, Jones’ elemental role in the creation of Jackson’s album will be his defining achievement.

[Ellis Cashmore’s “” is published by Bloomsbury.]

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Quincy Jones, Michael Jackson and Off the Wall appeared first on 51�Թ�.

These questions followed me since I began researching for my Poder Suave — Soft Power, launched in Brazil in 2017. That following year, my book was a finalist in the Jabuti Awards, the most important literary award in Latin America under the creative economy category, which recognizes artistic contributions to economic growth. I focused my research on cultural soft power — power that is seductive and that draws in viewers worldwide. Some examples include Hollywood and Bollywood movies, French fashion, Russian ballet, the British Invasion of the 1960s (bands like the Beatles) and Brazilian bossa nova, Carnaval and telenovelas.

A general conclusion from my research shows that what society deems as desirable, such as believing one actor is persuasive or buying into certain fashion choices, is built upon accepted trends. With corporate and governmental support, these manifestations of “soft power” can reach new heights — like how Russia used ballet as a diplomatic tool during the Soviet era. Cultural influence is not limited to wealthy countries. Indian film and Brazilian music, for example, both reach wide international audiences.

Via the author.

However, the importance of trends, while real, did not satisfy my curiosity. I pondered over why some underprivileged creatives emerge onto the global stage, whereas other artists never reach their potential, despite having numerous advantages. What is the secret behind their success or failure?

I investigated this unsolved mystery in my doctoral thesis on socio-cultural progress with the help of the Capes Foundation Scholarship (Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education). After five years of research, my thesis and newest book Poder Cultural finally provides the answers.

First, cultural power is the ability to universally influence people into thinking a movie, work of art or related product is good. Cultural power can move other countries’ economies, shape consumer habits and create new industries. Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, for instance, contributed $4.3 billion to the US GDP, to Bloomberg Economics. The tour largely boosted the hospitality industry, including hotels, local businesses and tourism revenues.

Even writers go through an audiovisual medium, such as movies, TV shows, telenovelas or social media, to make their books relevant. was an unknown writer until her video went viral on TikTok and promoted Shadow Work Journal to a bestseller.

Relevant politics in cultural power

Research has proven that artists with culturally relevant attitudes and products are more likely to become powerful. Emerald Fennel had never won an award as an actress, writer or director until her movie Promising Young Woman won the 2020 Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay. Its violence, not unlike films such as First Blood, spoke to young media consumers who are sensitive to themes of female oppression and Eurocentrism.

Another example is Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan, who is better known in India than Brad Pitt. How is that possible? Khan is an undoubtedly attractive man. This fact alone gets him attention in the movie industry. In the beginning, Khan, like Pitt, used his good looks to obtain roles, even cheap flicks that would only be watched once. After ascending to stardom, Khan was able to reinvent his image by selecting roles with more cultural relevance. Take Khan’s performance as the alcoholic in Devdas (2002), which brought awareness to the struggles of addiction. 

Both Khan and Pitt support international causes that positively shape their images: Pitt is involved with One Campaign, which fights against AIDS and poverty in poor countries; Khan is the ambassador of Pulse Polio, the National AIDS Control Organization and the Make-a-Wish Foundation in India. However, Khan has one notable advantage over his competitor. He has a greater command over social media, which he uses to mobilize his appeal to millions. Khan posts about his children and his long marriage to Gauri Chibber. His 42 million followers on Facebook, 30 million on Instagram and 42 million on Twitter eat up his family narrative. Days after his interview with David Letterman on My Next Guest Needs No Introduction, the television host named him “the greatest star of the world.”

Major components of disproportionate recognition

Both stars and politicians use social media to increase their power. In the music world, video clips are the most important audiovisual tool for singers to achieve cultural strength. Musicians Dua Lipa and Anitta must know this well. Their power extrapolates to music. In 2020, Dua Lipa posted a video for her 46 million followers on Instagram, criticizing the way the Israeli Defense Forces treat Palestinians. Israeli NGO Im Tirtzu opened a petition demanding that Dua Lipa’s songs be banned from the Israeli army radio, the most popular in the country, although her request was not granted. Likewise, Brazilian, far-right, former president Jair Bolsonaro criticized Anitta on his social media for supporting the legalization of marijuana. Bolsonaro also used this platform to denounce former candidate and then-elected president Lula in the 2022 election over her views on the use of the Brazilian flag. 

Dua Lipa and Anitta’s content share similarities regarding aesthetics, techniques and lyrics. However, what makes Dua Lipa more effective, despite Anitta launching twice as many videos, is another crucial aspect for cultural power: language. Dua Lipa has always sung in the most popular language in the world, English, which helped close publicity contracts for the singer.  She also developed her career in one of the world’s fashion capitals, London. Located outside any “English centers,” Anitta invested in more English videos, like “Girl from Rio,” “Downtown,” “Faking Love,” and “Boys Don’t Cry” to be more widely noticed.

Are these aspects to obtain cultural power fair? Definitely not. Because of these constraints, many culturally significant artists are ignored.  Helena Solberg, for instance, was the only female director from Cinema Novo, the Brazilian New Cinema movement from the 1960’s and the most important film movement of the southern hemisphere. Her movies discussed the roots of the underdevelopment situation in Latin America. She lived from 1971 to 1990 in the US and gained recognition with movies like The Brazilian Connection (1983), Home of the Brave (1986) and Carmen Miranda — Bananas is My Business (1994).  However, none of her films infiltrated Hollywood since they were independent productions, giving her much less cultural power than expected. 

Another example of disproportionate, language-biased representation is the career of Senegalese filmmaker Safi Faye.  She was the mother of African cinema and the first Sub-Saharan African woman to direct a commercially distributed feature film, Kaddu Beykat, released in 1975. Her movies were essential to understand the lives of women in African tribes, a genre which had not been explored. Yet, she was never given global recognition since her films were in languages like Serer and Wolof, African dialects that remain absent from Google. Faye’s death in 2024 was mostly ignored by major news channels and cultural magazines in the Western world. The case of Safi Faye proves that what is available to Western viewers is very much regulated by Eurocentric cultural tastes.

The purpose of researching Poder Cultural was not only to understand the unspoken rules in achieving stardom, but mainly to show how the dice are rolled in arts and entertainment industries across countries of differing wealth and privilege. Exposing inequality and analyzing success are the most important steps to change the rules of the game and, therefore, make cultural power more accessible to all. 

[ and edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post What Gives an Artist Profitable Cultural Power in the World? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Singers like , with her soulful voice and introspective lyrics, , with his silky-smooth melodies, and the incomparable , whose Afro-fusion mastery knows no bounds, have captivated global audiences. Their popularity has spread to countries such as the United Kingdom, Portugal, and the United States. Worldwide streams amounted to in 2022. 

Afrobeats, from the rich musical heritage of Africa, fuses traditional rhythms with modern influences to create an irresistible tapestry of sound. With roots that stretch across the continent, Afrobeats encapsulates the vibrancy of Ghana’s — a genre that combines elements of rock and jazz — and the pulse of West African percussion from neighboring countries.

Music with a message

Afrobeats conveys messages of African liberation and culture. Songs like “” by Fela Kuti critique oppressive regimes, while “” by Burna Boy celebrates African resilience and unity. “” by Master KG (featuring Nomcebo Zikode), though not strictly Afrobeats as it also borrows from gospel-house, became a global anthem of hope during the COVID-19 pandemic. This musical renaissance has united Africa, reclaiming its narrative and breaking free from the chains of colonial history. Afrobeats artists shed light on the beauty of Africa and the African experience. They also challenge , such as the idea that hip-hop has negative influences on youth.

Emerging artist ‘s profound voice captures the complexity of young adulthood, offering solace to a generation navigating their identities. Africa is, after all, the in the world. Starr expresses that with confidence anything is possible for young people, even the unimaginable. In her song “,” she sings, “Espiritu Fortuna, I go make you jo dada, shey you getty the power, sweety passy amala ketu.” In other words, “we are blessed beyond our knowledge to make any of our dreams come true.” In her lead single “,” Starr dismisses those who underestimate her because of her age and gender, reiterating that change can be made at any age, sector, and in any region of the globe.

Hailing from Ghana, King Promise has already etched his name in the annals of Afrobeats with his melodic prowess. His dulcet tones dance over Highlife-infused rhythms, creating a signature sound that radiates joy and nostalgia. Promise’s rise exemplifies the genre’s power to forge connections, both within and beyond borders, while recognizing the vast culture of Africa. His popular songs, such as “,” “,” and “,” not only showcase King Promise’s musical talent but also resonate with diverse audiences. Through these tracks, he infuses elements of traditional African sounds with modern beats, creating a unique sonic experience that celebrates the continent’s rich musical heritage and helps break stereotypes.

A conversation about celebrating cultural heritage would be remiss without paying homage to Burna Boy. His ascent from the streets of Port Harcourt to the is a testament to the ���ڰ��Dz��𲹳ٲ�’ transformative impact. Burna Boy’s genre-bending and socially conscious lyrics have redefined modern African music. Songs such as “” speak of the joy and uniqueness each country has in identifying as African. Unapologetic anthems like “” and “” touch on shifting from false narratives (i.e., colonialist perspectives) and standing true to one’s origin. In “,” Burna Boy sings, “They wanna tell you o, tell you o, tell you o/Another story o, story o, story o.” He has become a symbol of African pride and resistance.

A confident, growing continent

As Afrobeats shapes the world’s perception of Africa as a cultural trendsetter, it also emblematizes Africa’s into a political and economic force on the global stage. The African Union’s to foster unity and cooperation among member states are yielding tangible results, as seen in initiatives addressing regional conflicts, economic development and .

Some notable examples of include promoting renewable energy sources, implementing waste reduction and recycling programs, and advocating for responsible land use and conservation efforts. The African Union has been actively eco-friendly agricultural practices, such as agroforestry and organic farming, to ensure long-term environmental health and food security for its member states.

In the realm of trade and investment, the establishment of the Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) heralds a new era of intracontinental commerce. The AfCFTA aims to boost intra-African trade and economic integration. The increased interconnectivity opens up African economies, entrepreneurs, producers and artists not only to each other, but to the . This exposure has increased for African products, and African music, both within the continent and internationally. With its vast resources, youthful population and burgeoning economies, the continent is poised to make its mark on the global dynamic.

���ڰ��Dz��𲹳ٲ�’ serves as a poignant backdrop to Africa’s emancipation from the remnants of colonialism. The “winds of change” are in the air, and former colonial powers must now reckon with a new Africa that demands recognition and equality. African nations such as Mali and Burkina Faso are their sovereignty by marking an end to the “Francafrique” strategy in which France dominated post-independence relationships with its former colonies. Channeling the same spirit that enlivens Afrobeats — bold, unapologetic and eager for liberation — into their diplomatic negotiations, these nations are in pursuit of a true partnership across the African continent, free from ndertones.

The world is “recognizing that Africa’s story is no longer one of marginalization, but of unyielding .”

[ produced this piece and is a partner of 51�Թ�.]

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post A Confident Africa Is Spreading Afrobeats to the World appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The song has a curious history. María Grever, a Mexican composer, originally composed it. She gave it the Spanish title “Cuando vuelva a tu lado” (When I Return to Your Side). It got its current title when it was adapted to English. For two decades, “What a Difference a Day Makes” lived on the sidelines as a somewhat recognizable tune. In 1944, the title achieved some limited popularity thanks to Mexican-American singer Andy Russell’s bilingual version, which made it to number 15 in the charts.

In the dawning age of the transistor radio, Dinah Washington’s 1959 R&B version became a top ten hit. That sealed its reputation as a song every serious singer and jazz musician had to learn to perform. From then on, popular singers from Frank Sinatra to Dean Martin, Bobby Darin, Natalie Cole, Rod Stewart, Cher and many, many others made it part of their repertoire.

Why bring up this bit of curious US folklore 90 years later?

There are moments when history stalls and others where it accelerates. We now have the leisure to put 2023 in the rearview mirror. Future historians will almost certainly see it as a year of historical acceleration. A bit like 1959, a time when everything seemed to be on a fairly even, predictable keel for those who were living through it.

Political history follows similar patterns to cultural history. They both change over time, in ways that those living through the transitional moments fail to perceive. The practices as well as the tastes of the past often disappear and may even appear to the following generations as incomprehensible. The vagaries of popular music, especially in our consumer society, offer serious matter for reflection.

The commercial music scene has changed radically over the past six decades, as it already had between 1934 and 1959. For many commentators on US culture, the latter date represents the crucial moment when a shift took place from postwar puritanism and buttoned-down conformity to the liberation of the sixties, with the hippies, the Civil Rights movement, the sexual revolution and the golden age of a rock’n’roll, a US invention transformed and brought up to date by British artists.

The 1998 movie Pleasantville appears to take place in 1959, judging from its use of Miles Davis’s “So What” as background music for one scene. All jazz musicians acknowledge that Davis’s album “Kind of Blue” literally changed the nature of jazz. The movie’s director and producers in 1998 were obviously aware of that. 

Pleasantville follows two youths who are magically transported from the 90s to the title town in the 50s. They disturb the innocent residents with their relatively uninhibited manners. The 1950s scenes in the movie were filmed in black and white. When manners and morals began changing midway through the movie, the filming changes to technicolor. For the producers, that symbolized how Americans visualize that transitional moment in their culture. Things would never be the same after that. 

A tale of two decades (the fifties and sixties)

The cable TV series Mad Men (2007), focused on Madison Avenue’s advertising industry in the sixties, ran for eight years. Picking up where Pleasantville left off, the first episode begins in 1960, the start of a new and radically different decade that would transform the 1950s’ consumerist culture into something wildly different.

Mad Men builds its drama around the careers of high-achieving advertising executives. The plot is regularly punctuated by historical and cultural events. These include two Kennedy assassinations, war in Vietnam, a moon landing, drugs, the deaths of MLK and Marilyn Monroe, and all the other excitement of the times kicked off in the decade that followed that seminal year of 1959. Both works look back at the rapid metamorphosis that American culture underwent in those decades.

All this is to say that some years do make a difference. 1959 was one of those years. So, I maintain, is 2023. Something, or indeed many things possibly equally significant happened in this past year. When producers of Hollywood and TV dramas three or four decades from now look back at 2023, they may have a similar impression. There will nevertheless be a significant  difference. This time around it isn’t just US culture that is transitioning. It’s global culture 

What will 2023 be remembered for? Here are seven of the most obvious things. Future historians will certainly find others.

— The continuation of a violent and, in the likely view of future
historians, senseless and avoidable war in Eastern Europe, which
has already changed the shape of international relations.

— The start of another absurd and even more tragic war in Gaza that
is likely to have even greater historical consequences.

— The invasion of a group, not so much of as mind
snatchers, led by OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Bard, with a
slew of others on their way.

— The visible beginnings of the dedollarization movement
accelerated by the expansion of BRICS (an intergovernmental
organization named for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South
Africa).

— The of the notion of “the Global South” in our
everyday vocabulary.

— The predictable growing momentum of another more-
traumatizing-than-ever US presidential campaign leading up to
the November 2024 election,

— Gathering evidence that this really is Cold War 2.0. This time,
though, there are two hot wars that have the potential to spark
World War III and a nuclear war, whose specter haunted my
generation’s youth during the original Cold War.

As the year 2024 approaches — seated atop “time’s winged chariot hurrying” ever nearer, in the of Andrew Marvell — the real question concerns how the tense plot of all these abruptly begun, ambiguously evolving and clearly unfinished events will wend towards some kind of acceptable denouement or a more traumatizing development.

Ranking years past

As we look back at recent history, 2016 stands as a landmark year that saw Brexit and Donald Trump’s rise to the US presidency. Trump had the effect of putting history itself in a state of suspended animation before the unanticipated invasion of COVID-19. 2020 stood out as the year of the pandemic, marking the confusion of a clueless, globalized world that suddenly woke up to the reality that it had no idea how it had found itself in this predicament and even less about how to respond appropriately.

As Joe Biden assumed the throne of the 75-year-old “rules-based international order,” 2021 turned out to be a year of building suspense, as a new shift to normalized behavior was announced. The major event of that year was the US withdrawal from a 20-year engagement in Afghanistan, which momentarily seemed to reduce the tension. But the building pressure — some of it deviously planned — exploded in February 2022 with the war in Ukraine.

A new year has now begun. Between wars and crucial elections at various points of the globe, 2024 is likely to be loaded with drama that dwarfs that of the previous years. Anything can happen. None of it looks as if it will be easy to manage.

Anyone in the media should know by now that high drama is good for business. Catastrophic drama is great for business. The hyperreal shenanigans associated with Donald Trump’s election and presidency, including his chaotic exit from the White House, enabled the media to live off five full years of a manufactured, worthy-of-Hollywood scenario called Russiagate. That was mostly comedy, but in February 2022 it morphed into global tragedy as the already deeply detested Russia invaded Ukraine. 

In 2024, there will be new drama. At 51�Թ�, we are intent on covering it from multiple perspectives to avoid being captured by only one narrative. We will need your help more than ever. We need the insights and direct testimony of our authors, which potentially includes all of you. But, most importantly of all, we need you to keep thinking. In the dawning age of AI, human thinking will be our most precious asset.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post “What a Difference a Year Makes”: Looking Back at 2023 appeared first on 51�Թ�.

PalMusic, as it says on its website, is a group of “UK ambassadors for the Edward Said National Conservatory of Music (ESNCM) in Palestine which provides musical education of the highest quality to young Palestinians.” More than 2,000 young musicians are enrolled in their programs.

In the wake of the Hamas attack, the concert has been cancelled with Cathedral officials citing security concerns.

With more than 1,200 Israelis massacred by Hamas gunmen and with over 1,000 Palestinians killed already in the near carpet-bombing retaliation of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on Gaza and its 2.3 million people, a cancelled music event in London passes with barely a ripple. In the fog of war and with raw and angry emotions running high this might seem, and it in fact is, a scarcely noteworthy event. Except that it is noteworthy.

ESNCM is a bridge of hope and possibility in a place where, unlike anything ever seen before, the actions of the most extreme government in Israel’s history is determined to deny Palestinians all hope and crush all possibilities .

Israel’s “mighty vengeance”

There can be no doubt that the massacres of unarmed Israeli civilians on October 7 have shown the true face of Hamas as a ruthless and brutal organization. But, as Arab Digest has argued in its , the actions of extremist ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir made a Hamas operation inevitable.

The scale of the Hamas attack and the catastrophic intelligence failures that allowed it have surprised many observers. What is not surprising is the ruthless response of Israel. In addition to the hundreds of air-strikes that have already wiped out entire neighbourhoods, Israel has cut off water, food, gas and electricity to Gaza as it conducts a campaign that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says will inflict “mighty vengeance” on Hamas.

That this vengeance involves air strikes with massive collateral damage to Palestinian families trapped in the enclave or that cutting off electricity, water and food to civilians constitutes a war crime is not of concern either to the Netanyahu government. Neither is it a concern to an opposition which, before the war, was calling for his head and that is now ready to him in a national unity government.

Nor is it a concern to Western governments, who have promised full and unqualified backing for Israel. While it is understandable and even acceptable that Israel’s allies show their support, what is lacking is a concomitant call for restraint as the IDF seeks to carry out Netanyahu’s order to : “All the places that Hamas hides in, operates from, we will turn them into ruins.”

Netanyahu told civilians to “get out of there,” knowing that there is no escape from Gaza. by the IDF near Rafah, the only open border crossing — already heavily restricted, before the war, by Egypt — was reported on October 10, after the prime minister’s warning.

On Wednesday, Gaza’s only power plant that was still functioning as it ran out of fuel. Clean drinking water, already , has become virtually unobtainable after Israel cut Gaza’s supply off. The Israeli bombardment has forced the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to distribution. There is now, it seems, no limit to what Israel will do as it attempts to eradicate Hamas.

Israel’s attempt to crush Hamas will backfire

Israel’s campaign of eradication will inevitably fail. The unemployment rate in Gaza runs at above 50%. Angry young men, most of whom will have lost family members in this latest war, if not before, will become the next generation of fighters. The cycle of violence and brutality on both sides will continue.

Itamar Ben-Gvir and his fellow fascists seek to drive Palestinians from Palestine by whatever means they are enabled to use. Unconditional blanket support for Israel from Western governments serves to further empower them.

Benjamin Netanyahu turned to the extremists to avoid a conviction for fraud when it was clear he had run through every other political grouping in his long career of deceptions and betrayals. Now he is in their power more than ever before, and they will strive to bend him to their plan to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people from what is left of Palestine.

Israel Moves to Round Two of Its Democracy Stress Test

However the levelling of Gaza in the threatened land invasion, should it come about, will not stop the conflict. Nor will the Palestinians be driven from their homeland.  They have shown great resilience in a resistance that is reflected not just in armed struggle but much more so in peaceful actions. In music, for example.

In announcing the postponement PalMusic UK said,

[The] concert was highlighting the achievements of young Palestinian musicians. We support them to learn music as we believe in its power to bring harmony and create hope.

We are deeply saddened by the events in Gaza and Israel since Saturday and for the loss of innocent lives. We stand for peace.

PalMusic UK noted that Southwark Cathedral continues to support its work. The organization remains hopeful that the concert can be rescheduled.

[ first published this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post This Is What a Cancelled Music Event Says About Palestine appeared first on 51�Թ�.

An instant star

Born as Vickie Lynn Hogan in 1967, this Texan beauty had her first taste of the spotlight as a pole dancer at a local strip club, rapidly becoming the town’s hottest performer.

When she was only 16, she dropped out of high school and married Billy Wayne Smith, a blue-collar construction worker. The couple soon welcomed a son named Daniel Wayne, but Anna Nicole’s dissatisfaction with the marriage led her to leave at the young age of 20, seeking solace and opportunities in the sprawling city of Los Angeles.

It was in Los Angeles that Anna Nicole’s star began to rise rapidly. As she graced the covers of Playboy magazine and became the face of Guess jeans, the world took notice of her irresistible charm. With a body that seemed to defy nature and a pout that could melt icebergs, Anna Nicole embodied seduction, wrapped in curves and enhanced by silicone. Her meteoric ascent from a clothing model to an iconic Playboy Playmate showcased her unwavering determination to conquer the fiercely competitive entertainment industry, fearlessly using her sex appeal as a powerful weapon.

Gone in a flash

Despite the dazzling lights and  ascendant fame, it was Smith’s controversial marriage to the billionaire oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II that would ultimately lead to her downfall. In 1994, at the age of 26, she married the 89-year-old Marshall, igniting a firestorm of speculation. Critics questioned her motives, labeling her a gold digger, while others doubted the authenticity of their relationship. But as they say, love knows no boundaries.

After Marshall’s death in 1995, Smith was drawn into a legal labyrinth. While his will didn’t grant her a substantial inheritance, she fought fiercely to prove her entitlement to a share, worth hundreds of millions, of his vast estate. The ensuing legal battles turned courtrooms across the nation into dramatic arenas, with Smith claiming that Marshall had promised her a rightful portion and accusing his son, E. Pierce Marshall, of manipulating the will to exclude her.

However, Smith’s tenacity faced legal setbacks. In 2000, a jury initially awarded her an astonishing $474 million, only for the decision to be overturned later. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, where in 2006, the final ruling dashed her hopes of obtaining any part of Marshall’s estate.

While these relentless courtroom clashes dominated the media’s attention, Smith suffered a devastating blow in the untimely death of her son, Daniel Wayne Smith, in 2006. Born from her first marriage, Daniel accompanied his mother to the hospital for the birth of his half-sister, Dannielynn. Tragically, just three days later, Daniel’s life was cut short by an accidental drug overdose, sending shockwaves of grief through Smith’s world.

Why do we hurt the ones we admire?

Macfarlane’s directing skillfully incorporates captivating archival footage, taking us on a journey through Smith’s formative years in a challenging American upbringing, her instant popularity as a Texas stripper, her fascinating relationship with J. Howard Marshall, her time as a Guess girl, and her subsequent role as a Playboy Playmate. We are intimately exposed to her complex inner world and turbulent psyche through these powerful visuals.

The media’s relentless obsession with Smith’s life and relationships became a toxic force in her existence. Like a couple locked in a dysfunctional relationship, she and the media couldn’t keep their hands off each other, even though they knew the tragic fate that awaited them. From the moment she burst onto the scene, the media voraciously devoured her every move. Her bombshell persona and the scandalous stories that surrounded her became irresistible material for headlines and gossip columns. And she knew exactly how to play the game, skilfully manipulating camera angles and teasing the press with tantalizing tidbits that left them craving more.

It was a symbiotic relationship built on toxicity. Smith craved attention and adoration, and the media willingly indulged her desires. The result was an insatiable cycle of headlines, paparazzi snapshots, and scandalous rumors. Tragically, this insatiable thirst for attention eventually consumed her. The invasive cameras, constant scrutiny, and unrelenting pressure took a toll on her mental health. She transformed into a caricature of herself, a prisoner of the spotlight, with the media circling like vultures, eagerly awaiting their next feast. And there was plenty to feast upon, including her struggles with prescription drug addiction and visible mental health issues.

Why Fame Can Be a Nightmare

As her life spiraled out of control, the media reveled in the spectacle. Every misstep, every struggle became a sensationalized soap opera, eagerly devoured by the masses. Smith’s downfall became a morbid reality show, where her pain became profit for a callous industry. It was a dark dance, a sickening game, and both sides played their parts until there was nothing left.

In 2007, at the age of 39, Smith tragically succumbed to an accidental overdose of prescription drugs, marking a devastating end to a life lived in the tumultuous limelight. 

So, let us raise a glass to Anna Nicole, a fallen star who blazed across the sky with intensity, only to crash and burn in an inferno of chaos. Her legacy serves as a poignant reminder that even the most glamorous icons can become casualties of a world that both idolizes and devours them. As the dust settles from her existence, we are left to contemplate our own complicity in the media’s insatiable appetite for scandal, and the tragic toll it exacts on those caught in its clutches.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Bombshell: The Life and Death of Anna Nicole Smith appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Born Anna Mae Bullock on November 26, 1939, in Nutbush, Tennessee, Tina Turner rose to prominence in the 1960s as the lead vocalist of the Ike & Tina Turner Revue. The duo’s energetic live performances and their chart-topping hits such as “River Deep – Mountain High” and “Proud Mary”made them a force to be reckoned with. Tina’s raw talent and boundless energy on stage earned her the title of the “Queen of Rock ‘n’ Roll.”

However, it was during her solo career that Tina Turner truly soared to new heights. In the 1980s, she released her landmark album “Private Dancer,” which featured the unforgettable singles “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” “Private Dancer,”and “Better Be Good to Me.”. This Grammy-winning album showcased her raw talent. Songs like “Simply the Best,” “We Don’t Need Another Hero,” and “Steamy Windows”became anthems for fans worldwide, and her live shows sold out stadiums across the globe..

Her marriage to Ike Turner, which ended in divorce in 1978, was marked by turbulent times and personal struggles. However, Tina overcame these challenges and was soon back in the saddle again. Her musical repertoire, informed by her traumatic marriage, was replete with themes of grief, betrayal and rising up from the ashes like a phoenix. Her , “I, Tina,” later adapted into the film “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” served as a testament to her indomitable spirit and became an inspiration to many.

Life without Ike

Tina’s career continued to flourish with subsequent albums like “Break Every Rule” (1986) and “Foreign Affair” (1989).Her collaboration with Bryan Adams on the hit song “It’s Only Love” further solidified her status as a global sensation.

Many of Turner’s songs explore the complexities of love and relationships. She delves into themes of passion, heartbreak, desire, and devotion. Songs like “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” “Private Dancer,” and “I Don’t Wanna Fight” examine the ups and downs of romantic connections and the struggles of maintaining them. Her music frequently touches upon the desire for freedom and independence. Tracks like “River Deep – Mountain High,” “Nutbush City Limits,”and “We Don’t Need Another Hero” reflect a longing for liberation from oppressive situations, or personal limitations.

And who can forget her in the cult film, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdrome, in which she co-starred with Mel Gibson as the chain-mail wearing ‘Aunty Entity’, the queen of a post-apocalyptic township named Bartertown. With this iconic role, she redefined the place of a leading woman in a major Hollywood production way back in 1985 when such characterizations were virtually unheard of.

In 1995 she performed the song “GoldenEye” written by Irish musicians Bono and the Edge. The song served as the theme for the James Bond film GoldenEye.

Tina Turner moved to Europe in the mid-1980s. After a successful career in the United States, she met her future husband, a man who was 16 years her junior, the German music executive Erwin Bach, and subsequently settled in Switzerland. She officially became a Swiss citizen in 2013 after residing in the country for many years. Her move to Europe allowed her to enjoy a quieter personal life and also marked a significant phase in her music career. Turner found considerable success and popularity in Europe, particularly during the 1980s and 1990s.

Buddhist enlightenment

Turner publicly announced her conversion to Buddhism in the early 1990s, following a trip to Japan where she encountered the teachings of Nichiren Buddhism. She had openly spoken about how her Buddhist practice served as a source of strength and resilience for her throughout her life. She credited the practice of chanting and studying Buddhist teachings with helping her overcome personal struggles and find inner peace.

Tina’s contributions to the music industry were recognized with numerous accolades throughout her career. She was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, received 12 Grammy awards, and a Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award. Having sold over 100 million records worldwide, she became one of the highest selling artists of all time.   

When Angela Bassett, who played Turner in the 1993 biopic “What’s Love Got To Do With It”, heard about her demise, aloud: “How do we say farewell to a woman who owned her pain and trauma and used it as a means to help change the world?”Bassett said that “through her courage in telling her story, her commitment to stay the course in her life, no matter the sacrifice, and her determination to carve out a space in rock and roll for herself and for others who look like her, Tina Turner showed others who lived in fear what a beautiful future filled with love, compassion and freedom should look like.”

She is, and always will be, the Queen of Rock ‘n’ Roll.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Tina Turner: The Unparalleled Queen of Rock ’n’ Roll appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The streets embraced this new sound, and soon MCs started grabbing the mic, spitting rhymes and turning parties into lyrical battlegrounds. The Furious Five, with their charismatic frontman Grandmaster Flash, took this shit to a whole new level. Their track “The Message” dropped in ’82, and it was a raw portrayal of the harsh realities of life in the ghetto. It was all about keepin’ it real, speaking truth to power, and giving a voice to the voiceless.

Then came the legendary golden age of hip hop, with a slew of iconic artists droppin’ bombs that would shape the game forever. Run-DMC, Rakim, Public Enemy, and N.W.A—the names alone command respect. They rhymed with passion, skill, and wit, raising their middle fingers to the system that kept their communities down.

These artists brought the themes of money, power, sex, and drugs to the forefront. They painted vivid pictures of the hustle, the grind, and the pursuit of paper. Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five’s “” exposed the dark side of the coke game, while N.W.A’s entire Straight Outta Compton album laid bare the reality of police brutality and systemic racism.

But rap wasn’t just about the struggle. It celebrated success, the hustle, and the good life. Biggie Smalls, the Notorious B.I.G., showed us the power of the hustle in “” with lyrics like, “It was all a dream, I used to read Word Up! Magazine, Salt-N-Pepa and Heavy D up in the limousine.” Those words were an anthem for anyone trying to rise up from the bottom.

And let’s not forget the ladies who paved their own way in this male-dominated scene. Salt-N-Pepa, Queen Latifah, and Lil’ Kim took control of their sexuality and gave a powerful voice to women in hip hop. With tracks like “Shoop” and “,” they owned their power and commanded respect.

As hip hop spread its wings, it evolved and morphed into new sub-genres and styles, including one of its most notorious and commercially successful; gangsta rap.

Fuck tha Police: The Birth of Gangsta Rap

Gangsta rap emerged in the mid-1980s as a subgenre of hip-hop music. It originated primarily in the African American communities of South Central Los Angeles, California. The term “gangsta” reflects the genre’s focus on depicting the realities of street life, crime, violence, and the experiences of urban youth in marginalized communities.

Several artists and groups played significant roles in the development of gangsta rap. One of the earliest and most influential figures was Schoolly D, who released songs like “P.S.K. What Does It Mean?” in 1985, known for their explicit and gritty portrayals of inner-city life. However, it was N.W.A (Niggaz Wit Attitude), a pioneering group from Compton, California, that brought gangsta rap to the mainstream.

N.W.A, consisting of members such as Eazy-E, Ice Cube, Dr. Dre, MC Ren, and DJ Yella, released their groundbreaking album in 1988. It was characterized by its fearless lyrics that reflected the harsh realities of street violence, police brutality, and gang culture. Songs like “” and “” became anthems of resistance and gave voice to the frustrations and experiences of Black youth.

The success of N.W.A and Ice-T in the late ‘80s paved the way for other gangsta rap artists and crews to emerge, Snoop Dogg, Tupac Shakur, The Notorious B.I.G., and many more.

Perhaps nobody said it better than Tupac, an incredibly gifted rapper, poet and storyteller who became the poster child of Gangsta rap. In the song ‘Starin’ Through my Rear View’, he summed up the pain of his generation:

“Multiple gunshots fill the block, the fun stops/
Niggaz is callin cops, people shot, nobody stop/
I wonder when the world stopped caring last night/
Two kids shot while the whole block staring/
I will never understand this society, first they try
To murder me, then they lie to me/

A few beats later he spits out the hook, warning the world that the end is near.

“They got me starin’ at the world through my rearview/
Go on, baby, scream to God, he can’t hear you/
I can feel your heart beatin’ fast ’cause it’s time to die/
Gettin’ high, watchin’ time fly”

On September 7, 1996, Tupac was gunned down in a drive-by shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada. He was 25 years old.

His songs have become the stuff of legend with their mesmerizing beats and poetic take on the life of an outlaw, including “California Love”, “Till the End of Time”, All Eyez on Me”, “Hail Mary” and “When Thugz Cry”. Twenty-seven years after he died, his music still raises the room temperature and makes those booties jiggle like jello.    

It is important to note that while gangsta rap has been criticized for its explicit content and sometimes glorification of violence, it also provided a platform for artists to voice their frustrations and bring attention to social and political injustices. It remains an influential and impactful subgenre within the broader landscape of hip-hop music.

Demolishing Wokeness

The 2000s introduced us to a new wave of artists who took hip hop to new heights. Jay-Z, Eminem, and Kanye West became cultural icons, dominating charts and shaping the sound of a new era. Jay-Z’s “” captured the ambition and the hustle of a generation, while Eminem’s “” became an anthem for anyone chasing their dreams.

Hip hop has a reputation for being unapologetically raw and uncensored, often delving into themes that make the prim and proper folks squirm. Money, power, and sex are like the holy trinity of hip hop, and it’s entertaining to observe how they make the self-righteous cringe.

Take Jay-Z’s “,” for example. He says, “You know I thug ’em, fuck ’em, love ’em, leave ’em / ‘Cause I don’t fuckin’ need ’em.” Oh, mercy! That line sure doesn’t sit well with the sensitive souls who value emotional connection. But guess what? Jay-Z doesn’t give a damn about your delicate sensibilities.

Then we’ve got 50 Cent with his track “” He raps, “I don’t know what you heard about me / But a bitch can’t get a dollar out of me / No Cadillac, no perms, you can’t see / That I’m a motherfuckin’ P.I.M.P.” Oh, the horror! Denizens of the ivory tower can’t fathom why anyone would be so fixated on material possessions when there are deeper existential matters to ponder. It’s just not their cup of tea.

But here’s the thing: hip hop isn’t meant to cater to the refined tastes of the upper crust. It’s a cultural force that reflects the realities of the streets, where money, power, and sex often dominate the narrative. It’s unapologetic, brash, and larger than life. It speaks to a different audience, one that isn’t seeking intellectual enlightenment but rather a raw and authentic expression of life’s grittier side.

Celebrating sexual desire

Rap music has always prided itself on being counter-cultural, subversive, and rebellious. In a society where prudishness often reigns supreme, rap music serves as a bold middle finger to societal norms. It challenges the idea that discussions about sex should be kept behind closed doors and offers a raw, unfiltered portrayal of human desires.

In the realm of rap, hot women are like the Holy Grail. Artists can’t resist showering their lyrics with vivid descriptions of curvaceous figures, luscious lips, and hypnotizing gazes. From Sir Mix-a-Lot’s classic “” to Cardi B’s unapologetic celebration of female sexuality in “,” rap music revels in the art of celebrating the female form. Critics may scoff and call it superficial or objectifying, but let’s be honest here – it’s all part of the game.

In the world of rap, it seems like the number of sexual partners you’ve had is directly proportional to your street cred. You’ll often hear rap lyrics filled with accounts of late-night escapades, bedroom acrobatics, and enough innuendos to make your grandmother blush. It’s like a never-ending competition to outdo each other in the realm of sexual prowess, and we’re all here for the wild stories and exaggerated swagger.

Let’s give credit where it’s due – rap music has taken the art of wordplay and metaphors to a whole new level. While some may argue that explicit lyrics about hot women and sex lack depth, true connoisseurs of the genre know that there’s more beneath the surface. Most rappers are skilled wordsmiths, weaving intricate rhymes and clever metaphors that add layers of meaning to their lyrical prowess. So, even if it seems like a straightforward ode to sexual desire, there’s often an undercurrent of social commentary or personal expression lurking within those lascivious verses.

From Projects to Private Jets

Picture this: a struggling artist from the rough streets, surrounded by poverty and adversity, armed with nothing but a dream and a microphone. Fast forward a few years, and that same artist is now dripping in diamonds, cruising in luxury cars, and living in mansions that would make Scrooge McDuck blush. The rags-to-riches stories of iconic rappers not only embody the American Dream but also send up the anti-capitalist rhetoric popular in white liberal circles.

Hip hop’s success stories are nothing short of astonishing. Take Jay-Z, for example. From his humble beginnings in Brooklyn’s notorious Marcy Projects to becoming a , he’s the embodiment of the rags-to-riches narrative. He didn’t just become one of the most influential rappers of all time; he transformed himself into a business mogul, owning a stake in everything from music streaming platforms to luxury champagne brands. And he’s not alone. Artists like Dr. Dre, Sean Combs, and Rihanna have leveraged their talents and entrepreneurial spirit to build empires that would make Wall Street tremble. 

If there’s one thing successful rappers are unapologetic about, it’s flaunting their wealth. From diamond-encrusted grills to chains that weigh more than a small child, rappers have perfected the art of bling. Critics may decry this ostentatious display of opulence as shallow or materialistic, but let’s be real here – who doesn’t secretly want to rock a gold-plated suit while sipping Cristal from a diamond-studded goblet? Those rappers have turned the celebration of wealth into an art form, and their unapologetic embrace of luxury upends the anti-capitalist narrative, giving a middle finger to those who decry their success.

Materialism as a Middle Finger

Anti-capitalist rhetoric often bemoans the materialistic excesses of the wealthy, viewing them as symbols of greed and inequality. But here’s the thing – rappers have taken that narrative and flipped it on its head. They revel in the materialistic aspects of their success, not just as a personal indulgence but as a defiant act against a society that said they couldn’t make it. For them, the diamonds, the cars, and the lavish lifestyles aren’t just symbols of opulence; they’re a giant middle finger to a system that often keeps the underprivileged down. It’s their way of saying, “Look at me now!”

Beyond the bling and the flashy lifestyles, the most successful hip hop artists are defying anti-capitalist rhetoric through their entrepreneurial endeavors. They’re not just consuming wealth; they’re creating it. They’ve become savvy businesspeople, establishing record labels, fashion lines, and investment portfolios that generate money and opportunities for themselves and their communities. They’ve turned their hustle into a blueprint for success, inspiring generations to chase their dreams and break free from the chains of poverty.

While the haters may turn up their noses at their opulent displays of success, these artists have flipped the script. They’ve transformed materialism into a form of rebellion, entrepreneurship into a tool for empowerment, and their success into an inspiration for others to break free from the limitations imposed by society. So, let the champagne flow, the diamonds shine, and the rappers keep flipping the bird to anyone who says they can’t have it all.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Get Rich or Die Tryin’: Rappers Pursuing the American Dream appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Should We Lift the Ban on Russian Sport?

READ MORE

Now, with the war in Ukraine, that soft power is facing a major crisis. Since Russia launched its invasion at the end of February, many ballet performances are being canceled around the world: The Bolshoi Ballet’s summer season at London’s , “Swan Lake” by the Royal Moscow Ballet at the Helix Theatre in Dublin and concerts by the Vienna Philharmonic — led by the Russian conductor and Vladimir Putin’s supporter, Valery Gergiev — at the Carnegie Hall in New York have all been called off. 

The Danish minister of culture, Ane Halsboe-Jorgensen, suggested the Musikhuset Aarhus, Scandinavia’s largest concert hall, should Russian National Ballet’s performance. The UK tour by the Russian State Ballet of Siberia has been as a stand against the war. 

Because of the conflict, former dancers and Ukraine natives Darya Fedotova and Sergiy Mykhaylov changed the name of their school from the  to the International Ballet of Florida. , in Newcastle, canceled the screenings of Bolshoi Ballet’s “Swan Lake” and “Pharaoh’s Daughter.” A Japanese ballerina with the Russian Ballet Theater in Moscow, , is dancing for peace during a tour in the US, but a restaurant refused to serve lunch to the cast when they learned they were from Russia. 

Business Card

The boycotts may just be starting, bringing financial loss to ��ܲ�������’s cultural establishment amid already crippling economic sanctions. But the damage to Russian �����������’s soft power can be even more everlasting, taking years to recover. After all, soft power is the ability to seduce rather than coerce, strengthen a nation’s image abroad and thus enhance cultural and diplomatic relations as well as tourism. It takes years, even decades, to cultivate the tradition, like Hollywood in the US, the carnival in Brazil and MAG (manga, anime, games) culture in Japan.

Both the USSR and Russia could never compete with truly global pop-culture exports emanating from America. There were no music icons to rival Michael Jackson, blockbusters like “Star Wars” or TV stars like Oprah. The country produced incredible cultural products, especially when it came to film. Sergei Eisenstein’s “Battleship Potemkin” (1925), Andrei Tarkovsky’s sci-fi “Solaris” (1972) and Alexander Sokurov’s “Russian Arc” (2002) are masterpieces that earned Russian cinema a place in every art book and class around the world, but they were far from being international hits. 

Russian composers like Igor Stravinski and Alexander Scriabin, and writers such as Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Lev Tolstoy, similarly occupy high positions in the world’s literary and music canons but can hardly be described as widely popular, especially in the Anglophone cultural sphere. 

Ballet, on the other hand, has always been a lucrative export for Russia. In her  “Swans of the Kremlin,” Christina Ezrahi looks at how Russian ballet, whose tradition stretches back to the imperial court as a celebration of the Romanov dynasty, with ballet schools established during the rule of in the 18^th century, has grabbed the world’s attention. Following the 1917 revolution, luckily convinced Vladimir Lenin not to destroy the Bolshoi because peasants and workers flocked to the theater despite the chaos of the civil war years. 

Art and Politics

Although theaters like the Bolshoi may appear as a microcosmos of liberal art, in ��ܲ�������’s history, ballet has always had close ties with political power. Stalin was an opera aficionado and used to arrive at the Bolshoi by a secret entrance and watch alone. After the signing of the non-aggression pact with Germany in 1939, he took Hitler’s foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop to see  dance at the Bolshoi. 

During the Soviet era, ballet served as a visiting card for Russian diplomats. In “American-Soviet Cultural Diplomacy,” Cadra Peterson McDaniel  how the Kremlin used the Bolshoi ballets as a means of cultural exchange, weaving communist ideas such as collective ownership of the means of production and the elimination of income inequality discretely into the storylines along with pre-revolutionary dance aesthetics during 1959 US tour.

Other artists were also crucial for projecting Soviet cultural soft power at the time, like the world-famous cellist and conductor Mstislav Rostropovich and his wife, the opera singer Galina Vishnevskaya. But they faced tough competition from Tchaikovsky’s ballet hits like “The Nutcracker.” 

Ballet served a purpose during the putsch of 1991, which signaled the beginning of the Soviet Union’s collapse, when instead of announcing the attempted coup against Mikhail Gorbachev, “Swan Lake” was  on national television on a loop. The export of Russian ballet increased during the  as the Bolshoi had to tour to compensate for an unstable economy while enjoying the opening up of the country after decades behind the Iron Curtain. 

President Putin’s two decades in power may have allowed for economic recovery, but Russian ballet suffered from scandals like the acid attack on Bolshoi’s artistic director Sergei Filin in 2013. The scandal garnered the attention of the international media following stories about the at the Bolshoi and its close affiliation with the Kremlin, tarnishing Russian �����������’s appeal.

The connection between Bolshoi and the power structure in Russia is so vivid that artists were directly affected as the result of the invasion of Ukraine. , the chief conductor at the Bolshoi, resigned after coming under pressure to condemn Russian actions. Fearing that musicians are becoming “victims of so-called ‘cancel culture,’” he worried he “will be soon asked to choose between Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Beethoven, Brahms, Debussy.” Two , Brazilian David Motta Soares and Italian Jacopo Tissi, also resigned, citing solidarity with Ukraine. 

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information..

As someone who appears to favor the outdoors, sports and guns, it’s unlikely that President Putin will see ballet as a priority to be shielded from Western sanctions and boycotts. There is, in fact, little he could do, especially given the current restrictions on travel in and out of the country. There is, of course, the question of whether boycotts of the arts are justified, considering that other countries have a history of political intervention, like China in Hong Kong or the US in Iraq, but their cultural products were not banned from movie theaters and art exhibitions. 

It may find itself caught in another historic moment, but Russian ballet’s cultural soft power survived the tsars, revolutions, famine, dictatorship and the fall of empires. In the end, dance will likely outlast autocracy.  

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Russian Ballet Under Fire — Can the Industry Dance Out of This One? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The Art of Prince Andrew’s Lawyers

READ MORE

Ellen develops a perfectly justified critique of an incredibly trivial study from the University of Cambridge that had the pretension of being comprehensive because it involved “350,000 participants, from 50 countries, across six continents.” (Oxford, this alumnus does not mind telling you, would never have conducted anything so misguided and brainless.) The study sought to analyze the personality traits of people who, according to its self-description, “are drawn to similar music genres.” Among the traits it studied were descriptors such as “extrovert,” “open,” “agreeable” and “neurotic.”

Today’s Weekly Devil’s Dictionary definition:

Music:

1. Up until late in the 20^th century: A form of individual and collective expression, the most refined of the arts, that uses diverse technologies, including the human voice, which are combined in ways that permit the production of complex combinations of sound employed for the widest variety of social, ritual, religious and artistic purposes

2. Since the later part of the 20^th century: commercially available recorded songs

Contextual Note

Ellen feigns being unaware of the first definition above. She seems to accept the idea that music has been definitively redefined sometime in the recent past by Napster and Spotify. Musical creators no longer have to toil within their communities marked by evolving traditions with ancient roots, relying on the range of objects bequeathed to them for collective musical expression. They have been liberated, first by recording technologies that enabled wide distribution across the globe, then by the miracle of digital instantaneity. But also by the marketing geniuses who now decide what music must sound like.

Modern musicians no longer need to think about the music of the past, except when their producers point out the occasional value of nostalgia. Even then, nostalgia at best covers decades, not centuries. To thrive or even survive, musicians must simply focus on the music that sells today, the one their agents, publishers and marketers guide them to produce. 

Ellen’s ability to write off the entire history of humanity’s music is mind-boggling. I’m even left wondering whether she has ever even heard of the famous medieval English song whose title is nearly a homophone with her name: “The Ballad of Barbara Allen.” That can’t of course be true because artists as modern as Joan Baez and Art Garfunkel have recorded it. Ellen undoubtedly knows a lot about the musical traditions she pretends to ignore. She clearly believes she is writing for an audience blithely unaware of music’s past. She leaves the distinct impression that anything that isn’t a commercial song is not music. 

Ellen quite correctly objects to the premise of the Cambridge study that assumes the existence of a correlation between the preference for certain popular artists and personality traits. She is also correct when she notes that music “taste, like the humans who possess it, seems built from a dizzying array of variables.” Why is it then that she refuses to acknowledge the very real scope of that “dizzying array” as she reduces music to one narrowly defined type of musical genre: the professionally recorded popular song invented for monetization through radio and jukeboxes in the United States in the mid-20^th century?

Perhaps the most revealing observation she makes concerns the circumstances in which people listen to music. “When you select a song,” she wonders, “are you happy, miserable, in love, heartbroken, angry? Or none of the above — just trying to chill while you make dinner, thanks. That’s pertinent, actually: where you are when you listen to music, what you’re doing. Working out. Driving. Strolling. Reading. Work. Leisure. In a pub or at a club. Lying in a darkened room, with AirPods in.”

What Ellen describes is the behavior of a music consumer, not a music lover. Music is reduced to the role of sound to correspond to a mood for an individual in an atomized world. The modern commercial song has systematically removed all the salient features of music as it has existed in every tradition, notably its harmonic structure, melodic freedom and rhythmic contrasts. But most glaringly of all, it stifles the creative relationships between the musicians who produce the music. When songs are efficiently packaged, the relationship between musicians becomes purely an industrial one. Even live performances become artificial shows.

Ellen makes a very valid point when, contradicting the authors of the study, she writes that music “can also take you out of yourself. It is an escape chute, a liberator, as much as it is a mirror.” It is certainly true for musicians. But for them, unlike consumers, the sense of liberation is tied to the idea of mastering the constraints that musical creation imposes. The musician lives the experience as something vibrant and real. For the music consumer, it is prepackaged and therefore hyperreal. There may be escape but it won’t be liberation.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information .

Ellen has a curious idea of what the function of music is in modern society. “Some people don’t even like music,” she notes. “They don’t yearn for a soundtrack to their life.” What better illustration of the degree to which the average person’s musical experience has become hyperreal? Movies are constructed with soundtracks, not human lives. Yet that appears to be how people are invited to think about their own lives, as a movie of which they are presumably the star.

Historical Note

Archeologists date the first musical instruments as far back as 18,000 years. Of course, animals and especially birds may have instilled in the earliest humans the idea that music could have an important role to play in their individual and collective lives. 

Religions across the globe have associated music with the kinds of social rituals and spiritual quests they encourage. In other words, music has for many thousands of years functioned as a link between people and the natural world, societies and the universe. In traditional European cosmology before the 17^th century’s scientific revolution, astronomers and philosophers posited the existence of mathematically perfect, heavenly harmonies called the “music of the spheres.”

Barbara Ellen is writing at a curious point in human history, as society begins to anticipate an as yet undefined cultural world order that will inevitably be imposed by the metaverse and artificial intelligence. For all we know, this may simply be the final stage of the commercial revolution that we call the consumer society. If Mark Zuckerberg’s and Elon Musk’s forecasts have any validity, we are headed for a hyper-commercial revolution in which we will end up being nothing more than the product Facebook and Google have already turned us into.

There are some natural and valid reasons to think that music itself may refuse to be sucked into the vortex of the metaverse. Music is too close to the core of human life to be absorbed by Big Data. All past and present civilizations have been built from their evolving traditions. These include language, cooking, architecture, graphic arts and music. These traditions combine to produce scientific and religious beliefs, urban organization, poetry, pottery, jewelry, social hierarchies, public institutions and much else.

Although everything people produce has the potential of being reduced to a commodity with a price tag, the cultural output of any civilization emerges from a wide range of spontaneously produced social activities. It is nevertheless true that the production and evolution of culture changed radically with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. This inevitably led to what we tend to think of as the ultimate avatar of civilization: the consumer society.

Ellen herself recognizes that “we have completely and irrevocably changed the way we consume and interact with music.” It’s all about money. She then shares with us a curious musing, that “perhaps there should be a global ‘cheapskate’ personality-category for those who don’t pay for music?” By making this suggestion, she clearly doubts that separating music from money will ever happen again. Sadly, she may be right.

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The 51�Թ� Devil’s Dictionary.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Shedding a Tear for the Demise of Music appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Jackson, by contrast, has, since his death, suffered reputational harm over child sexual abuse allegations, but not so irreparable that he — or, more accurately, his character — has been dragged down from the showbusiness pantheon.

What If Michael Jackson Had Lived?

READ MORE

Earlier in February, a musical devoted to his life and work opened at the Neil Simon Theatre on Broadway. “It’s unfortunate he is not alive to witness the flawless production of MJ the Musical, a model biographical musical,” wrote Ayanna Prescod, of the , who awarded the show the maximum five stars. The review was typical of others, which range from positive to rhapsodic.

Only one reviewer, of Variety, had the temerity to raise questions about Jackson’s sexual abuse allegations with cast members. He was shown the door. “The show’s backers were quick to shut down any mention of the scandal that still clouds the King of Pop’s life and legacy at the red-carpet premiere of the musical,” wrote Appler.

The Afterlife   

When Jackson died in 2009, there was an immediate upturn in the already formidable sales of his records and a period when some radio stations played nothing but his music, whether as a solo artist or as part of the Jackson 5. Even after death, he continued to mesmerize audiences. He was rarely out of the news and even appeared as a in 2014.

But in 2019, “,” a 4-hour documentary focusing on two men, Wade Robson and James Safechuck, offered a startling account of Jackson, not as the world’s onetime most popular entertainer but as a sexual predator. The testimonies of the two men were delivered with such conviction that they were accepted by many as credible. There was no headlong rush from others claiming to be victims. Robson and Safechuck were known to be close to Jackson, and their claims were detailed enough to persuade many to reevaluate the singer and, by implication, his legacy.

For a while, it appeared that Jackson’s afterlife would end abruptly. Less than a year before, the arrest of Harvey Weinstein, a powerful Hollywood producer, had initiated a dramatic cultural mood shift. The #MeToo movement surged to prominence and, in the years since, every man or woman accused of untoward behavior, including verbal harassment, was castigated. Often, their contracts were revoked and their overall status downgraded — in other words, canceled.

Yet Jackson’s stature, though affected, has not suffered comparably. He was the highest-earning dead entertainer in the world for eight straight years, from 2013 through 2020, slipping to number three with $75 million made last year, according to Forbes. His music continues to sell. His estate has many other income streams, including Cirque du Soleil’s show, “,” a spectacular success in Las Vegas. Michael Jackson is still with us, shows no signs of going away and most decidedly has not been canceled. Why?

Don’t Speak Ill of the Dead

Obviously, many people just don’t believe Jackson’s accusers, and some assume they are . Jackson is unable to defend himself and thus any allegation is destined to remain only that — an allegation, a claim, an assertion or a contention. The supporting evidence, however direct and believable, derives from the remembrances of two men, both of whom were privy to Jackson’s life but whose statements can’t be refuted by the accused.

This is further complicated by the time lapse between his death and the revelations. Jackson had been subject to rumors and accusations, some of which had traction enough to land him in court. But he was in 2005 and died an innocent man, legally speaking. Had he been alive at the time of the 2019 documentary, Jackson would almost certainly have denied all allegations and set a legal team on the case.

In view of the way he handled the media during his life, he would probably have appeared on television and in other media, issuing his own version of events. He would probably have pointed out that both men were treated kindly as friends and, for reasons best known to them, never uttered their complaints during his lifetime.

It sounds crass, but being dead does not guarantee innocence. British TV personality Jimmy Savile was enormously popular in his life and raised about £40 million with his charitable work. After he died in 2011, Pandora’s box was prised open: All manner of people advanced accusations of misconduct, including having sex with the corpses of dead patients at a hospital mortuary. The weight of testimony convinced all but Savile’s family and most devoted fans of his guilt. While he was well-liked, Savile was not in Jackson’s class. The King of Pop’s approval was global and worshipful. Correction: It is global and worshipful.

Don’t Trust the Media

Another factor in Jackson’s continued popularity is a lack of trust in the media. Research that 56% of Americans agreed with the statement, “Journalists and reporters are purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations.”

The rise of Donald Trump, the COVID-19 pandemic and the circulation of what many now call fake news have made people distrustful of mainstream media. Even if we leave aside the bizarre beliefs that Jackson is still alive — and probably sharing a home with Elvis, Marilyn Monroe and JFK — there are many who are likely to question practically everything they learn from the media about the star.

It’s no longer necessary to be a conspiracy theorist to be a cynic. Questioning newspapers and TV news is commonplace, so the fact that the seemingly incriminating documentary was shown on mainstream channels — Channel 4 in the UK, HBO in the US — no longer validates its authenticity.

Don’t Forget That He Was Black

Bill Cosby, a once-legendary black comedian, has been well and truly canceled. But Cosby was tried in court and, after initially being released after a jury failed to reach a decision, was later convicted, sentenced and spent over two years in prison before the conviction for sexual assault was overturned. He is finished as both an entertainer and the educator he seemed to aspire to be. He is now 84.

Whoopi Goldberg’s recent that the Holocaust wasn’t about race was baffling and surprising, coming as it did from an African American. An apology followed, along with a two-week suspension from the ABC show, “The View.” Cancelation looks likely. Her opinions are often provocative and often well-intended. But, in this instance, she simply sounded foolish and ignorant. It’s unlikely we’ll hear much from her in the future.

Jackson was also black. On occasion, he himself to be so. But his ever-changing appearance persuaded some that he was blanching his skin and undergoing plastic surgery in an effort to disguise his blackness. Jackson himself would have objected to this. On more than one occasion, he pointed out that he suffered from vitiligo, a condition that affects skin pigmentation.

Jackson’s stalwart supporters would probably refer to the historical cases of Mike Tyson, O.J. Simpson and Clarence Thomas, all of whom were conspicuously successful black men whose careers or reputations were damaged after high-profile cases. Jackson, they could argue, is part of a tradition in which black men who rise to the top are brought back to earth, as if to remind white America of the self-destructive element in black males.

It would be naïve to assume Jackson’s blackness has not been a factor in deterring cancelation. In Cosby’s case, a court of law considered evidence of his wrongdoing. Goldberg’s contretemps was made in full view of millions. There is no definitive proof of Jackson’s alleged transgressions, so anyone or any organization that makes decisions on his culpability is forced to conjecture. Much as they may deny the conjectures are affected by Jackson’s blackness, who would believe it?

Awareness of the unequal treatment and abuse of women has been complemented by the recognition that black people have, over the decades, been suppressed and, on many occasions, brutalized. They’ve been unheard and underrepresented in many spheres of social activity, though not always in entertainment. The revival of the shibboleth of white privilege that was first aired in the 1980s served notice that castigation of blacks for deeds that might have gone unpunished if performed by whites has been commonplace.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information..

This doesn’t suggest Jackson has been granted a free pass. Heaven knows, he has plenty of vilifiers. Yet there is understandable caution. This prompts an awkward question: Are we less likely to condemn people of color for suspected or actual transgressions? And perhaps an even more awkward question: Does “we” usually mean “whites”? The legal precept of innocent until proved guilty has been reversed in recent years, allegation alone becoming potent enough to denounce celebrities and annul their careers.

Jackson has his detractors, for sure. Yet somehow his legacy actually grows in stature. Thirteen years after his death, he continues to fascinate just as he did in life. It seems impossible to harm or damage his — what shall I call it? — revenant. There is probably no other celebrity, living or dead, so insusceptible to cancelation.

*[Ellis Cashmore’s “” will be published by Bloomsbury in May.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Why Hasn’t Michael Jackson Been Canceled? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Is Big Tech Ready to Tackle Extremism?

READ MORE

The far right took Jackson’s song out of context by framing the lyrics around the idea of the “great replacement.” Appropriating a global hit performed by one of the most famous artists in modern history allows the far right to reach a wide audience, using Michael Jackson’s star status to build credibility around its claims.

They Don’t Really Care

The far right has a fascination with the lyrics of “They Don’t Really Care About US” because of the themes covered in the song. The in question contain anti-Semitic “Jew me, sue me, everybody do me / Kick me, kike me, don’t you black or white me.” The conversations on Telegram involve praising Jackson for “recognizing” that Jews were the ones in . Users continued to praise Jackson for using the word “,” deemed anti-Semitic for its historical context that dates back to the Jewish community entering the United States via .

The word “kike” is , which pleases the far right and helps build a narrative frame around a misconstrued version of Jackson’s song. The lyrics about Jews, in addition to the chorus, “All I wanna say is that they don’t really care about us,” also feeds into the beliefs espoused by the .

The song’s lyrics faced for being politically incorrect when it was initially released, but it was not until recently that the far right noticed how it could manipulate the lyrics to reach a mass audience. Despite Jackson’s of the song, both versions continue to be readily available online.

Jackson produced two music videos for this powerful hit. The first video with the statement: “This film is not degrading one race, but pictorializes the injustices to all mankind. May God grant us peace throughout the world.” The video takes place in prison, with disgruntled inmates surrounding Jackson. Throughout the video, visuals of weapons, bombs and beatings are shown across the screen.

The other of the video is more upbeat, taking place in Brazil, with bright colors and dancing, but with the same problematic lyrics. Some even claimed they saw Jackson doing a Nazi salute at one point in the video. Telegram users preferred the prison version because the visuals aligned with their us-versus-them frame.

After facing criticism, Jackson explained that he purposefully used that verbiage to highlight the injustice individuals were facing at the time by creating , specifically with the intention of showing the of name-calling people.

After users went back and forth in the channel providing their own interpretations of the song, they attempted to develop tactics to circulate the music video and create memes of Jackson’s photograph with the words “” or “they don’t really care about us.” images of the king of pop in this context across the internet could lead to those unfamiliar with the terms the opportunity to seek out further information on this type of content.

The mentality that binds the far right together is further solidified by the “us” Jackson uses in the song title and chorus, a user pointed out. After the user pointed out that they were considered the “” Jackson was referring to, the channel realized that he was talking about them. While the channel did not use the words “” outside of putting it on memes of Jackson, it was being described implicitly by users.

The channel audience agreed that the song’s purpose is to inform listeners that the government doesn’t care about them and that the authorities are willing to replace them through immigration to the extent that whites become the minority group. The great replacement and are two concepts of particular relevance for the far right because whites aspire to retain their majority status.

Based on the 2020 census results, there is a high likelihood of the far right panicking because the United States is becoming more . The world saw this fear of the great replacement in Charlottesville, Virginia, when protesters chanted “” during a Unite the Right rally in 2017.  

Narrative Frame

Despite evidence that Jackson suffered from — a condition where the skin loses pigmentation — users claimed he purposefully bleached his because he disliked his dark African American complexion. While there was no evidence for the claims Telegram users were making, they began to discuss how this framing can be used as a recruitment tactic — especially as these claims cannot be entirely disputed since Jackson has . However, the larger a conspiracy theory becomes, the that it will survive because it has crossed too many paths.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information .

The Michael Jackson the Telegram channel developed is a false reality and can be easily disproved after research. It only took one person to start the conversation before other individuals chimed in by trying to make connections between everything that has been said. The entire narrative framework is built on the foundation of an us-versus-them mentality the far right has always had.

Michael Jackson was not an ant-Semite, nor did he bleach his skin. But rhetoric can easily be misconstrued to fit a narrative that aids in furthering a specific cause. Rhetoric can have an impact, examined under a microscope, especially when delivered by someone of Michael Jackson’s caliber. Unfortunately, it is only a matter of time before the memes created by the far right that piqued interest in Jackson begin to circulate not only on other but also in the mainstream.

*[51�Թ� is a  partner of the .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Appropriating the King of Pop: The Far Right Co-Opts Michael Jackson appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The Musical Is Political: Black Metal and the Extreme Right

READ MORE

The story centers on Siegfried, a hero in the mold of Beowulf: a strong, nearly invincible warrior who has won riches through his exploits, a powerful sword and a cloak of invisibility. Siegfried is very much the belle of the medieval bro-ball. The poem begins with Siegfried traveling to the German town of Worms to propose marriage to Kriemhild, the Burgundian princess. Her brother, King Gunther, consents to the match, but only if Siegfried helps him win the hand of Brunhild, the warrior queen of Isenland. It’s to be a double wedding.

Following the nuptials (and a disturbing episode involving the marital rape of Brunhild), a feud emerges between Kriemhild and Brunhild. The conflict culminates in one of Gunther’s kinsmen murdering Siegfried, thrusting a spear into the vulnerable spot in his back. The remainder of the poem (the whole second half, that is) revolves around Kriemhild’s revenge, which results in the violent death of pretty much all the main characters, including Kriemhild herself. Taken together, the Nibelungenlied is an illuminating portrayal of ancient Germanic heroism and courtly drama.

Rediscovered in the mid-18^th century, the popularity of the poem swelled with the rising tide of German nationalism in the 19^th century. Most famously, the composer Richard Wagner, a German nationalist and virulent anti-Semite, reimagined the story in an epic four-part opera consisting of “The Rhinegold,” “The Valkyrie,” “Siegfried” and “Twilight of the Gods,” collectively known as “” or the Ring cycle, for short. Of course, several of the operas’ leitmotifs are instantly recognizable, not least the “.” Wagner’s Ring cycle became a landmark of German art and is still performed today, occasionally in back-to-back-to-back-to-back .

The Nazi regime was preternaturally keen to memorialize German lore, especially the Nibelungenlied, given its association with Wagner. An enthused Hitler was an in Bayreuth, home to Wagner’s own theater. Several symbols from both the original and Wagner’s version appealed to the Nazis, perhaps most notably the murder of Siegfried. It reflected the “” (�ٴDZ�������ٴ�ß) conspiracy theory that the Nazis propagated, namely that the German army was betrayed during the First World War by treasonous Jews and leftists.

The regime supported several projects stamped with the label of the Nibelungs. Chief among them was the cavernous Nibelungenhalle in Passau, the putative home of the original composer of the Nibelungenlied, which was used for mass indoor rallies. In the postwar era, far-right parties like the German People’s Union and the National Democratic Party of Germany organized assemblies with the specific intention of using the nationalist cachet of the Nibelungs — until Passau’s authorities the building in 2004.

Still, appropriation of the Nibelungs legend endures among Germany’s far right. Beginning in 2013, right-wing extremists organized the “” (KdN, the “Battle of the Nibelungs”), a mixed martial arts competition catering to far-right fighters and fans from around Europe. The event attracted 850 spectators in 2018 and was one of the biggest MMA competitions in Europe. It was in 2019, and organizers were from live-streaming KdN fights in 2020, but it may yet resurface in 2021.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information..

Symbols and allusions to the Nibelungenlied sadly will persist amid Germany’s far-right scene. This symbolism has a long history of co-option by extremists. Even though the of Wagner’s operas are not anti-Semitic, their endorsement by the Nazi regime touched Nibelung lore with an association that inescapably appeals to the far right. Yet references to the Nibelungenlied are more than far-right supporters’ fetishization of a twisted version of German cultural history. They form a part of the vast book of codes used by far-right actors to communicate. Cracking these is often the key to decoding how the far right organizes, mobilizes and ultimately understands the world in which it operates.

*[51�Թ� is a  partner of the .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post From Opera to MMA: Nationalist Symbolism and the German Far Right appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The Far Right’s Alternative History

LISTEN

What is particularly disturbing is the recognition that many recent violent crimes perpetrated by the extreme right seem to be connected or influenced by such worldviews. Anders Breivik, responsible for bombings and the shooting of 77 people in Norway in 2011, as an Odinist. James Alex Field, arrested for the murder of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, marched alongside a flag depicting the black sun, a Nazi symbol drawing directly on Germanic heathen Ariosophic imagery, which in turn had inspired the formation of the Thule Society.

This same black sun emblem appeared on the front and last pages of the manifesto of the Christchurch mass murderer in March 2019. The manifesto ended with the clarion call: “see you in Valhalla.” In the UK, Thomas Mair, who West Yorkshire MP Jo Cox, was reported as being influenced by racist Ariosophic literature too.

Gospel of Hate

The internet, the dark web, online gaming forums and encrypted messaging services are frequently accused of helping to spread this gospel of hate. Thus, some academics, such as Steven Woodbridge, have of the need to watch the uses of “historical themes, imagery and language” that are used in these forums to promote their particular brand of violent political discourse. One of these potential memes is black metal music and its offshoot, national socialist black metal (NSBM). Indeed, Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, in “Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity,” that black metal and its “fascination with the occult, evil, Nazism and Hitler” were a possible motivation behind the 1999 massacre, on Hitler’s birthday, of 12 students and a teacher at Columbine High School in Colorado.

Black metal is also associated with a series of church burnings across Norway in the 1990s by Varg Vikernes, a racist heathen and black metal musician. More recently, it was that Holden Matthew, the 21-year-old charged with burning down three black churches in Louisiana, was also influenced by black metal and held racist heathen beliefs. Some of black metal’s aesthetics even appear to have the violent imaginary of the neo-Nazi Atomwaffen Division. Plato may have been correct when he “about the interconnectivity of politics and music.”

Black metal is an extreme genre of heavy metal that first emerged in the UK with the band Venom. The subgenre took its name from the title of Venom’s second album, “Black Metal,” released in 1982. It was intended as a rejection of the commercialization of heavy metal as well as a critique of modern secular society. A second wave of the movement, which was more ideological in orientation and often emphasized Satanism or paganism, became infamous for promoting a series of church burnings. It emerged primarily in Norway in the 1990s and is exemplified by such bands as Burzum.

This Norwegian second wave helped to popularize the genre even further and led to the creation of other black metal bands across Europe and the globe. So influential has this genre now become that one commentator that “black metal has arguably become Norway’s greatest cultural export.”

Karl Spracklin black metal as “a form of extreme metal typified by evil sounds and elitist ideologies,” with a number of bands drawing on “nationalist and fascist images and themes.” Its sound is generally characterized by shrieking and growling vocals, disjointed guitar riffs, a frenetic pace and an emphasis on atmosphere, often deliberately created through the implementation of a raw, lo-fi quality of the recording. Many black metal performers tend to adopt pseudonyms and dress in a kind of Kiss-inspired corpse paint. Upside-down crucifixes and medieval weaponry, alongside Satanic and pagan imagery, additionally appear with relative frequency on black metal websites, CD covers and tattoos.

Other common musical and visual leitmotifs include war, death, fantasy, the apocalyptic and the mythological. Norwegian Satanic black metal band Gorgoroth, for example, took the inspiration for its name from a fictional setting in Tolkien’s land of Mordor. Although such motifs might be viewed as deliberately transgressive in order to attract devotees, some have that black metal practitioners also intend the genre to function “as a springboard from which violent actions could logically emerge” with the specific intent of “reclaiming … a pagan heritage.”

National Socialist Black Metal

Defenders of the genre, however, that it “is not a unified, monolithic culture” and that are too frequently “fabricated by conservative groups seeking to impose their own moral agendas.” Indeed, bands such as the Rolling Stones and Eagles have been linked erroneously with a Satanic agenda as early as the late 1960s. Cronos of Venom also denies outright any religious affiliations, : “We are entertainers first and foremost — if I wanted to be a murderer or a Satanist, I’d do that full time instead of playing songs for a living.”

The genre is notoriously difficult to define, with a litany of subgenre offshoots, including unblack/Christian, depressive suicidal and ambient black metal, to name but a few extreme variants. Black metal followers also argue, in their defense, that the music is primarily , celebrating a romantic and idealized view of the past which is heavy on ritual and critical of secularism. Aron Weaver, of the US black metal and heathen-inspired band Wolves in the Throne Room, it “as an artistic movement that is critiquing modernity on a fundamental level, saying that the modern world view is missing something.”

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information..

Some contemporary UK black metal bands, such as Winterfylleth, while admitting that their “musical influence … unashamedly borrows from Burzum” and other black metal bands of an extremist predisposition, that they do “not necessarily” believe the message behind those bands. A number of black metal followers would agree, as Spracklin points out, with many fans making “a distinction between the sound and the ideologies.” There are also heathen black metal bands, such as Norway’s Enslaved, that are avowedly anti-Satanic and anti-fascist.

Some black metal musicians are openly Satanist but reject Nazism. King ov Hell, who played in Gorgoroth, that “I am totally against every form of flock ideology. Nazism is an ideology of the flock.” There is even a countermovement against Nazism within the black metal music scene, evidenced by the US-based band Neckbeard Deathcamp and its 2018 album, “White Nationalism is for Basement Dwelling Losers.” The latter is a satirical critique the NSBM subgenre, which is avowedly pro-Nazi.

Black Metal Against Racism

While it is important to point out that national socialist black metal remains a minority element within black metal, signs of far-right extremism similarly contaminate related musical genres such as goth, industrial and neofolk. The latter incorporates elements of traditional European folk and reconstructed medieval instruments, exemplified by such bands as Fire, Sol Invictus and Death in June. The latter take their name from the Night of the Long Knives, when Hitler arranged the murder of his rivals in the Sturmabteilung critical of his policies. Nazi imagery, including the death head worn by the SS, is a consistent theme on their album covers, as are such Germanic runes like Algiz and Odal that were appropriated by neo-Nazis into their blood-and-soil ideology.

According to one Death in June fan on Nordic Elite in a post now removed, “European Civilisation … is going down the drain with the jewish/American mulicultural invasion.” But in the neofolk scene, too, there are recently established bands that are explicitly anti-racist and who reach a much larger, liberal audience. The band Heilung, for instance, recently issued a on the alleged harassment of a black woman at a performance in New York: “Apparently some people attended our ritual with the idea that Heilung is only for white people … This is not the case. Heilung is for ALL people, regardless of the color of the skin. And we are sorry that this happened at our show. We do not tolerate hate speech and racism.”

The neofolk band Wardruna, the authors of the soundtrack to the History Channel series “Vikings,” has made prominent anti-racist statements. In a blog promoting “antifascist neofolk bands from around the world,” the band’s lead singer, Einar Selvik, : “It is a very positive effect, that increased interest does not allow the subculture on the extreme right wing to use our history in peace. We have somehow taken our own story back.”

Whilst outright extremism in the neofolk, black metal and related music scenes is not the norm, it is important to address this problem as well as to draw attention to instances in which such prejudice is less explicit. The Manchester-based Winterfylleth may denounce Nazism by labeling it “the first attempt at some kind of tyrannical EU,” but their critique of extremist politics is reserved. Note that they were “not necessarily” believers in national socialism — this is far from outright rejection.

Winterfylleth are overtly and “unashamedly Anglo-Saxon in their approach” to their music, expressing a particular concern about a loss of national English identity. Hence their recent turn from black metal to a more lyrical folk black metal style, evidenced by their 2018 song “The Hallowing of Heirdom” with its melancholic refrain, “So who are we now?” Fandom comments on the latter signify an ambiguous range of to their politics and new musical direction, from the negative (“its like countryfile meets the druids”), to the more enthusiastic (“Celebrate that you are English… hail Woden”).

Another English pagan metal or folk metal band, Forefather, like Winterfylleth also celebrates its Anglo-Saxon roots. Intriguingly, with these UK bands, a broadly Germanic influence has become explicitly rooted more in specific English heathen blood-and-soil themes, exemplified in songs such as “When Our England Died.” Fan comments tend to the greatness of Anglo-Saxon culture and critique other foreign elements.

Beyond the Footnote

Given that not all black metal fans are fascists or Satanists, that many are simply intrigued by the genre’s ability to shock and entertain, and that some are genuinely attracted to the genre for its interest in ancient heathen religion, an even more specific blood-and-soil subgenre emerged from within black metal, the NSBM. National socialist black metal aimed to specifically its politics and religiosity much more clearly than black metal. It mixes extreme-right racism with paganism, is explicit in its rejection of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and was very much influenced in its development by the actions of Varg Vikernes. It is also violent, exemplified by the German NSBM band Absurd and their of a 15-year-old boy, which they also then referenced on the cover of their 1995 album, “Thuringian Pagan Madness.”

According to , NSBM “reskins the classical fascist ideological elements and combines them with racist and ethnic Paganism.” Critics state that NSMB is deliberately being “as a vehicle to spread hate and radicalize nominally apolitical metal fans.” While many of these NSBM bands appear to be primarily Ukrainian and Scandinavian, the subgenre has become global. According to Celan Brill-Voelkle, “When the keywords ‘national socialism’ are searched in ‘the metal archives’, there are an astounding 774 results of active bands worldwide.”

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information .

Ian Stuart Donaldson, former lead singer of the English Nazi rock band Skrewdriver, once that “A pamphlet is read only once, but a song is learnt by heart and repeated a thousand times.” Given their global reach and violent messaging, NSBM and other extremist elements within black metal can be seen to “paganism and Nordic folk myths … far more effectively than any number of meetings and marches could.” While others have on the way in which Christian nationalists are trying to infiltrate and influence mainstream Christian groups “in order to pull Christians to the far right,” there is an urgent need to monitor more closely a similar development within heathenry.

The black metal genre, alongside the existence of extremist racist heathen groups such as the O9A, is interesting for another theoretical reason too. It reinforces the made by Graham Macklin more than 15 years ago that if scholars of the far right in the UK look beyond a traditional narrow political lens, they will see that a study of fascism in Britain, given its wide cultural influence, deserves more than a mere epilogue or footnote in the history books.

*[51�Թ� is a  partner of the .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post The Musical Is Political: Black Metal and the Extreme Right appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The Afterlife of Michael Jackson

READ MORE

It was a cleverly chosen tune. Video didn’t kill the radio star, of course; that was television. But it did transform popular culture, and MTV was the prime mover. It was an unexpected arrival — a station that tore up the rulebook that stated that television should provide a balanced menu of entertainment, news and informative documentaries. Instead, MTV screened music videos, one after another, all day and all night. Presenters, known as video jockeys, or VJs, appeared ever so often, and there were short news bulletins. Otherwise, the only interruptions to the music were the ads.

Perfect Symbiosis

Music videos had been around for decades, but they failed to take off as a distinct art form until MTV started. Record labels realized these were an indispensable way to promote their products and artists, like Madonna, Dire Straits and Duran Duran, all of whom rose to fame courtesy of MTV. This dawned on the record companies almost immediately, and they clamored to have their music played on the new channel. They agreed to license their videos to MTV for free, treating them as a purely promotional expense.

Advertising was MTV’s principal source of revenue, and the ad agencies loved the audience MTV delivered: young, white and with disposable income. And that’s all there was to it: the channel (viewers paid a modest monthly subscription for access to cable television) played music and drew audiences to their screens while the advertisers tried to entice the engaged viewers to buy their products. On that simple arrangement dramatic changes turned. Why? How did that happen? Perhaps most importantly, who came up with this brilliantly ingenious concept?

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information .

The masterminds were John Lack, who worked for Warner Cable, Robert Pittman, a radio programmer for NBC, and Les Garland, all of whom had taken note of a small television station in New Zealand that aired pop videos and, by implication, promoted record sales. Today, the distinction between promotional material and entertainment is barely perceptible; in the 1980s, it was clearer, albeit already becoming smudged. MTV was intended to entertain audiences by playing music videos. The videos themselves were produced by record companies with the intention of boosting sales of vinyl, cassettes and, later, CDs. A more perfect symbiosis is hard to find.

Thriller

Forty years ago, not every commercial record was accompanied by a video and, despite the elegance of its design, the idea of just playing music 24/7 must have seemed preposterous. It probably seemed preposterous after its first year of operation too. MTV claimed to have about 1 million subscribers, which augured badly. But key artists appeared and, as they rose, so did the station; by 1988, MTV estimated it reached 49% of American homes, or about . Peter Gabriel, ZZ Top and the Police joined Madonna and co. All had a strong presence in the channel’s formative period. These artists owed their success to MTV as much as MTV owed its success to them. Glaringly absent was Michael Jackson.

When MTV failed to feature his “” despite its success in the charts, criticized MTV for excluding videos by black artists, using the phrase “blatant racism” to describe the practice. It actually wasn’t blatant: The channel featured black artists, including Tina Turner, and Eddy Grant, in its first two years. But when joined James in questioning the relative absence of black artists, suspicions grew. Was MTV deliberately excluding black artists?

Jackson’s hit “” was released as a single on January 2, 1983. The concurrent video, featuring Jackson with Jheri curls, helped propel it to the top of the charts. MTV did not play it. In March, when Garland eventually decided to allow “Billie Jean” onto the MTV playlist, he didn’t explain his unexpected change of heart, though it was thought to have been influenced by the prospect of CBS, the owner of Jackson’s label, murmuring that it could withdraw its full roster of music. “CBS Records Group President Walter Yetnikoff had to threaten to remove all other CBS videos from MTV before the network agreed to air the video for ‘Billie Jean,’” Nadra Kareen Nittle the circulating story in her “How MTV Handled Accusations of Racism and Became More Inclusive.” 

There aren’t too many moments when musical history is changed: Sam Phillips’ decision to sell his contract with Elvis Presley to RCA Victor for $35,000 in 1955; John Lennon’s fateful meeting with Paul McCartney at the Woolton Parish Church garden fete, Liverpool, in 1957; or Anni-Frid Lyngstad’s appearance at Sweden’s 1969 Melodifestival where she met Benny Andersson and started a collaboration that would lead, within three years, to the formation of ABBA. MTV’s inclusion of Jackson on its playlist in 1983 is in this kind of company. Following Jackson’s overwhelming success, the racism allegations against MTV melted away and the proposed CBS boycott never materialized.

“Billie Jean” was not the reason it changed history: Jackson’s “Thriller” was an epochal turning point, the moment video became an art form independent of the music it was once supposed to sell. Almost 38 years after it first debuted on MTV, “” (to use its full name) video is still breathtaking. What many assumed was going to be no more than Jackson’s vanity project were stunned by a film-within-a-film-within-a-dream plot. Directed by John Landis, the video was 13 minutes long, even though Jackson’s track lasted only 5 minutes 57 seconds. It changed the music industry, practically forcing everyone involved in records to think in terms of images as well as sounds.

Real World

For the next 15 years, MTV provided a conduit for musical discovery and established artists, communicating in the nearest thing to a global lingua franca. Record labels lined up to have their material on MTV. Media behemoth Viacom purchased the whole operation and began spinning off affiliated international channels, such as MTV Australia, MTV Brazil and MTV Europe, as well as MTV2. It had a competitor, sort of. But VH1 was targeted at an older demographic and this was reflected in its playlists.

Ever prescient, MTV diversified in 1992, introducing a program every bit as unpromising and preposterous as the TV station itself. “” launched in 1992. This was an unscripted show in which a group of young people was herded together in one place and filmed. That was it. Shortened to just “Real World” in 2014, this became the longest-running reality TV show to date and influenced countless simulations. Nowadays, much of MTV’s schedule is taken up by reality shows.

Like pretty much everything else in popular culture, MTV should have had a short shelf life. It was probably the most important medium for pop music, possibly in history. But now it seems as anachronistic as the jukebox or the pop music radio station. Yet somehow, it survived. As one generation matured, another took hold of the market and responded less enthusiastically to staring at a static screen that continually recycled videos. MP3 players came onto the market in 1997 and allowed people to choose their own music and carry it around with them.

launched two years later and enabled people to dip into each other’s hard drives and share their music. Apple introduced iTunes in 2001. Listeners couldn’t see the videos, but they got portability, and that seemed a fair tradeoff. When YouTube came along in 2005, it looked like the digital revolution was complete. Pop and rock musos had everything MTV used to offer, and consumers could carry it around on their smartphones, which became internet-accessible from 2000.

This doesn’t mean the music videos so expertly curated and purveyed by MTV has been banished to history. Far from it. They are no longer confined to television. Once released by YouTube, videos become widely available. Record labels and their artists grumble that streaming denies them royalties  —  is thought to pay as little as $0.0006 per view — but, without the exposure, they probably couldn’t exist. It’s not unusual for a hit song to get a billion views.

Music may once have existed in isolation and relied on radio airplay for promotion, but MTV changed pop music into an audio-visual medium. It can no longer influence how videos should look and sound, and certainly cannot make or break an artist or a record. But the fruits of its innovation are still all around us. How many of us not have seen “” by Psy? Over 4 billion have — that’s about 54% of the world’s population, and it just 8^th among the most viewed videos on YouTube.

We can only conjecture what would have happened to video if MTV hadn’t existed. The visual format would have probably grown and dominated, anyway. In this view, MTV just accelerated the process. But you might as well ask what if Tim Berners-Lee had changed his mind and decided not to release the source code for the World Wide Web. We would still have the internet, but perhaps not quite how we know it. MTV didn’t invent video, but it shaped the way we consume, construe and appreciate music. That means it’s changed all of us.

*[Ellis Cashmore is the author of “”].

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post MTV at 40: Did Video Kill the Radio Star? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In late April, Anitta released her most expensive video for her new song, “.” She had one goal in mind: conquer the ears of the world. Her method was by reshaping a notorious Brazilian cultural soft power known as bossa nova.

The music video begins with clips of the singer dressed like a Hollywood star in 1950s Rio de Janeiro. Surrounded by thin, mostly white men, Anitta sings an English adaptation of the internationally famous “Girl From Ipanema,” which was released in 1962 by Antonio Carlos Jobim and Vinicius de Moraes. The video then shows viewers the real Rio de Janeiro. A trap beat drops and our eyes shift to black people dancing in Piscinao de Ramos (Ramos’ Pool), an artificial beach created by the government in 2000 in the suburbs of Rio.

Bolsonaro’s Conservative Brazil?

For two years, Anitta was heavily criticized by fans and artists for not taking a public stance over Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s far-right president. During the 2018 election campaign, she was questioned about her absence in the #EleNao (#NotHim) movement against Bolsonaro. At the time, she that she was only 25 years old and had zero political knowledge.

Bolsonaro’s nationalist policies aim to bring back the beauty and glory of Brazil’s past. But the truth is that he is more known for his , homophobic and declarations from his time in the Chamber of Deputies. Last year, one of his most trusted colleagues, Damares Alves, the minister of human rights, family and women, acted to stop a legal on a 10-year-old girl, who became pregnant after being raped by her own uncle.

With Bolsonaro in power, Brazilians are currently living under a conservative administration. This is particularly reflected in the federal government’s cultural decisions. Bolsonaro’s government monitors exhibitions, music, films and TV shows and assesses if they align with the state’s view of family and religious values.

Anitta has finally posted statements on social media criticizing Bolsonaro’s administration. Yet none of her tweets are as powerful as the message her new video carries.

A Different Rio

“Hot girls, where I’m from, we don’t look like models,” she sings, with scantily clad women dancing on an artificial beach. The song puts an emphasis on women without silicone breasts showing off their bodies with cellulite. The video also shows black men putting cream on women to bleach their body hair, while others barbecue meat on the beach. Some couples even look like they’re almost having sex in the sea. This is a completely different Brazil from the country Bolsonaro wants to portray to the world.

Anitta’s video presents clips of the Rio suburb’s poverty, but in a funny and sexy way. The video focuses on the nostalgic past of a white Rio de Janeiro that never really existed, but whose image was created with the help of the most popular Brazilian rhythm of all time, bossa nova. Translated as “new wave,” this genre is a mix of jazz, African beats and samba.

In 1962, the historical debut at by Antonio Carlos Jobim and Joao Gilberto helped bring bossa nova to the world stage. In the same year, Tom Jobim and Vinicius de Moraes released “Garota de Ipanema” (Girl From Ipanema), one of the most famous Brazilian songs of all time. The muse to inspire the composers was , a 17-year-old girl with blonde hair and blue eyes who walked every day on the beach.

As a successful singer whose fortune is estimated at at the age of 28, Anitta’s cultural power overseas is being built song by song. In the past four years, 24 of her 32 singles were to international markets. Giovanni Bianco, a Brazilian creative director, produced the “Girl From Rio” video. He has worked several times with Madonna, who released the song “” with Anitta in 2019.

Changing Bossa Nova

With bossa nova becoming more popular worldwide, the “Girl From Rio” video cost at least $200,000. Anitta has already collaborated with international stars like Maluma, Major Lazer, Cardi B. and J. Balvin. The official launch party of the song took place at Strawberry Moon, a bar at The GoodTime Hotel in Miami whose partner is Pharrell Williams, an American singer and producer.

In May, “Girl from Rio” was the 8th most-listened song on Spotify after its release, with 1 million plays in Brazil and 400,000 in other countries. Although Anitta featured on popular US shows with NBC and also on “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” the song soon fell out of the top 100. With 54 million followers on Instagram, the singer’s fans accused Warner Music — the label Anitta is associated with — of not promoting the song worldwide.

In the video, the white images of the 1950s, carried by bossa nova’s soft pace and soft power, give way to the colorful scenes in “Girl From Rio.” With its trap beat and variation of funk, this is the Brazilian genre in the world today. With the help of her record label or not, Anitta wants to conquer the world with a Rio de Janeiro that is far from the one shown on postcards or holiday brochures — and certainly not the one Bolsonaro wants to promote.

Anitta wants to focus on empowering black people, women and those with standard bodies, not with abs, breasts and butts like models. She definitely knows what she’s doing.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post The Cultural Power of Anitta in Bolsonaro’s Brazil appeared first on 51�Թ�.

This is the first letter I’ve written to a dead person, though you’re still alive in a sense, aren’t you? There were always two Michael Jacksons: one, the flesh-and-blood mortal who succumbed 12 years ago; the other, a product of countless people’s imaginations, a creation freed of the constraints of time and space who will live forever.

I’m writing to let you know that, since the death of — what shall we call him? — the corporeal Michael Jackson, there has been an afterlife that promises to be, if not quite as interesting as your actual life, at least interesting enough to suggest that the imagined Jackson will live on and affect us for many more years to come. Some may hate me for saying this, but I reckon people will carry on discussing you for decades and will eventually, and perhaps grudgingly, accept that you are an African American who made history.

Let me try to justify this. Think of five African Americans who have earned widespread social approval over the past 40 years. Michael Jordan will probably be on most readers’ lists. Barack Obama too, even though his presidential tenure revealed fallibility that was once considered unthinkable. Oprah Winfrey will surely appear on most lists. Beyonce, like you, a singer whose dreamlike rise has been followed by a generation, will feature too. George Floyd might crop up, not so much for what he did, but for launching an unprecedented global movement. But probably not you, Michael. Yet your achievements compare favorably with those of the others, and you remain as relevant and crucial as any of them.

At the moment, you’re certainly remembered as vividly. Why? Well, I need to fill you in on a few developments that happened after you lost consciousness at your home in the Holmby Hills neighborhood of Los Angeles. Paramedics arrived at 12:26 pm and found you weren’t breathing. They tried CPR before rushing you to the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, arriving at 1:14 pm. Surgeons couldn’t revive you, and you were dead at 2.26 pm on June 25, 2009.

The Afterlife Begins

That’s the point at which the afterlife started. Millions of acolytes all over the world went into the kind of mourning we hadn’t witnessed since the death of your friend, Princess Diana, in 1997. It might have been your music that touched people more deeply than probably anyone else since Elvis or the Beatles, but your videos also had something to do with it. The mold-breaking “” video has been seen by — and I’m guessing now — everyone alive and several million more who have left us in the intervening years since it was first broadcast in 1983.

There were other boldly original videos. But there was something else about you that moved people. Like other great artists, you found a way of turning fans from admirers to confidantes; they felt like companions, intimates, people with whom you shared secrets. I don’t think for a second you did. But you persuaded millions they weren’t just observing your life; they were parts of it.

Fans’ sorrow took on a commercial complexion when they stopped crying for long enough to buy your records. You sold a prodigious number of records in your actual life, of course. Your first single for Motown, with your brothers, went straight to number one in the charts. The , and later The Jacksons, were a record-selling phenomenon in the 1970s, but the 1980s were yours alone. As a solo artist, you were the heir to the position occupied earlier in the 20^th century by Frank Sinatra, Elvis and the Beatles. Only Madonna could claim to challenge you as the world’s premier entertainer. By the time of your death, you had sold over a billion records, either by yourself or with your brothers.

The “Thriller” album alone had sold 60 million (now up to 66 million). Sales surged after your death, not because consumers wanted to replenish their collections, but because they wanted a way to validate their relationship with you. In the first week alone after you died, 422,000 copies of your albums sold in the US (40 times the previous week’s total).

In June 2010, “Billboard” estimated that your estate more than $1 billion in revenue in the year after your death. This came from various sources, including the sale of 33 million albums globally, 26.5 million track downloads and merchandise. I have to tell you, Michael: You left an unholy financial mess when you departed. The dispute over the values of your assets wasn’t settled until May 2021 when a Los Angeles judge declared they were worth $111 million. Record sales in addition to the various licensing agreements brokered by your estate made you the highest-earning dead celebrity in history, according to , in 2020. It has been reported that you generated more than in the afterlife.

Multitude of Rumors

But, despite the enduring commercial activity, your afterlife has not been an ennobling experience. Over the years, there have been a few allegations made about your conduct with boys, and these have given rise to a multitude of rumors. Yet none of them damaged your real-life reputation, not irreparably, anyway. Remember the first accusation? It was 28 years , in 1993, when 12-year-old Jordan Chandler, whom you had met the previous year, claimed you had molested him. He made the accusation largely at the urging of his father, and the response of your camp was that this was a shakedown. Another boy, Wade Robson, spoke up in your defense at the time. It seemed advisable to settle the case and, in January 1994, you did exactly that; the figure involved was said to be up to $22 million.

At that point, you had become one of those larger-than-life characters, full of quirks and eccentricities, but so loaded with money and so worshipped by devotees that you pretty much pleased yourself. You didn’t think it was necessary to play by the rules — you probably didn’t even know about any rules. That’s how it seemed in 2003 when you talked to the now-shamed British journalist about having sleepovers with children, including a cancer patient named Gavin Arvizo. In the TV , “Living With Michael Jackson,” you actually said on , “It’s not sexual. We’re going to sleep. I tuck them in. … It’s very charming.” It was either breathtaking naivete that led you to make such an admission or perhaps a self-assuring hubris. Either way, it brought the police to your ranch, an investigation, an arrest and that included child molestation, abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.

Robson defended you once again, this time at your trial in 2005. Members of the jury believed him and, presumably, you when they acquitted you of 14 charges. The not-guilty verdict came four years before your death, almost to the day. But a courtroom verdict is not the same as a social judgment, and suspicions grew. Your did nothing to kill them off. So, they were still swirling around when you resurfaced to announce plans for a series of concerts at London’s O2 Arena to take place over several months in 2009. It was a gigantic 50-gig undertaking, and not everyone thought you were capable of completing it at your age. In fact, you never even got started. You died, aged 50, while rehearsals were taking place.

A Great Leveler

Death is a great leveler, of course: It spares nothing and no one. But, in your case, it tilted the balance very much against you. Robson and James Safechuck both started legal actions in the years following your death. Robson changed his earlier story and alleged you molested him repeatedly over a seven-year period when he was aged between 7 and 14. Safechuck said you abused him on more than 100 occasions. Both Robson and Safechuck were frequent visitors to your Neverland ranch in California during the 1980s.

The bizarre fascination that both elevated and haunted you in your real life became a frightening execration in 2019 after the broadcast of a four-hour, two-part television documentary, “Leaving Neverland.” Directed by Dan Reed, the program focused on Robson and Safechuck. Both men were by then in their 30s. As children, they were swept away by your care, kindness and generosity. In the program, they described how they enjoyed wondrous times at your estate, which was decked out like a giant playground.

But they also , often in granular detail, of events behind closed doors. These, they said, were harrowing encounters that involved the sexual abuse of young innocents. Their version of events was challenged by your family and diehard fans, of course. But you weren’t around to defend yourself, respond to the accusations and offer alternative remembrances. So, Robson’s and Safechuck’s testimonies were given credibility by the TV documentary and considered an overdue exposé. Your songs were banned from several radio stations around the world in the days and weeks following the broadcast.

No famous person has ever been annihilated posthumously — at least not as you have. John F. Kennedy’s peccadilloes have been unearthed and tut-tutted over, but without sullying his character. Marilyn Monroe’s misdeeds have also been highlighted, in her case enhancing her postmortem charisma. The British TV personality Jimmy Savile was excoriated in the media after his death in 2011, though he was not well-known outside the UK.

In your case, you are known probably by everyone on earth. Will they ever think of you differently? The likelihood of new evidence or substantial recantation is slight, and only time might rinse the necro-stigma from your spiritual corpse. It’s paradoxical that you’ll be immortalized in disgrace after a life filled with adulation, applause and rhapsodic approval.

*[Ellis Cashmore’s “” will be published in 2022 by Bloomsbury.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post The Afterlife of Michael Jackson appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Why Fame Can Be a Nightmare

READ MORE

Gaye recorded 25 studio albums plus four live and 24 compilations, mostly for Motown, but his magnum opus was “,” an album that unfurls the narrative, and perhaps the meaning, not only of Gaye’s understanding of life, but of the times in which he lived. First released on May 21, 1971, Gaye’s supreme achievement approaches its 50^th anniversary. The occasion offers a chance to assess Gaye’s and his creation’s relevance.

Perfect Material

As a teenager, Gaye (or Gay, as he was; he added the “e” for effect later) was in one of the doo-wop groups popular in the 1950s that specialized in close harmony vocals and meaningless phrases — hence the name. On the advice of a friend, he moved to Detroit, the base of Motown Records, the now-iconic label started by Berry Gordy in 1959. While his contemporaries at the and Chess record companies annulled some of their black artists’ attempts to mimic white performers, Gordy, in many cases, reversed the process. In Gaye, he found perfect raw material.

Passionate about success in the mainstream and, by implication, white-dominated markets, Gordy initially marketed Gaye as a wholesome crooner, appearing with big bands on national television when possible. His early releases were typically covers of standards, such as Vaughn Monroe’s “Sandman” or nondescript Motown originals, like Gordy’s own composition “Let Your Conscience Be Your Guide.” Gaye’s first album, released in 1961, was most likely an indication of his desired musical direction and comprised standards such as Cole Porter’s “Love for Sale” and Rodgers and Hart’s “How Deep Is the Ocean (How High Is the Sky).” His versions of Sinatra’s “”  and “,” from the musical “My Fair Lady” suggest his ambitions.

Gaye was a multi-instrumentalist and would often play on other artists’ material. He also wrote. One of his songs (co-written) was “Stubborn Kind of Fella,” which, while no harbinger of what lay ahead, gained Gaye recognition when it was released as a single in 1962. It also set his career off on a different trajectory. Over the next several years, he continued to write and collaborate with other Motown personnel, until, in 1965, he gained international attention with his “Ain’t That Peculiar.” Gaye also duetted, most notably with Tammi Terrell (“Ain’t Nothing Like the Real Thing” became a big success in 1968). Terrell died tragically young, at 24, in 1970.

The whole time, Gaye still had his sights set on the mainstream. Gaye, as Ritz writes, “did everything he could to win a mainstream middle-class audience, crooning the ballads he thought white music lovers wanted to hear.” He may not have felt comfortable doing it, but he went along with most of Gordy’s ideas, like performing at whites’ dinner clubs, dressed in a tuxedo and a bowtie.

Remember: Gaye would have been accustomed to appearing in front of whites-only and sometimes physically segregated audiences. Some African American artists specialized in what was disparagingly called the chitlin circuit — a network of clubs, theaters and other venues with black clientele. Up until 1964, segregation was a constitutional part of America’s social structure. The landmark civil rights legislation outlawed segregation in public places and made discrimination in employment illegal. Of course, society didn’t change nearly as quickly as many wanted. Frustration at the lack of meaningful progress expressed itself in the rise of militant groups like the Black Panthers and the more pervasive ethos of black power that became prominent in the late 1960s.

Gaye’s early attempts to maneuver himself into a mainstream market were often at odds with the ambitions of contemporaries like James Brown, Otis Redding and Gaye’s colleague at Motown, Stevie Wonder, all of whom pursued a rather different course, maintaining a black sensibility without compromising their independence. This rankled with Gaye and, even while his records sold and he became acknowledged as a global artist, he confessed to feeling like “Berry’s puppet.” This didn’t mean he felt exploited. If anything, Gaye was complicit, at one stage agreeing to sing an advertising jingle on a Detroit radio station.

Even after his internationally acclaimed “I Heard It Through the Grapevine” in 1968, Gaye felt he was to the demands of the white market he was trying to break into: “Sometimes I felt like the shuffle-and-jive niggers of old, steppin’ and fechin’ for the white folk.” It was a remarkable and seemingly guilt-stricken admission for a singer who, at the time, was drawing comparisons with Ray Charles and Sam Cooke. (Incidentally, this tune was used under the famous 1985 ad for Levi’s, which featured the recently deceased Nick Kamen.)

Heart and Soul

Then, in an unexpectedly magnanimous deal, Gordy offered Wonder a contract that effectively freed him from the usual constraints of Motown and allowed him creative control over his own music. Gordy was rewarded with four virtuoso albums from Wonder. Presumably emboldened by Gordy’s newfound amenability, Gaye sought and got a similar contract, one with greater artistic license. He took immediate advantage of it. At first, Gaye released a single: “What’s Going On” was not one of his own songs but delivered a message he endorsed.

The message itself was generic: “There’s far too many of you dying / You know we’ve got to find a way to bring some loving here today.” Resistance to US involvement in the Vietnam War, which had started in 1964 and ended with the withdrawal of American forces in 1973, was at its height and, while the lyric was presumably about this conflict, it had — and still has — wider resonance.

The single was successful and Gordy encouraged Gaye to make an entire album in a similar style. He did so, the story being that he completed the whole project in a month. Early reviews were exciting. “Gaye has designed his album as one many-faceted statement on conditions in the world today, made nearly seamless by careful transitions between the cuts. A simple, subdued tone is held throughout, pillowed by a densely-textured instrumental and vocal backing,” wrote Vince Aletti in his review for . “Part mystic, part pentecostal fundamentalist, part socially aware ghetto graduate, this particular Motown superstar simply happens to believe that he speaks to God and vice versa,” magazine rhapsodized.

The album had a molten quality, each track bleeding into the next, with themes of spirituality, violence, poverty, unemployment, policing, drug dependence, the inner cities, the environment and the care of children flowing through. It was a glistening, rippling, soul-stirring triumph, fundamental and organic. And it wasn’t just the audial beauty that caught the attention but the almost primal force with which it was delivered. Gaye sang as if he were baring his heart and soul.

Gaye never surpassed his masterwork and went into a gradual descent, parting with Motown, falling behind on alimony payments and sliding into a debt reported to be $7 million by 1978. Gaye spent time alone in Hawaii, the UK and Belgium, still writing and sporadically recording. It was a period of unhappy isolation. He was given a lifeline by Larkin Arnold of CBS and repaid him with an album and the 1982 single “Sexual Healing,” which is, as readers will know, as sensuous a piece of pop music as there has ever been.

Gaye might have slid a little, but he was still a solid entertainer in his forties. The following year, he went on a concert tour that was, by all accounts, disorderly and marred by confusion. Gaye had also acquired a taste for cocaine. During the tour, he became involved in a violent conflict with his own father, who drew a gun, killing his son. It was the day before Gaye’s 45^th birthday.

We often talk about entertainers’ legacies as if they all leave one. Of course, very few actually do. Marvin Gaye did. His tour de force remains an intricately immersive piece of art, of its time and also of any time. It has the social realism of a canvas and the sly subversiveness Spike Lee brings to his films. It is an exercise in the possibilities of popular music, persuading listeners to engage with issues and events, but in elliptical ways that make thinking and taking pleasure one and the same thing.

*[Ellis Cashmore is the author of “]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Marvin Gaye’s What’s Going On, 50 Years On appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Frankie Lymon’s Tragedy

The archetype is not in today’s celebrity culture, nor anywhere near it actually. was an astounding talent from Harlem who, in 1956, surged into the public consciousness courtesy of the then-new medium of television. Lymon was 13 when he and his band, The Teenagers, announced themselves with the , “Why Do Fools Fall in Love,” which was released within weeks of Elvis’ “Heartbreak Hotel.” Lymon sang and co-wrote the single, which was a sensational hit in North America, Britain and practically all over Western Europe despite nine competing cover versions (and several more in later years).

Lymon was as near-ubiquitous as it was possible to be in the late 1950s. He and his band toured Europe as well as the US. At the same age, Michael Jackson was, in 1971, launching his solo career with his first single, “Got To Be There,” and comparisons are justified. Like Jackson, Lymon was young, black and gifted with a voice that had the fragility of youth but the depth that typically accompanies maturity. He also moved like a pro dancer and radiated confidence onstage. His timing was perfect: He arrived at the stage in history when rock’n’roll was forcing music’s equivalent of a paradigm shift, creating an entirely new grammar and syntax for a postwar generation with disposable income and time to spare.

The media hastened his downfall as well as his rise. When he danced with a white girl on a TV show, the show was canned amid a national furor. America’s practice of separating blacks and whites, known as Jim Crow laws, had been violated. But there was a more chilling and premonitory determinant in his decline. Lymon was using heroin at 15. He was dead by 25.

Lymon’s decay and death went relatively unnoticed. By 1968, his records were no longer selling and, in the mid-20th century, neither audiences nor the media were ready to share vicariously in the kind of degradation they now find fascinating. But Lymon was one of those child stars who unraveled in a way that revealed a moral. I’m not sure exactly what it is, but there seems to be too much meaning in his story to neglect. As with so many talented young people who rise and enjoy precocious success, their dream can suddenly turn into a nightmare of disillusionment.

Britney Spears’ Bad Dream

Britney Spears’ nightmarish ordeal has become a story told and retold by countless magazines, newspapers and broadcast media. Once a dominant and ascending force in pop culture, Spears, who was born in Louisiana, was 8 years old when she was turned down for Disney’s “The All New Mickey Mouse Club” because she was too young. She returned three years later and landed a permanent spot, along with Christina Aguilera and Justin Timberlake, both of whom went on to have adult careers in music and movies. The show was canceled in 1991, leaving Spears to pursue a singing career.

At 15, she got a record deal, and in 1998, she “�ĦBaby One More Time.” It was her first single and made her an international phenomenon. In the accompanying video, Spears appeared dressed as a teenage schoolgirl, replete in uniform, but with provocative dance moves. The sight probably made audiences smile nervously. Her second album, “Oops!… I Did It Again,” came out in 2000, turning Spears into a legitimate rival to Madonna as the world’s leading diva.

She seemed to hold all the cards too. Spears was 20 when she signed a huge endorsement deal with Pepsi in 2001. Madonna was then in her early 40s. Two more multimillion-selling albums put Spears in position to conquer the world. In 2002, Forbes magazine called her “the world’s most powerful celebrity” with earnings of about $40 million a year. But then her story arc began to warp.

After huge success with “Toxic” in 2003, record sales began to slip and she seemed to recede from public view. The next time she made big news was in 2007 when pictures of her shaving her head with a hair clipper surfaced. “,” caterwauled the headlines as describing an accident in a nuclear reactor. In fact, Spears had been denied access to her two children by her ex-husband, Kevin Federline, shortly after a spell in rehab — for what is not clear. Spears denied she had a drinking problem, though some she had been drinking and taking pills since she was 13.

Spears grew increasingly impatient with paparazzi. In 2008, Spears’ erratic behavior reached the courts and her affairs were placed under a court-ordered conservatorship (i.e., guardianship), meaning her father should manage her affairs during her incapacitation. Whether or not she was incapacitated is a matter of conjecture. Clearly her fans thought not: They started an online campaign to #FreeBritney.

Earlier this year, a TV documentary, “Framing Britney Spears,” reduced the singer, who is 40 in December, to . Forbes currently her net worth to be $60 million.

When We Stop Clapping

Frankie Lymon and Britney Spears: different ages, different audiences and different kinds of tragedies. But they were both based on hijacked adolescence. We can add more doomed child stars: Lindsay Lohan, Macaulay Culkin, Corey Feldman, Gary Coleman. There’s almost a sacrificial element to a childhood in showbusiness. Some, like actors Kristen Stewart, Daniel Radcliffe and Natalie Portman, have navigated a smooth passage into adulthood and triumphed handsomely. But most child stars seem to be candidates for a dysfunctional adulthood.

Why? The “lost childhood” argument is too crass to be useful. Michael Jackson’s perplexing middle age is sometimes in these terms. There is certainly an intellect-lite plausibility to the idea that children need to develop emotionally and psychologically through various stages and fame interrupts their progress. Jackson was 8 when his father added him to the lineup of the Jackson 5 and encouraged him to reach for the skies rather than settle for an ordinary earthbound life. He spent the rest of his life reaching. Or perhaps just clinging to the rope ladder to the stars left him by his pushy dad.

We, the audience, decide whether it’s sweet dreams or nightmares for child stars. When you think about it, the relationship we have with abundantly talented kids is much like visitors to a circus who delight in watching seals perform tricks and elephants stand on their hind legs (I doubt if they are allowed to feature this nowadays). We are not tempted to inquire too deeply into how the objects of our fascination are trained or coaxed into performing. And, when the act is finished, we do not try to wring any meaning from the drama — we just clap. We eventually stop clapping; when we do, it is not the end of the world for us, though it may be for the animals and the aggrandized humans.

Most kids do not expect adulation and the kind of applause child stars thrive on. They seek mundane rewards like the approval of friends, casual sex, the means to buy alcohol and enough money for fashionable clothes or a down payment on a car. Customary rites of passage typically involve getting laid, wasted and arrested. All three and you are a grownup.

The passage to adulthood for child stars is different. They typically have more money than they can spend, all the clothes, cars and anything else they want, and they have adult friends. Peers are almost inevitably replaced by fellow professionals. Unlike most other adolescents who are indifferent to what the world thinks about them, child stars depend on the admiration and acceptance of an audience. When both of those disappear, it must seem like a termination of life rather than a showbiz career.

*[Ellis Cashmore is the author of “.”]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Why Fame Can Be a Nightmare appeared first on 51�Թ�.

For the uninitiated, NFTs are titles of ownership of works of human creativity secured over a blockchain network. They essentially consist of artwork, music and cultural artifacts that exist only in a digital format. Of course, their purely digital nature means there is no proof of their human origin. Nothing in the way the objects of NFTs are produced and disseminated prevents artificial intelligence from being the actual “creative” author. The only thing we can really know about these objects is their price, which for some highly prized NFTs can reach astronomic summits. Their value nevertheless appears to be linked in the purchasers’ minds to the belief in human authorship. But, unlike the traditional art market, that consideration has more to do with the name and fame of the author than evidence of craftsmanship.

AI, Our Ultimate Moral Censor

READ MORE

Steven Levy, writing for , illustrates the phenomenon by citing the example of a song the electronic DJ 3Lau successfully auctioned as an NFT via the internet. The purchaser, identified as “Bidder 65,” acquired the precious token for a sum in cryptocurrency estimated as the equivalent of over $3.66 million. As Levy points out, “Bidder 65 now has unique access to the song, which others one day might hear for free.”

The attribution of value to works of art that even their purchasers may not find attractive is not a new phenomenon. Even in the traditional art market, aesthetics have less to do with the price of a work of art than the reputation of the artist. But in the art market, the purchaser takes material possession of the work of art and may even feel a physical relationship with the object. Tokens are nothing more than named items in a ledger.

So, how can they command such elevated price tags? Levy offers this explanation: “While it seems radical to ascribe such crazy value to strings of bits, remember that money itself is an abstract concept, where everyone agrees to pretend that there’s value in what we call dollars, euros, or renminbi.”

Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

Agree to pretend:

A culturally-induced habit encouraged by an economic philosophy that accepts as its dual organizing principles the idea that ownership is the equivalent of a productive human activity and that the value of any object is strictly equivalent to the price people pay for it

Contextual Note

Some commentators see NFTs as a welcome opportunity for creators of cultural artifacts, who might otherwise have difficulty living off their creativity. Any enterprising artist or performer can now put a price on the NFT of one of their works or auction off the exclusive title to the highest bidder.

The rapper Grimes, the mother of Elon Musk’s latest child, to sell the NFT of a 50-second video for $389,000. She sold a series of titles for a sum approaching $6 million. Struggling artists trying to make a name for themselves and finance their careers in a deeply competitive world are unlikely to have similar success. No one, by the way, would confuse Grimes with a struggling artist. Nevertheless, there are likely many other 50-second videos produced by original artists with more substantial aesthetic appeal than the one Grimes sold for nearly $400k.

Mitchell Clark, for The Verge, provides a simple analogy to illustrate the economic logic underlying the phenomenon. “NFTs are designed to give you something that can’t be copied: ownership of the work (though the artist can still retain the copyright and reproduction rights, just like with physical artwork),” Clark writes. “To put it in terms of physical art collecting: anyone can buy a Monet print. But only one person can own the original.”

In other words, original works that exist as physical objects can be successfully copied by skilled artists or even stolen. Their value is uncertain. But an inalienable title of ownership cannot be copied and so the title becomes more valuable than the content of the work. Because it exists in a blockchain ledger, it cannot be compromised.

���󲹰�����𲹰���’s Romeo, appalled by the barrier to the fulfillment of his love that the two lovers’ family names put in his path, queried the logic of his situation with the question: “What’s in a name?” He then reassured himself that “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Romeo apparently had philosophical grounds for rejecting the nominalism of William of Ockham. In ���󲹰�����𲹰���’s era, it was still possible to believe that substance could still effectively trump appearance. In Romeo’s eyes, Juliet possessed a value independent of her title as a member of the Capulet family. With the evolution of the economy in the centuries since Shakespeare, both titles of ownership and digital appearance have clearly eclipsed substance.

This long-term trend is largely due to the role money itself has assumed as the only true measure of everything. As Steven Levy points out, “NFTs are simply an evolution of our imaginative machinations of making common stuff worth paying a lot for.” 

Historical Note

To understand why NFTs actually tell us something about the world we live in and how the financial engineers of our brave, new world have allowed hyperreality to replace reality, we must trace the historical trends that have led to producing the “logic” underlying NFTs.

At the top of the list is humanity’s widely shared belief in the sacrosanct law of supply and demand. The emergence of the law is sometimes credited to the 14^th-century scholar Ibn Taymiyyah, who wrote: “If desire for goods increases while its availability decreases, its price rises. On the other hand, if availability of the good increases and the desire for it decreases, the price comes down.”

This observation subsequently became the golden rule of capitalism and the market economy. Anything that can be identified as rare, and for which demand can be created, will command a high price in the marketplace. Because ownership is limited, usually to one person, ownership can itself become an ingredient of market value, independently of what is owned. “It’s all based on demand,” Levy tells us, “and at this moment, the demand for NFTs is booming.”

Some see a historical link with the patronage system that allowed artists during the Renaissance to realize their ambitions. Wealthy aristocrats took artists under their wing to enable the creation of Michelangelo’s sculptures and ���󲹰�����𲹰���’s sonnets. Without their generosity, some of the greatest works of the European tradition would never have seen the light of day. But it wasn’t about either ownership or monetary value. Most patrons were driven by a belief in their role as stewards of a refined culture for the benefit of their community. 

Developing his reflection on the Monet painting, Mitchell Clark observed that “if I got a Monet, I could appreciate it as a physical object. With digital art, a copy is literally as good as the original.” In other words, NFTs mark the point in history at which the material world literally has lost its competitive advantage over hyperreality. If I own a Monet, I can not only admire it, but even explore the brushwork. The owner of a reproduction only sees the effect of the brushwork. I have the added thrill of knowing that what I can see and touch is the very material that Claude Monet saw and touched. Not only are NFTs not fungible; they are not tangible.

Levy quotes the novelist William Gibson who “famously described cyberspace … as a ‘consensual hallucination.’” That is the definition of hyperreality. We have lost the distinction between cyberspace and real space. It represents the ultimate transformation of the consumer society, the triumph of fame as fame alone, rather than what fame produces. Value is now synonymous with price. Oscar Wilde famously defined the cynic as someone who “knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” The NFT craze shows us that our culture has reached the pinnacle of cynicism.

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on 51�Թ�.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post NFTs and the Cynicism of Contemporary Art appeared first on 51�Թ�.

His take on the refugee crisis has taken a different spin, however, through a fictional narrative of a couple from Sudan, torn apart by conflict and who reunite in the dream world. It’s an audiobook called “,” which collaborates with producers ToneO and Essence, starring actors Mustafa Khogali and Hind Swareldahab, who were involved with the Sudanese uprising and have some experience of navigating the British asylum system.

What follows is the gripping, outlandish and also very real-to-life tale of Sameh and Ahlam. Facing barriers in the form of the European and UK immigration systems, they defy powers keeping them apart using the practice of lucid dreaming — having dreams where the dreamer is aware they are in a dream and even gaining control over some of the dream’s elements.

A Rich River of Life: The Importance of Free Movement

READ MORE

Potent explains the concept as part of the book using his signature , the “The Rhyming Guide to Lucid Dreaming,” and in which he offers another perspective on dreams: “They won’t let us dream, / They want us living their illusion. / That’s why dreaming is a radical act. / Dreaming is resistance.”

It’s a fascinating take on the politics of freedom of movement through the metaphysical and genre of romance, set against hip hop and poetry. And the project has led Potent to do workshops on lucid dreaming and the freedom of movement with young marginalized people. Without a doubt, the project is timely. As the peak summer period for migration has seen record numbers of people crossing the English Channel on flimsy boats, hostile anti-asylum rhetoric has stepped up.

In this guest edition of The Interview, Sophia Akram talks to Potent Whisper about the inspiration and the concepts behind “Lucid Lovers.”

Sophia Akram: A lot is going on in the final output: storytelling, poetry, music, politics, metaphysics intertwined with love and human-interest genres. What made you feel this was the best way of telling a story that is fundamentally a lesson on migration?

Potent Whisper: Somebody will tell you they oppose freedom of movement until they fall in love with somebody from another country and become separated by borders.

It seems to me that people only care about stories that reflect or benefit their own lives in some way. By introducing leading themes of love and dreams, I am speaking to experiences that people share all around the world.

Hopefully, by using this common ground, I have, in some way, provided a non-politicized audience with the space to venture beyond their own lived experiences; to recognize their shared humanity with the characters and begin to care about them beyond the book.

Akram: A passion and compassion for the subject of freedom of movement and the plight of asylum seekers come through. What galvanized you on the issue?

Potent Whisper: The idea that immigrants and asylum seekers are problematic is one that has been relentlessly smashed into the consciousness of the general public by politicians and the mainstream media. This is not only a lie that causes the suffering of immigrants and asylum seekers — which is more than enough reason to write this book — but it is also a lie that simultaneously enables the suffering of the average “English” person who was born in this country.

If you were to ask a random Brit why their grandmother couldn’t get the operation she desperately needed, they may well point to immigrants. If you were to ask a young family why they can’t get a council house, they wouldn’t complain about the demolition of or lack of provision for social housing — they would point to immigrants.

The average British person who is struggling to make ends meet does not feel angry with a government that needlessly chose to implement austerity measures. Instead, they would point to the vulnerable and desperate asylum seeker who came to this country in the simple hope of finding safety.

I am not exactly the smartest guy in the world, but it doesn’t take a genius to see that the scapegoating of immigrants (and Muslims) is one of the major enablers of the transferal of public wealth into private hands, via government, in this country and around the world. To quote a passage from “Lucid Lovers,” when Ahlam asks Samer to explain Brexit:

“The British government decided to give bankers hundreds of billions of pounds after the financial crisis in 2008, crippling the British people through austerity measures. They had ten years of misery and the country saw a genocide of the poor but the government managed to redirect their anger away from the powerful people who are consciously killing them and instead towards immigrants and Muslims. This was coupled with the notion that leaving the European Union aka ‘Brexit’ would stop immigrants from entering the country and thus improve living conditions in the UK. The truth, however, is that the effects of Brexit will worsen their real situation. But when the leader of the opposition tried to warn everybody, he was portrayed as a racist and terrorist sympathiser and so the British public voted for an actual racist terrorist and now they’re all screwed.”

Akram: Lucid dreaming sounds wild. Is it real, and how did you come to know about it?

Potent Whisper: Lucid dreaming is 100% real, scientifically proven and well established as a practice. I was introduced to it by my brother after our grandmother passed away last year, and it gave me meaningful hope that we might exist beyond our bodies after we die. After all, if we can exist without our bodies in dreams, perhaps we can exist without our bodies after they decompose.

Akram: I sometimes know when I’m dreaming — is that the same thing? You also touch on dream sharing — is that possible? How would someone find out more about lucid dreaming and what are its benefits?

Potent Whisper: To become lucid means that you are aware that you are in a dream. With some practice, you can then learn to control or direct elements of your dream, which not only allows you to do things that are impossible when awake — like flying — but can enrich your life and improve your wellbeing in the waking world too. For example, lucid dreaming can be used to practice and develop skills whilst we are asleep: If you are learning to play the piano, you can use lucid dreaming to practice playing and, when you wake up, you will have improved accordingly.

Lucid dreaming can also be used to help us process emotional traumas, heal our bodies, consolidate and memorize new information, and so much more. On a more spiritual level, many people have reported that they use lucid dreaming to communicate with ancestors or seek guidance from their spirit guide.

Certainly, I have found that when I face a difficult challenge in life, a solution can often present itself to me whilst contemplating the problem in a lucid dream. The practice also has huge creative potential with many iconic artists and inventors pointing to the dream world as the source of their work. Believe it or not, I actually wrote parts of the audiobook whilst I was in a lucid state. My “The Rhyming Guide to Lucid Dreaming,” which features in the audiobook, explores the benefits of lucid dreaming in more depth.

In terms of dream sharing: It is important for the audience to understand that the character’s ability to share a dream and inhabit the same dream space is very different to lucid dreaming. Unlike lucid dreaming, sharing a dream is not widely reported or scientifically recognized as being possible in real life. Though that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been or can’t be done!

*[The project, funded by Arts Council England, is available to stream and download for free at LucidLovers.co.uk.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post The Rapper Breaking Down Borders With Dreams appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Her friend, Simone de Beauvoir, wrote of the need to create at least “interim mercies,” but it is a life’s work to create many of them. It is almost fitting that Greco’s greatest film role was in John Huston’s “The Roots of Heaven,” an adaptation of Romain Gary’s magnificent novel, “Les Racines de Ciel.” From the pen of one of France’s most dashing war heroes, an ace fighter pilot, no one could say the book was merely sentimental. But its epigram — that once the roots of heaven embed themselves in your heart you will never be able to extract them — meant that a chosen life is a choice, indeed, for life.

The Parisian Becoming of Simone de Beauvoir

READ MORE

In the case of Greco, that life was chosen without any other choice by surviving Nazi concentration camps as a suspected teenage Resistance fighter. She emerged starving and destitute, relying on charity to survive, and her preference for the color black as was one thrust upon her by donors of usually oversized men’s clothing. This morphed into the black and often tight outfits of the Left Bank night club singer who fell into the circle of philosophers and artists.

Men fell in love with her. Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus wrote lyrics for her, visiting American actors like Marlon Brando courted her. The list of her suitors, and lovers, is endless. But this was the 1950s in Paris, which prefigured the 1960s in the rest of the Western world. Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre had themselves strings of lovers, sometimes shared. And this was part of Beauvoir’s becoming a new and free woman. There was nothing prudish about the context of “The Second Sex.”

This Paris was also multi-racial. And this is where the most famous and most tragic of Greco’s love affairs broke ground, not so much in France but as a symbol to the United States as to what was possible. Miles Davis, escaping the US and its racism, fell madly in love with Greco in Paris, where he was welcomed like Paul Robeson was welcomed in London and where jazz was very much the accompaniment to existentialist philosophy. It represented a freedom that nevertheless required technical virtuosity. This is what many overlook in their views of French thought. Rigor was always there in palaces of absurdity. Being a human was an absurd condition, but it was a condition that mandated responsibilities: The world could not be abandoned.

So deep was the relationship between Davis and Greco that Sartre asked Davis, “Why don’t you just marry her?” To which Miles Davis replied that, if he did, she would just be regarded as a “Negro’s whore” in America; this would break her heart, and he loved her too much to hurt her. When, eventually, they did meet in New York, they were treated so badly that all of Davis’ misgivings have come home to roost.

The end of the relationship did not mean Greco abandoned her openness — nor her bravery. Many thought she was selling out when she accepted an invitation to sing at a concert in Chile for the dictator Augusto Pinochet. But when she mounted the stage, every song she sang was one that Pinochet had banned, including by , the singer tortured and executed in public by the regime. Greco left the staged with her audience, including Pinochet, in stunned silence, but she was triumphant.

Greco had a tender but annoying voice. One loved her or loathed her. But when she sang the songs of Jacques Brel, it was a giving of female voice to the sometimes desperate heroics and defiance of Brel. Women, too, could embed themselves — and not as hapless creatures — in the human condition.

Perhaps only France could present such a creature to the world. Without writing a word of philosophy, Juliette Greco embodied and personified what it was to live philosophically and with actuality. What is absurd is a far cry from what is preposterous. The absurd calls for human dignity and humanity as the foundations of freedom snatched from the jaws of fascism.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Juliette Greco: Snatching Dignity From the Jaws of the Absurd appeared first on 51�Թ�.

His influence wasn’t limited to the arts. His reputation had the misfortune of becoming tarnished by an association with Naziism. Wagner himself cannot be held responsible for the association with Adolf Hitler since the composer died six years before Hitler was born. But though Wagner’s anti-Semitism must have pleased Hitler, the Fuhrer admired the music for other reasons, more closely linked with its patriotic mythology. It is no coincidence that Wagner’s art belongs to an era that privileged aggressive racist nationalism in Europe.

Wagner was unquestionably an innovator. Any musician who listens to even random excerpts of his orchestral music and opera scores cannot but be impressed by the subtle complexity of his art. Thanks to his Promethean ambition, Wagner achieved the singular feat of both subverting the inspired individualism at the core of his century’s romantic tradition and fulfilling the romantics’ paradoxical ambition of formulating new principles for achieving collective domination.

Banking Takes the Fun Out of Spoofs

READ MORE

He rejected the social drama of the Italian masters of opera — Verdi, Rossini, Donizetti — who worked in a tradition perfected by Mozart. The Italian tradition used melody and recognizable harmonic structures as the structuring factors that permitted the expression of human pathos. Wagner’s sense of drama replaced social conflict with idealized quests aimed at reordering the world. These were the very forces driving European nationalism at the time.

Wagner clearly broke from recognized traditions and produced an art that was not just different, but in purely musical terms always rich with surprises. But was this what people expected from music? One famous ironic by a pragmatic 19th-century American sums up Wagner’s effect on the average person, even today. The humorist Bill Nye is credited with the remark, “Wagner’s music, I have been informed, is really much better than it sounds.”

Examining Wagner’s legacy across Western culture right up to modern times, Ross tends to give Wagner too much credit. Convinced that the composer was the agent who shaped the culture around him, he tends to neglect the evidence showing how the ambient culture shaped Wagner. At one point, he claims that in his opera, “Tristan und Isolde,” Wagner “set the course for an avant-garde art of dream logic, mental intoxication, formless form, limitless desire.” In other words, Ross attributes to Wagner the creation of some of the most salient features of the modern world.

Here is today’s 3D definition:

Formless form:

The ultimate attainment of aesthetic hyperreality, when an artist invents the means to create the illusion of form — an immaterial but recognizable component of all art — by annihilating the recognized principles of form.

Contextual Note

Wagner didn’t invent any of the four features Ross lists: dream logic, mental intoxication, formless form, limitless desire. William Blake did. Lord Byron did. So did Beethoven, Goethe and Henry Fuseli. Wagner assembled those existing trends and repackaged them into what are clearly musical monuments. In so doing, he concretized better than anyone else the major tendency of his age: worship of the monumental.

Wagner lived at a moment in history when Europeans were less intent on building monuments — as the Italians did with their architecture during the Renaissance — than on adulating anything that strove to be monumental, whether it was empire, opera or industry. Wagner himself was a monumentalist striver.

Western civilization didn’t wait for Wagner to begin fashioning and disseminating the four features Ross mentions. They were already embedded in broader cultural trends, including the new focus of the capitalist economy, habits of production and consumption, commodification, modes of entertainment and politics. 

At one point, Ross quotes the academic Nicholas Vazsonyi: “Wagner’s special skill was the ability to preserve the artistic integrity of his towering works amidst the blaze of commodification to which he in the first place had subjected them.” Wagner tirelessly promoted the brand he had created, with a sense of mission similar to modern monopolists named Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk.

But what about the four features he mentions? By formless form, Ross appears to mean the subversion of traditional forms. That could be called the grand illusion of modernism. No art can be totally formless, not even John Cage’s “” As , everything “is a compound of matter and form.”

At the same time, compelling art at any point in history challenges existing principles of form, but not to impose formlessness. The challenge can go in two directions. The first calls attention to a recognized form that has become lifeless, repetitive and easily duplicable through familiarity. The second consists of successfully exploiting an unfamiliar dimension that derived from existing formal principles. It transforms appearance by adding a new layer of meaning, making it more compelling.

The most deserving examples of transformation, rather than neutralizing form, enrich it. Bach did precisely that with both harmony and melody. So did Vivaldi, with a greater focus on rhythm. They and their contemporaries invented a language whose intricacy of formal principles made Mozart possible, a composer who never sought to undermine Bach’s system of formality. Mozart exploited the formal principles, subtly enriching multiple aspects of their stylistic expression.

When the legendary jazz took the familiar popular tune, Cherokee, and built his improvisation on harmonic extensions of its standard chords, he not only produced a fresh version of the tune, but he also changed the course of the history of jazz. He didn’t invent a new type of formality or cancel the old one. He extended and transformed the existing one. The challenge young musicians faced was to assimilate and successfully exploit the enriched formal principles that defined this new musical language.

Ross is nevertheless right to assert that the idea of “formless form” became a theme of modernist aesthetics, evident in James Joyce’s use of stream of consciousness and the discontinuity of thought developed in T.S. Eliot’s poems. But Joyce and Eliot, like Picasso and Braque, used the sense of confusion caused by the disruption of recognizable forms to exploit an even fuller range of forms inherited from their traditions. The, speaking of Eliot’s “The Waste Land,” claimed that despite its appearing “remarkably disconnected and confused” a closer reading “reveals the hidden form of the work.” Successful artists always try to hide form. Only their imitators, hoping to exploit a trend, abandon it to make it truly formless.

Historical Note

The history of any culture can never be reduced to a simple logic of cause and effect or the tracing of influence from one thinker or artist to another. The real danger lies in isolating vague themes — such as the four that Alex Ross cites — and treating them as if they had some substantial meaning in any historical context. The idea of formless clearly has no meaning other than as a slogan. Dream logic didn’t require waiting for either Sigmund Freud or Richard Wagner. Midsummer night dreams have inspired artistic works throughout human history.

On the other hand, the other two features — mental intoxication and limitless desire — have effectively taken on new meaning in a post-Wagner world. They became the foundation of the industry that would drive the consumer society: advertising. Intoxication and the stimulation of limitless desire have provided the basis of the 20th-century economy, in conjunction with the 19th-century impulse toward nationalist imperialism.

The new composers of the 20th century — Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Berg, Webern, Satie and others — rejected the Wagnerian system. Hollywood, on the other hand, wholeheartedly embraced Wagnerian drama as the foundation of the emotional rhythms of its films. Though rarely attaining the sophistication of Wagner himself, the best movie scores reflect Wagner’s musical universe. More significantly, the dramatic rhythm of standard Hollywood films seems inspired by the sequences of false climaxes Wagner so expertly concatenated.

Apart from pompous Hollywood scores, the direct trace of Wagner’s influence on music has largely disappeared in the 21st century. But it unquestionably remains in advertising, commodification, monopolistic and whatever remains of nationalistic imperialism.

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on 51�Թ�.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Richard Wagner and the Twilight of Western Civilization appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Anyone familiar with Chinese culture knows the central, practically sacred place that the value of harmony holds. It has both a spiritual and social dimension. It accounts for the ability of Chinese emperors in the past — as well as today’s Communist Party — to hold in tow a large and diverse population over a vast expanse of territory. It works by inducing attitudes of conformity and disciplined behavior that serve to maintain public order. Most Chinese accept this as a rational principle and an essential feature of their culture. People hailing from the individualistic cultures of the West still have trouble grasping this fact.

The concept derives from the dynamics of music that in ancient times infused Chinese culture. Harmony is not unison. It always implies the combining of divergent elements whose different principles of resonance produce sounds that converge in an agreeable or intriguing way. Dissonance that points to resolution within the dynamics of music is a necessary ingredient. This is true of every musical tradition. Elizabethan poet and composer Thomas Campion expressed this in the simplest terms in his poem, “”: “These dull notes we sing/ Discords need for helps to grace them.”

Are China’s New Silk Road Ambitions a Desert Mirage?

READ MORE

Xi appears not to be too fond of discord, even when it is needed for the sake of true harmony. The Chinese government has even invented a barbarous word that English translators appear to have accepted because a more conventional translation, such as “separatist,” fails to convey its deeper meaning. That word is “splitism.” Unlike separatism, which supposes two potentially autonomous entities, splitism designates something akin to a violation of the integrity of a territory, a people or a culture. It is an attack on unison voicings.

Concerning the status of Tibet, a territory, like Xinjiang, potentially guilty of splitism, Xi offered a practical suggestion demonstrating his unorthodox conception of harmony. Al Jazeera summarizes Xi’s message: “Political and ideological education needed to be strengthened in Tibet’s schools in order to ‘plant the seeds of loving China in the depths of the hearts of every youth.’”

Here is today’s 3D definition:

Seeds of loving:

Active principles of emotional orientation that can be based either on the authentic concern for the good of the other or on a policy of intimidation sufficiently strong in its negative force to appear superficially to resemble deep and spontaneous affection for the object of one’s fear.

Contextual Note

Xi’s concerns with the hearts of young Tibetans and his idea that they may be fertile ground for “seeds of loving” radically distorts the traditional notions of both harmony and love he seeks to promote. The questions every society must ask itself are, “What is harmony?” and “What is love?”

In both Chinese and Western music, harmony implies the physical notion and even cosmological notion of sympathetic resonance. One student of Chinese musical culture as an “inner dialectic between the creation and resolution of tension and, by extension, a similarly nuanced relationship.” Thomas Campion would undoubtedly agree. In other words, harmony is not the effect of unison or forced imitation, but of the coming together or the resolution of diverse discords.

Xi’s idea of love appears to radically differ from that of Lao Tzu, who : “Go to the people. Live with them. Learn from them. Love them. Start with what they know. Build with what they have.” If it resonates with anything, rather than with Lao Tzu, Xi’s concept recalls the traditional right-wing slogan cast in the face of protesters against the US war in Vietnam: “Love America or leave it.” Xi wants Tibetan youth to love China, but, in contrast with Lao Tzu, he is unwilling to learn from them. They must learn from him.

Perhaps Xi is seeking to distinguish China from the decidedly superficial and jaded West that no longer pays attention to its youth. US politicians have clearly become indifferent to “the depths” within the hearts of the younger generations. China at least thinks about its youth. 

US President Donald Trump has this generation’s young protesters as “anarchists and agitators” who must be reined in by a strict policy of “law and order.” He has for the 17-year-old vigilante Kyle Rittenhouse who killed two protesters, but the president is doing everything within his power to prevent young people from voting. The Democratic National Convention underscored the startling fact that it has consciously abandoned the youth-oriented movement led by Bernie Sanders, a movement that was clamoring for health care, social justice, reduced military engagement and relief from oppressive debt. The Democrats consider all these issues, which are truly “at the depths” of young voters’ hearts, as irrelevant to their overriding mission of electing a man with no vision for the future, who will turn 80 in his first term.

Al Jazeera reports on Xi’s vision of the future: “Pledging to build a ‘united, prosperous, civilised, harmonious and beautiful new, modern, socialist Tibet,’ Xi said China needed to strengthen the role of the Communist Party in the territory and better integrate its ethnic groups.” And it will all be done in the name of harmony.

Chinese political analysts and apologists that “China’s long tradition of thinking about harmony makes it uniquely able and disposed to exercise soft power in world politics.” In the realm of geopolitics, Xi claims to understand the value of the concept of soft power, an idea initially proposed by to contrast with the hard power of military might.

That may or may not be true. But internally, Xi mobilizes the same soft-power rhetoric, including the appeal to harmony, to justify a policy of hard power designed to enforce something more like conformity than harmony. On the international front, Xi understands that since the United States, under the past three presidents, has allowed military power and economic sanctions to define its foreign policy, by doing the opposite — notably thanks to the Belt and Road Initiative — China could emulate the success the US had with its Marshall Plan for Europe following World War II.  But can China achieve this goal in harmony with the nations it is bringing on board? That is a moot question.

Historical Note

Xi’s conception of the concept of harmony is innovative in the sense that it diverges from tradition. In her book, “Music Cosmology and the Politics of Harmony in Early China,” Erica Fox Brindley places the origins of the Chinese concept of harmony in ancient times, when “conceptions of music became important culturally and politically.” Xi’s musical tastes as demonstrated in this official government rap song appear to have little in common with the contemplative character of traditional Chinese music. Xi’s wife is a famous singer, but the harmony of her music on display in this patriotic song demonstrates greater respect for conventional Western harmony than it does for the Chinese musical tradition.

While explaining the roots of the concept in Chinese spirituality and “protoscientific beliefs on the intrinsic harmony of the cosmos,” Brindley her readers that the “rhetoric of harmony in the People’s Republic … is complicated.” The author identifies the Zuo Zhuan — one of the earliest works of Chinese history composed before 500 BC — as the “locus classicus for defining the term ‘harmony’ in ancient China.” Harmony refers “not merely to the conformity of similar items but to an appealing admixture of many diverse ones.” Xi’s current admixture reflects little more than the combination of stale Western trends with Chinese pop vocal style.

There is a traditional saying in Chinese, lǐ yuè bēng huài, which literally means “rites and music are in ruins.” As on his website dedicated to learning Mandarin, the idiom “refers to a society in disarray.” Xi would claim that his new rites and music are solidly built and are a protection against the prospect of ruin that the entire world is facing. Lao Tzu might disagree, at least concerning the methods employed.

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on 51�Թ�.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Xi Jinping’s Tibetan Summer of Love appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Is Brazil’s Soft Power Under Threat?

READ MORE

It’s almost impossible not to be seduced by the rhythm, the beautiful men and women dancing on a paradisiacal Caribbean beach in the video clip. Seduction is a key element to soft power that works through attraction instead of coercion, which is the prerogative of hard power projected via politics and economics. Soft power shapes the preference of other people and societies through culture, diplomacy, science and religion. It is usually the best propaganda for any country precisely because it doesn’t look propaganda, with credibility being an important element of the message it carries.

Favorite Genre

Hollywood, one of the most successful vehicles of soft power globally, needed more than just one film to achieve its levels of influence in the 20^th century. So, is Latin music a new soft power, or is “Despacito” a rare phenomenon? Latin music has been internationally renowned for decades, with bossa nova and tango capturing audiences the world over. But the number of Latin artists wining important international awards and topping charts like appears to be a more recent phenomenon.

According to Rolling Stone magazine’s of the 50 Greatest Latin Pop Songs from 1950 to now, 24 of the 50 are from the past 25 years, including songs like Ricky Martin’s 1995 hit “María,” “A Dios le Pido” by Juanes from 2002, Julieta Venegas’“Algo Esta Cambiando” from 2003 and Shakira’s “Hips Don’t Lie,” released in 2006, among others. This trend may just be a new outlet of soft power for the continent.

Artists from all over the world are being seduced by Latin music, inspiring increasingly more international collaborations. In 2019, the Swedish singer went to São Paulo to produce “Are U Gonna Tell Her?” with Brazilian funk singer MC Zaac, a racy and rather Latin-looking clip, sung in English and Portuguese. The American magazine Variety that Brazilian singer Anitta “offers a much more interesting counterpoint to Madonna than Britney Spears,” referring to their collaboration on “Faz Gostoso” on Madonna’s 14^th album “Madame X.”

We can thank funk music for this trend. Although funk has its origins in black communities in 1950s America, with artists like Horace Silver and, later, James Brown, Brazil’s was born in the 1970s in Rio de Janeiro’s favelas, but still mostly focused on remixes. Later in that decade, it became the rhythm we know today, with faster beats, more erotic and original lyrics about guns, drug trafficking and other favela problems.

However, it is only in the past 20 years that Brazilian funk got a new look, with songs identified more heavily with Brazil’s black community and the nouveau riche that became known as , or ostentation funk. That is when funk became another Latin hit on the internet, with artists like Anitta, Ludmilla and videos by getting millions of views on YouTube and SoundCloud. The rhythm was once known for its violent, sexist and pornographic lyrics. But that also changed in the past few years, with new variations like offering a dance beat and romantic lyrics, and building on influences ranging from MPB (), pop and bregga, or .

As a result, funk became the Brazilian music genre in foreign countries. “Bum Bum Tam Tam,” by MC Fioti, released in 2017, is the first Brazilian song to reach 1 billion views on YouTube, with views abroad overtaking the domestic audience. According to a from DeltaFolha, of the 200 most-listened-to songs on Spotify in 51 countries, funk is the favorite Brazilian genre internationally.

Seduced by Latin Music

Reggaeton is another Latin rhythm that is part of this soft power. in the Caribbean countries like Puerto Rico, Panama and the Dominican Republic in the 1980s, it has grown into a bigger phenomenon in the 2000s. Daddy Yankee and Snow’s “Con Calma” had over last year and has been awarded the 2019 Premio Lo Nuestro — an annual award presented by Univision TV channel in the US since 1989 to distinguish the new talent of Latin music. The Philadelphia Inquirer’s list of the includes famous reggaeton hits like Bad Bunny’s “Yo Perreo Solo.”

It’s not the first time that Latin music becomes a soft power. In the 1950s, Brazilian bossa nova, which translates as “new wave,” seduced hearts and minds all over the world, with a genre that mixes samba, jazz and African beats. Singers like João Gilberto and Antonio Carlos Jobim made a historical debut at the , introducing bossa nova to American audiences. Two days before the show, the White House , and Jackie Kennedy, a big fan of the rhythm, insisted on Brazilian music as the main theme. American jazz artists like Quincy Jones, Herbie Mann, Stan Getz and Charlie Byrd soon started to record bossa nova. Bebel Gilberto, the daughter of João Gilberto, made her career in the US with bossa nova.

At the same time that bossa nova swept the world, tango was also conquering the global radio waves. This rhythm of Argentina is responsible for a , involving festivals and numerous tango houses that have been drawing tourists from all over the world for over 70 years. The genre of Astor Piazzolla, Julio Sosa and Carlos Gardel captivated Hollywood, becoming central to films like “Scent of a Woman,” which grossed and won an Academy Award for Al Pacino.

Bossa nova and tango conquered the world long before the birth and popularity of music festivals and multimillion tours. Although the music industry almost collapsed in the 2000s as the internet made music freely available, streaming saw its first significant . And it’s in this new era of YouTube and Spotify hits that Latin artists are shaping the tastes of their audiences — a soft power that gives the continent a distinct voice in the world.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Latin Music Is Seducing the World All Over Again appeared first on 51�Թ�.

To anyone familiar with the history of jazz, the partnership between pianist McCoy Tyner and saxophonist John Coltrane in the legendary quartet that included drummer Elvin Jones and bassist Jimmy Garrison was very special. To this day its heritage resonates across American and global musical culture. The group’s finest and most memorable collective work of art was the , “A Love Supreme,” recorded in December 1964. The piece in four movements sought to express the deep spirituality of the saxophonist and shared by the group. A look at its creative principles reveals that beyond its intensely spiritual musical substance some potentially political meaning also emerges.

John Coltrane never had the occasion to speak at length about how “A Love Supreme” was created. He died at the age of 40, less than three years after recording it. More recently, McCoy Tyner on the experience. Though the message of the Coltrane quartet’s music was never intended to be directly political — with the possible exception of “,” a kind of dirge for four young black girls killed in a church by the Ku Klux Klan — Tyner tells us about how the principle of democracy played a significant role in their achievement. He describes the experience itself as a special moment among creative people: “When you get in a situation where everyone is thinking democratically, thinking in terms of what is played and how it affects you and how your response to it affects those around you.”

Here is today’s 3D definition:

Democratically:

The description of a way of thinking and acting that, when executed optimally, permits creative interaction, enhancing both the individual and collective personality of its practitioners, but when driven by greed and lust for power — the usual motivation of those who vie for power — destroys the instinct toward solidarity and mutual enrichment.

Contextual Note

Tyner develops his description of the band’s democracy, citing “the fact that we functioned like one person. It wasn’t like we were four guys on stage doing his own particular kind of thing. In other words, it had to be in relationship to the total.” He adds that the lesson can be applied to other forms of human relations than music. “To me, it’s a wonderful way to not only think, but behave. I think to create civility in life and society itself, to think of yourself in relationship to other people. What you do, may affect someone else. We have to be conscious of that, that we don’t function by ourselves.”

The basic premise of improvisation in jazz can not only be applied to social life, but could, if we paid attention to it, provide meaning to democracy itself, which, as we survey the global landscape today, seems to have lost much of its meaning. It’s sad to note that the improvisational culture of jazz that thrived in the US, Europe and elsewhere for the better part of a century has been displaced by a cynically consumerist approach to music. Most people today — our civilization’s music consumers — think of music as being synonymous with songs and little else.

But throughout human history and across the globe even today, musical traditions have been built and are still practiced that rely on shared musical ideas, a convergence of tradition and creativity that manifests itself through spontaneous improvisational engagement. These musical realities have only a tenuous relationship with the production of the commercial artifacts we call “songs,” and even less to do with its marketing.

A philosopher of history might see a parallel with political practice. Democracy has never been perfect. It has always been skewed toward the interests of a privileged elite. It was, after all, Athenian democracy that put Socrates to death. One of the first democratic nations, the United States, not only enthroned slavery in its Constitution but also sought to reserve the exercise of voting to the propertied classes. But at the same time, unlike oligarchy that closes avenues of creation, democracy leaves an opening for creative transformation.

From its earliest moments, democracy in the United States embraced the idea of collective improvisation, permitting the emergence both of new forms of political thought and expression,  including parties and labor unions, and new forms of abuse in the form of political corruption, including lobbies, political bosses and pressure groups. 

At a purely cultural level, American democracy represented an idealized view of society that embraced the improvisational poetry of a Walt Whitman and the collective inventiveness of a variety of popular musical traditions that finally coalesced in jazz. It also developed a new collective art form called the cinema, requiring the association of a wide range of complementary talents, artistic and technical, in a spirit of collaboration that produced an original language of visual communication. For decades, improvisation provided the dynamic substance of these emerging arts.

What do we see today in the respective domains of politics and the arts? Improvisation has been sidelined and to a large extent replaced thanks to the triumph of commercially focused oligarchies that have lost all respect for improvisation. They see it as the source of that most intolerable of phenomena: financial risk. 

In its glorious past, the global cinema industry once attracted to Hollywood visionaries such as Fritz Lang, Ernst Lubitsch, Orson Wells, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, Billy Wilder, to name only those. They improvised to create an art form that progressively gave way to the current Hollywood ethos dominated by the remake, the action film, the superhero movie and the blockbuster. A select crew of virtuoso artistic-minded creators — Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, David Lynch, the Coen brothers — still have a chance to play on the sidelines, but instead of creating a new artistic language, they mostly act as virtuoso performers of an art form others have created and that they have carefully studied.

Historical Note

The notion of democracy as theorized by political thinkers usually implies several complementary factors: equality, mutual respect and a level playing field. In an era of rapidly growing economic inequality, the power of those who are more than equal tends to crush the lives and fortunes of the less than equal. Respect as a social virtue has given way to the sniping of social media and the reflex of blaming, discrediting, shaming and doxing those who display even slightly different values or lifestyles than one’s own. And in an era when assertiveness has been elevated to the status of a supreme moral virtue, tweaking the playing field in one’s favor has become a way of life, the secret to succeeding in business and in life itself, the key to being admired as someone who is more than equal.

The truly glorious decades of jazz — from the 1930s to the 1960s — correspond to the period in which US President Franklin D. Roosevelt made a major effort to establish or reestablish the ideals of equality and a level playing field. He passed laws aimed at taming the wild capitalism that US culture had embraced and that, in 1929, had propelled the economy toward ruin. 

The prosperity of the US following World War I distorted the nation’s political culture, leading it to confound naked ambition, unbridled egoism and conspicuous consumption with the idea of democracy. Ayn Rand-style individualism, which would reemerge later to undermine Roosevelt’s reforms, had become the dominant ideology. Roosevelt countered that trend and helped the nation get a new handle on the meaning of democracy. His policies changed the perception of democracy so that it included not just respect but also solidarity and the value of collaborative effort.

Roosevelt’s influence on civic and economic culture remained dominant in the political sphere through the Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy years. It guided the evolution of many of the formal and informal institutions of the nation. It acted as a cultural rather than ideological force, encouraging the values of equality, collaboration and collective improvisation that continued to have a deep effect on public affairs.

It also prepared for future change. Two decades after Roosevelt’s death, the civil rights movement emerged as perhaps the purest expression of his legacy, finally establishing equality as an official policy rather than simply an abstract ideal. In August 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King improvised — as was his wont — his most famous address to the nation. A little more than a year later, the John Coltrane quartet performed “A Love Supreme” in a single recording session. This was the same year as the Gulf of Tonkin incident that turned the Vietnam standoff into a full-blown American war, ripping to shreds even the natural solidarity within many American families.

The war that eventually spread across Southeast Asia, coupled with the spectacular series of assassinations of Robert and John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, ended up shattering the Roosevelt legacy. By the 1970s, the glorious era of creative jazz had given way to musical forms increasingly dominated by electronic technology and commercialism. The movie studios, which had always functioned as a business as much as cultivators of art, began focusing on profit alone. And in 1980, a B-movie actor imbued with an economic ideology inherited from the 1920s (his teenage years), was elected president. Ronald Reagan began the work, continued by all his successors, Republicans and Democrats alike, of undoing what Roosevelt had accomplished, not only in terms of laws but especially in terms of culture.

And that is where we are today, possibly in a time of crisis worse than 1929 because of a threatening pandemic whose proportions we still cannot understand, but also at the very moment when one insurgent, nearly successful politician challenging the established order promises, not a revolution, but a return to the political culture of Roosevelt. The order appears to be on the point of eliminating the threat, not of the disease, but of the ghost of Roosevelt played by Bernie Sanders.

Two days after McCoy Tyner, Swedish actor Max von Sydow died at the age of 90. In his most famous role as the main character of Ingmar Bergman’s “The Seventh Seal,” von Sydow played a 14^th-century knight returning home from the Crusades to discover a land haunted by the Black Death, the pandemic that traumatized Europe for several centuries. Struggling with his own values and beliefs in a world marked by violence and apocalyptic fears, the knight managed to score a small victory over the character of Death in a game of chess, as he sacrificed his own life by distracting Death long enough to spare the lives of a young couple with a child. The young couple were popular artists, entertainers gifted in improvisation.

Bergman painted a frail picture of hope in the midst of a distressing pandemic. Art and, in particular, improvised art, has an underrated talent for producing hope. Let us honor those who have offered us that hope.

[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, , in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post McCoy Tyner’s Improvisations of Hope appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Let me start by saying that it took me years to realize how empowering it is to be a woman. In my childhood, I was a tomboy. I didn’t get along with other girls and wanted to be a boy — straightforward, reserved and noble. In my early teens, I was resentful of the “pleasing” rules that I allegedly had to follow in order to succeed — and by “success” they meant social acceptance. As a young woman, I was told that I was too expressive, too emotional, too free, too clumsy, too sexual. The list goes on.

The gender expectations bestowed on me didn’t match my personality, and I suffered. As a woman, albeit with a fat smudge of male energy, my instinct was to connect and to find common ground. It is that instinct that compelled me to comply with behaviors and choices that weren’t intrinsically good for me, and the result of such compliance was never pleasant. But when I didn’t comply — my first choice — I found myself alone, and that wasn’t pleasant, either.

The Me Too Movement: Changing the Rules of the Game

READ MORE

Early in life, I complied a lot. Then rebelled, and found myself alone. Then complied again. Later on, I realized that womanhood comes with strength and complexity, and that, unfortunately, we live in a world where broken men battle differently broken women, and no one is winning.

How did we get here? Perhaps this story of the — although it is specific to their history and culture — can shed some light on the world at large. Perhaps, a version of this tragedy has taken place in other cultures, too, and so we ended up with a world where broken men battle differently broken women, and no one wins.    

A Broken Battle

When #MeToo exploded, I felt very emotional. As I was reading stories by other women, I thought, predictably, “Wow, me too!” I took a tally of all the times when I was unexpectedly groped or physically violated, of walking home from the bus stop keys in hand and a scream ready to come out, of giggling uncomfortably in the face of insultingly lewd remarks by ugly old men with ugly old breath, and I thought, Wow. All of that has really happened — to me — but somehow, I have never thought of it as “not normal.” Wow. Me, too!

I grew up in a that is verbally direct and rough around the edges and, as a result, I am thick-skinned. I don’t get triggered by minor annoyances like clumsy catcalling or mansplaining in a professional environment. I either ignore or push back as needed, begrudgingly humiliating the offending party. But physical violence is something you cannot just deflect with emotional strength or intellectual superiority: You have to fight back with your fists, and I don’t know how. The lack of physical safety that many women routinely deal with on a daily basis was an astounding #MeToo revelation for me —  I’ve never thought of it this way prior to the campaign.

Violence and threats standing on their own as something categorically ugly and terrifying, there is also something else that is more granular and existentially complex, a type of human interaction that I have thought about a lot as I was trying to understand my life and why I have lived it so far the way I did. It is as if there were two very differently damaged sides to one messy story of the social imbalance. I am going to use examples from my own life to navigate this maze because that is what I know the best.

As a musician, I’ve spent a lot of time “networking” in the music industry. As I look back, almost every time I did something that makes me cringe today, like laughing off an older industry man asking for nudes. I felt like the other party had more power than I did, and I was afraid to lose something by explicitly telling them that they were out of line. Was it true? Was I going to lose anything? I don’t know.

I have never sent nudes to anybody and never slept with anybody for professional “help,” but I have never laughed them out of the room, either — once I was on my own in a foreign country, that is. I have never told them what I was actually thinking, like that they should check the mirror and not embarrass themselves. I treated them not as equal human beings with whom I could argue if I felt like it, but as figures of power whom I should keep on my good side just in case — no matter how unpleasant their behavior was to me.

As long as they didn’t try to physically assault me, I was willing to accept the verbal dance that on the inside I found disgusting. On some subtle level, I was supporting the very imbalance I despised, even though I tried to protect myself to the best of my ability within a framework of an existing power imbalance. I was alone in a foreign land and wanted to succeed, and the men who had the power were immature and presumptuous.

So, power. Let’s talk about it.

Let’s say I had somebody behind me, somebody with money and authority — a family member, a partner, or somebody who would otherwise have my back. Or maybe I were rich and could hire the influential music industry bastards to do whatever I wanted, no favors or special friendship needed. In that scenario, would I have had the confidence to put them back in their place immediately, without emitting even half a shy giggle? You bet I would have. I would have felt secure and protected.

The chance is, they would have treated me differently in the first place if I had social power matching or exceeding theirs. But there is a great positive in all that. Having dealt with it at a younger age, I can deal with about anybody now: rich, powerful, famous, whatever. That is a superpower.

Cognitive Dissonance

And then there is R. Kelly. When it comes to R. Kelly, I have been struggling with a cognitive dissonance for years. Like all of us, I’ve heard rumors for years. But my own story with him is different. I’ve dated Rob in 2007, and absolutely nothing horrible has happened.

I have been unable to reconcile the two narratives, and for a long time, I chose to believe my own experience. But when I watched “” last year, my hair stood up. I realized that I have lucked out big time. Were there underage girls scattered around Rob’s house as I was spending time with him on my terms? The thought of it breaks my heart into a thousand little pieces.

I was introduced to him by a producer friend. Rob showed a lot of personality, and I wanted to understand what was inside his head. I was not underaged when I met him. I was also an immigrant and had no idea who he was until maybe a year before I met him. He wasn’t my boss or my role model in any way. I went for it out of my own intellectual and sexual curiosity. He stood out, and I wanted to figure him out. I didn’t want anything from him. I didn’t think he would help me with my music, and I didn’t even try. He had no leverage over me, and I didn’t give up any of my turf.

Any time I didn’t approve of his behavior toward me, like when I had to wait forever at his mansion’s security checkpoint after driving for God knows how long from Chicago to Olympia Fields, I voiced my grudges like I would do with any other man. One time, one of his assistants hushed and made eyes at me as in, “Don’t talk this way to him,” and I was like, “What do you mean?”

The entire thing lasted only a few weeks. Quickly, I became annoyed by Rob’s erratic ways and by the perpetual presence of a million doting women orbiting around him at all times, and I stopped seeing him for good. The end. And that is why watching “Surviving R. Kelly” last year left me in pieces. The contrast between my own lackluster experience and the experiences of the women in the documentary is shattering. I myself am a survivor of severe domestic violence. I know what it’s like to be treated like an outcast with no rights, and how alone and defenseless one feels when in the middle of it.

As I think about this, a million questions race through my head. I ask myself, What would the world be like if we, women — the people who have tremendous power on the inside — didn’t feel like we would lose something if we don’t accept the terms that we don’t internally approve of? What if our internal compass were set to “dignity” as opposed to “pleasing somebody in power,” even in the most challenging circumstances? What if the society respected the human spirit — male, female, or any other kind? What if no one had to feel alone and without protection? What would it be like if somebody told every little girl that she is her own boss and that she can say no at any time, and if parents taught little boys to show their strength by being protective of girls and not abusive toward them?

I got to know Rob not as a predator, but as a musical genius and a strangely shy man who brags a lot. But the stories of his survivors are agonizing to me, too, and not just because they are so powerful they could make a stone cry. I suddenly feel like I have won the lottery simply by saying no to what I didn’t want to do. My heart goes out to all my sisters who have found in themselves the strength and the courage to come out and speak up. Me, too.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post #MeToo: Power, Let’s Talk About It appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Over the decades, Brazil has built a very positive international image. It was seen by a large portion of the world as a happy, multicultural, multiracial country fond of parties, high-spirited and exuberant in nature. This may not be true, but it doesn’t matter because in business, image sometimes counts more than reality itself.

Image is power — soft power. The term was created by the American political scientist Joseph Nye in the 1980s to designate the ability to attract rather than coerce (through hard power), to shape the preferences of others through appeal and attraction, through culture, sport, idiom, political values, religion, science, etc. Hollywood, the biggest cultural soft power in the world, was able to destabilize closed regimes, like that of the Soviet Union toward its collapse, through its films.

Jair Bolsonaro’s Image Crisis

READ MORE

Efficient soft power brings profits, tourism and social and technological gains to societies. Renaissance art not only softened the image of the Catholic Church but also shaped Italy — which didn’t even exist as a unified country at that time — as one of the greatest international tourist destinations of the world.

The popularity of the English language brought many benefits to countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, facilitating, for example, the international sales of cultural products like films and TV shows. Ballet is a common “business card” for Russian diplomats, seducing the world with art instead of sanctions and guns. The Japanese MAG (manga, anime and games) culture is voraciously consumed even by historic archenemies such as China and South Korea. 

Soft Power vs. Hard Power

Although Brazil doesn’t have a universally spoken language or great technology to serve its cause, it accumulated massive reserves of cultural soft power over the last decades. And this doesn’t even include the obvious — football, whose soft power withered somewhat after its humiliating 7:1 loss against Germany in the 2014 World Cup. But all this great cultural soft power is currently being dilacerated by the hard power installed in Brasilia last year, in the shape of the country’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro.

Carnival is one of the most efficient forms of soft power, one that helped build an image of a friendly and tolerant Brazil. It attracts millions of tourists from all over the world, and footage of its parades is sold to hundreds of TV channels worldwide. This year, President Bolsonaro decided to talk about the event on . But instead of using it in Brazil’s favor, he posted a video of a man stripping naked and making obscene gestures during a street party in Sao Paulo.

His tweet drew international attention and contributed to weakening Brazil’s soft power. Instead of reinforcing an image of a happy celebration, Bolsonaro created a pornographic and chaotic image of carnival in just one tweet. An isolated and unfortunate case took on an international dimension when the country’s president singled out this angle for comment.

The president again made international headlines when he that Brazil should not become a “paradise for the gay world.” At a meeting with journalists last year, Bolsonaro said that “whoever wants to come here to have sex with a woman, feel free. … Brazil cannot be a country in the gay world, with gay tourism. We have families.” For a president who wants to make Brazilian economy grow, this is not only homophobic, but ill-considered. Sao Paulo is the home of the biggest LGBT parade in the world, inspiring shows like Netflix’s “Sense 8.” This year, the parade attracted over , with hotels fully booked for days. While some developed countries fight to attract more tourists, Brazil closes its doors to one of its most profitable and democratic events.

Then, late last month, Brazil’s Ministry of Citizenship not only an abrupt reduction of investment in cultural events and products like theater plays, musicals, films and TV shows, but also started an ideological campaign against all cultural manifestations that undermine “traditional family values.” But culture only becomes soft power when it’s free to manifest ideas creatively. Hollywood became a soft power giant because no American president tried to boycott its products internationally, even when the studios produced films that went directly against the interests of Washington, like the Vietnam War films of Francis Ford Coppola, Stanley Kubrick and Oliver Stone.

The witch-hunt also affected Apex, the Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency that works to promote Brazilian products and services worldwide. The dismissal of its president, Mario Vilalva, following a with Brazil’s foreign minister, is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to far-right ideological control that the Bolsonaro government wants to exercise over an agency that, in order to be efficient, needs freedom, rationality and business flair to sell Brazil’s products abroad.

Everything’s Not Lost

But not everything is lost — yet. Brazil still has two other great cultural icons that, for now, are immune from hard-power attacks. Bossa Nova is still widely listened to, bought and used in films, soap operas and shows in places as distant from Brazil as the US, Japan and Australia. For now, no Bossa Nova artist is being undermined by the government, although Bolsonaro is not a big fan of Brazilian singer and composer Chico Buarque, a close friend of former president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Another source of Brazilian soft power is its soap operas. Just like the carnival, they helped shape Brazil’s image as a friendly, welcoming place. TV Globo — the channel of the largest media group in Latin America — has been exporting its soap operas to over 100 countries since the 1980s, becoming an important cultural symbol. “Escrava Isaura” (“Isaura the Slave”) was to 80 countries, watched by some 1 billion viewers in China alone.

A street market in Angola’s capital Luanda was named Roque Santeiro in 1991 because of the success of the eponymous soap opera. Paladar, the restaurant owned by Raquel (Regina Duarte) in the soap “Vale Tudo,” gave its name to many of the newly authorized private restaurants during Cuba’s economic opening in the 1990s. There are even reports that the screenings of “Sinhá Moça” during the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Nicaragua. This is soft power at its best.

However, TV Globo seems to be more and more in opposition to the Bolsonaro administration, especially because the president is giving clear preference to the second-largest broadcaster, TV Record, owned by , the billionaire founder of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, whose religious and ideological views are openly aligned with the president’s. TV Record is also famous for producing religion-themed soap operas like “A Terra Prometida”(“The Promised Land”) and “Jezebel,” which are far less creative and inferior in terms of production and narrative.

Who knows, Jair Bolsonaro might use his hard power to give his favorite TV station a push to become a soft power to rival the leading channel he never gives interviews to. But that’s now how soft power works in arts and entertainment: Creativity must walk hand in hand with freedom. And Brazil’s new president is not a big fan of the last one.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Is Brazil’s Soft Power Under Threat? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Popular, or “trivial,” culture was Karl May, a famous 19^th-century author of a large number of adventure stories, most of them taking place in the American West and the Middle East; Johannes Mario Simmel, the author of numerous bestselling novels; Heintje, a Dutch child star singer who melted every grandma’s heart; boulevard comedies from Bavaria and Hamburg; and schmaltzy Heimatfilme (homeland movies), such as the “Sissi” series with Romy Schneider.

Romance Novels Are a Weapon Against Misogyny

READ MORE

This was a time when, on Saturday or Sunday evening — prime time — German public television would program an opera or a piece of classical theater or, more rarely, a Nouvelle Vague — the French New Wave — film. Appreciating high culture, however, did not only mean sitting in front of the TV set late at night, watching Truffault, Godard and Antonioni films. It also meant subjecting oneself to the torture of (largely unsuccessfully) mastering Latin and, a few years later and even more unsuccessfully, ancient Greek.

Even in German higher education, authorities pretended to go with the times, introducing English and, somewhat reluctantly, French, into the humanistic curriculum. It was quite obvious, however, that both languages were “children of a lesser god,” taught because they were useful and, perhaps, also because they were the languages of the nations that had won the war against the Nazis. On the other side of the German border, in the GDR, students had to learn Russian.

A Path Out of Ignorance

Times have changed. Even in Germany, the number of students struggling with Latin has precipitously declined over the past several decades. The reason is obvious. In today’s labor markets, utility trumps Bildung — that elusive German notion of comprehensive education in the most basic sense, a process of leading somebody out of his or her state of ignorance.

Ignorance, however, is a subjective notion. Is somebody ignorant because he or she has no clue who Benito Mussolini was? Is somebody ignorant because he or she has never heard of Frank Zappa? In reality, what constitutes Bildung is to an overwhelming extent subjective, largely determined by those who are in a position to impose their idea of meaning, those who managed to gain “cultural hegemony” — a notion famously associated with the Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci.

In Europe, this has been what in Germany is known as the ��������ܲԲ�����ü��������ٳܳ� — the educated middle class, which derived its social status from Bildung rather than money. It imposed its notion of what was supposed to account for “good taste” and what constitutes the canon of high culture.

This did not mean that we would not indulge in reading Karl May and, a few years later, prefer Mario Puzzo’s “The Godfather,” James A. Michener’s “The Drifters” and Henri Charrière “Papillon” to Schiller or Berthold Brecht. But we did it with a bad conscience, as if reading “this kind” of literature — if literature it was at all — constituted a fundamental betrayal of the ideals of Bildung.

Times have changed, and radically so. Today it is blatantly obvious that popular culture has won the war over cultural hegemony — hands down. German public television rarely ever programs an opera, hardly ever a piece of theater. And nobody wants to watch any more classic New Wave movies, such as Alain Resnais’ “Last Year at Marienbad” or Michelangelo Antonioni’s “Blow Up,” which come across as pretentious and, quite frankly, rather boring.

Today, audiences want to be entertained rather than intellectually stunned and disturbed, want to escape from their ordinary and, more often than not, mind-numbing, if not depressing, everyday working lives. This explains, for instance, the popularity of Hallmark movies, particularly during the holiday season where they are regularly programmed during the afternoon on French public television virtually every weekday. And it explains even more the popularity of romance novels, by now the most lucrative genre in contemporary fiction in the US, way ahead of crime fiction. In 2011, netted $1.5 billion in the US alone — roughly half of all mass-market fiction books sold.

The Guardians of Haute Culture

For the guardians of haute culture, romance novels are perhaps the most denigrated and despised part of popular culture, particularly if they originate in the United States. They represent everything that is wrong with popular culture. As an anti-popular-culture diatribe in the pages of put it, “The great majority of popular culture in the UK is worthless, moronic, meretricious, self-serving, anti-democratic, sclerotic garbage: it’s the enemy of thought and change: it should be ignored, marginalized, trashed.”

Life is too short, the author continues, to waste your time watching TV sit coms (or reading romance novels), “when you could be listening to Schumann, trying to get to grips with Beethoven’s Late Quartets, learning Italian so you can read Dante in the original, or wrestling with Ford Madox Ford” (English novelist best known for his “The Good Soldier”). Unfortunately, listening to Schumann has gone out of fashion, and who in their right mind would waste time learning a language spoken by a few million people? The fact is that even today’s most snobbish culture vulture has heard of, and might even appreciate, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Who and the Rolling Stones.

That’s the ultimate insult to good taste — the fact that even the parvenus who make up a significant part of today’s new educated middle class have come to appreciate popular culture. According to a , in 2014, almost half of American romance novel readers (most of them women) had a college degree. This suggests that even the college educated are in need of an escape, a welcome retreat from reality.

This, by the way, is not to denigrate high culture (except, perhaps, for New Wave films). Endeavour Morse, arguably one of the greatest police detectives ever created, finds ultimate solace in listening to classical music, reflecting a perfect combination of popular and elite culture. If high culture smells funny (my appropriation of Frank Zappa’s well-known reflection on jazz), it is because it was highjacked by self-styled cultural Cheka which came to dictate what was good taste and what was not.

For example, opera was high culture; operetta and musical were not. Ironically enough, originated as “a widely available form of popular entertainment consumed by people of all social classes.” Milos Forman’s “Amadeus” might be a bit exaggerated, but it probably is not that much off the mark. Mozart’s tunes were popular, as were Verdi’s. It was only when elite social groups appropriated the opera to distinguish themselves from the “unwashed masses” that opera became the paragon of high culture. From now on, “going to the opera” involved a certain dress code, a certain demeanor, a certain level of appreciation of the experience, deemed “sublime.”

Today, opera is just one among many entertainment options. It no longer serves as a badge of distinction (in the sense analyzed by Pierre Bourdieu). Today, even among the educated middle class, binge-watching Netflix no longer exposes you to the opprobrium of your peers — if only because they do the same. Reading romance novels (or listening to them on Amazon Audible) or watching Hallmark holiday movies is no longer something to be enjoyed in the privacy of your home. We have emancipated ourselves from the dictates of good taste, and our world is the better for it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Did You Say High Culture Was Dead? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

But hell hath no fury, as a Brexiteer scorned. And with pro-EU “remainers” accused of “hijacking” the Proms — an eight-week summer festival of classical music concerts organized and broadcast by the BBC — musicians and campaigners supporting the EU Flags Team behind the action have hit back at the Brexiteer backlash.

Campaign organizer Paulo Tirago said that, on the contrary, they were “outraged” at Brexiteers for “hijacking the media with their negative diatribe, diluting the underlying message of the campaign.” Campaign coordinator Katy Roberts also said it was a clear case of “Brexiteers in the media hijacking the message of the campaign.”

The Proms became a target for campaigners who said freedom of movement in the European Union is crucial to orchestras and musicians, and that the impact of Brexit was pertinent to this. Lengthy and complex visa applications and border controls threaten livelihoods, they said. Young musicians will be bereft of the opportunity to learn. Standards in musicianship were under the threat of dwindling without the injection of such creative energy. The music industry, with its musicians, songwriters and composers, worth £1.6 billion ($1.99 billion) to the UK, will consequently feel threatened by the impact.

But this was not just in the case of classical music but in every genre. Other artists, including Fat Boy Slim, A Guy Called Gerald and Horse Meat Disco, have also expressed concern at the impact of Brexit. These acts performed for the so-called Stop Brexit Sound System during London’s 1-million-strong People’s Vote demonstration in March.

“There’s a lot at stake. Plus we didn’t want it becoming a jingoistic celebration of Brexit in the wake of the referendum,” added Tirago.

Flying the Flag

The EU Flags Team began distributing flags at the Proms in the wake of the Brexit referendum of June 2016. The campaign grew exponentially from just 2,600 flags in 2016 to 10,000 in 2017 and 20,000 in 2018. In London this year, 23,000 EU flags were handed out in Hyde Park and at the entrance of the Royal Albert Hall, where a flash-mob orchestra of classical musicians played EU-themed popular songs, such as “Thank EU for the Music” and “Ode to Joy.”

“It was about musicians supporting musicians to make the point to a wider audience,” added Tirago.” But efforts of the campaign and such underlying intentions led to accusations of hijacking the Proms. Up and down the land, news editors smacked their lips at the pending saga that the action promised to bring. It was a case of Punch and Judy live and direct. Except the only voices captured by much of the British mainstream media was that of the Brexiteers bemoaning the audacity.

But the fizz had gone before the week was even done. No one was hijacked and no Brexiteers were injured in the execution of this campaign. But what had been hijacked, according to one campaigner, “was our democracy, our British sense of humor, our decency, our empathy and our open and tolerant society.”

Meanwhile, on the other side of the fence, Brexiteers were offended by the so-called “takeover.” One Twitter user : “Pushing the EU flag on everyone on the way in, it was an EU rally. Shameful.” Another : “It’s just a pity @bbc decided to politicise it by having so many identical EU Forth Reich flags handed out to prommers.” 

So the BBC, as it appears, was also on the receiving end of criticism. But campaigners have hit back. Tirago was one of the first to speak out: “These are unfair accusations of bias leveled at the BBC. What could they do? Not film any member of the audience at all? There were thousands of people waving EU flags, it was not something camera operators could physically avoid.”

While campaigners handed out EU flags, inside the Royal Albert Hall musicians preparing to perform were conscious of the action taking place outside. In a show of emotion, one violinist emerged to thank in person the campaigners and to tell them that performing musicians appreciated their support.

As the flash-mob orchestra played “Ode to Joy” once again, the performance was observed by another spectator. Sakari Oramo, the Finnish chief conductor of the BBC Symphony Orchestra and Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, was spotted by Arrigo. “I explained the reasons behind what we were doing. He completely agreed and said he would pass on our best wishes to musicians performing at the Proms.” 

One orchestral pianist who did not want to be named said musicians had several “important questions” for British Prime Minister Boris Johnson regarding the consequences of living in a no-deal Brexit world.

Questions were raised about the criteria for the issuance of a work permit, including the process cost and time this will take to generate. They asked whether separate permits are required for every EU country an artist is scheduled to tour in; if reentries are allowed or whole visa applications will need to restart; about the number of days an artist will be allowed to work in an EU country before a new permit is required or if there will be a cap on the number of days a musician can work in the EU; and whether this will be counted as days spent in the country or as days when performances take place.

Differing Opinions

Not all Brexiteers awaiting to enter the Proms agreed with the message behind the campaign. Ruth Smith, a Christian science practitioner, called it a “form of propaganda,” while other Brexiteers such as Fiona and John Truswell, despite their differing opinion, said they supported freedom of speech.

The campaign has led to unavoidable dialogue. As thousands milled about waiting to enter the venue, Brexiteers and “remainers” bantered. Campaigner Rhiannon Taylor spoke of an “engaging conversation” with a Brexiteer who said he “didn’t realize how Brexit could affect his brother’s music career.” She added: “He literally said, ‘My God, what have I done?’ And [he] took an EU flag.”  

As one Brexiteer accepted an EU flag, another “remainer” refused one. Donning a Union Jack turban, risk analyst Jaz Sidhu said he “refused” a flag because “the UK needs to stay together and, of course, it needs to stay in the EU as well.”

But the flags “were not forced onto anyone who didn’t want one,” according to campaigner Aratxu Blanco. This, she added, also included Prime Minister Johnson’s brother, Jo Johnson. Blanco, a gutsy Spanish campaigner from Bilbao who has lived in the UK for 29 years, was seemingly far from shy about making her approach. “He didn’t take a flag. He just looked visibly shocked by the fact I had asked if he would like one.”

Outside the Royal Albert Hall, security guards warned attendees to remove their “Bollocks to Brexit” badges before they joined the line to enter the venue. Inside, guards were also on full alert after a scuffle that ensued when they intercepted activists with a “Brexit Now” banner.

Polarization

Brexit has polarized UK society more so than ever. If there is a litmus test to prove it, then the Proms was the place to witness it. The event became a global stage for disclosing the true depth of division seemingly caused in the UK by Brexit to date.

The plan for EU campaigners was to “promote diversity,” though. There was red, blue and probably purple too. There was also shock, horror, disbelief, anger, amusement, wonder, elation and awe.

Brexit had become the proverbial big elephant in the room. And no one could get away from the conversation, as it politely sat there waiting for someone to make small-talk at the very least. But this was no time to blow one’s own trumpet. The response was viciously engaging enough. It was definitely diverse and it had the dynamics of a very British affair.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Brexit Goes to the Proms appeared first on 51�Թ�.