Monday, July 31, 2006
Farewell, Murray Bookchin
I just saw the news that Murray Bookchin died yesterday morning. I need to run right now, but I'll be writing more about this a little later, with a few words and links to express my appreciation of his work. I do not like making proclamations about which writers or thinkers are "the greatest" and that sort of thing, because I believe that there are probably a number of great writers and thinkers out there who, for any number of reasons, nobody has ever heard of. However, among the anarchist writers/thinkers whom I have had a chance to read in recent years, I have come to realize that Murray Bookchin was probably one of the greatest; he was probably the best among those who've had a chance to publish books and articles prominently within the past few decades.
I recommend a visit to Counterpunch for some nice comments written by Brian Tokar. And, as I said, I'll probably be suggestng a few other sites later...
I recommend a visit to Counterpunch for some nice comments written by Brian Tokar. And, as I said, I'll probably be suggestng a few other sites later...
Saturday, July 29, 2006
It's No Fun Traveling Through New York City When You're In Pain
It should be obvious, but once in a while I have an experience that reminds me of this fact. If you’re walking around in pain, New York City is not the greatest place to be. I found this out again today when I experienced a big flareup of my latest dental infection, right after a visit to Metropolitan Hospital, at the south end of Spanish Harlem. (I could have gone to Lincoln Hospital in my own barrio, but my mother emphatically warned me away from the place, insisting it was a hellhole. Other corners heard from said, well, not quite as much of a hellhole these days, but that's not the highest recommendation either, I don't think.) Anyway, although I didn’t need to spend more than 10 minutes on the subway ride back, that was compounded by about 20 minutes of waiting for the damn subway, and the trip home became extremely excruciating.
In my experience, a dental infection can be more painful than anything. (Although I have experienced one at this level of pain maybe just once before, back in 2000 – the dental infection that caused me to get fired from my last real long-term full-time job). I was once hit by a car, back when I was 20 years old, which flung me some distance into the air and caused me to land on my head, resulting 30+ stitches in my scalp. But as far as pain is concerned, compared to the dental infections, that was really a piece of cake. (Though maybe, I imagine, terminal cancer is more painful - probably another thing I can look forward to when - or if - I get old, if I don't get it before I get old.)
Anyway, especially while I was on the subway platform, I was in horrible pain. This, combined with the heat, put me pretty much on the verge of passing out. While I was grimacing in pain, I noticed a couple of people looking at me, but it was really a wary kind of look that made me think they were deciding whether it would be a good idea to move further away from me.
Or maybe I was reading too much into it – I’m not much of the opinion that people can read faces so well, and I know I certainly can’t. But my impression was, they were thinking to themselves, maybe this is another psycho who's about to go into a seizure or something, so maybe it would best to move away.
I have had similar experiences repeatedly since I was a child. When I was a child of about ten, I had some serious stomach problems, which caused me to squirm around a lot one time on the bus, probably with an expression of pain on my face. I remember an adult across from me on the bus scowling, as though I were some bad or disturbed child whom that person didn’t think should be left alone on the bus. But it was hardly an expression of sympathy, for the poor latchkey kid who spent too much time on the public bus. (Though the school bus years earlier had been worse; on this bus, at least I didn’t get the shit beaten out of me every day.)
Anyway, I was getting into a phase in recent months where I was thinking how much I still do love cities and what a vital resource they are. Probably, it had something to do with all the time I've spent lately walking around and getting turned on by steel bridges and old piano factories. But once in a while, we need to be reminded that the city could use some humanizing. And we will always be reminded of that fact when we walk around in pain.
Of course, I wouldn’t have even needed to ride the subway to go through the ordeal of trying to get seen at the dental clinic at closing time (another awful story, within an awful story) if I had some kind of health coverage. There are some dentists two blocks away that I hear are pretty good, but I can't afford them. You would think that dentists might be affordable in the South Bronx, even with gentrification somewhere on the horizon. But they’re only affordable if you have health insurance or are able to get into the not-so-easy-to-get government-subsidized plans for extremely poor people.
And whenever I walk around in pain, it also reminds me of how awful it is that this country does not have a national/universal health plan. Really, it is simply barbaric, but our "great," "wealthy" nation is, indeed, barbaric in a few ways. It's not as overt a sign of barbarism as sending soldiers to Iraq to commit massacres or sending millions of dollars to the State of Israel so they can commit massacres, but it is still pretty barbaric all the same. And I would bet a lot more citizens of the U.S. die from lack of health coverage than die in wars.
I'll have to do some research on that front – a good start for another pissed off post somewhere down the road...
In my experience, a dental infection can be more painful than anything. (Although I have experienced one at this level of pain maybe just once before, back in 2000 – the dental infection that caused me to get fired from my last real long-term full-time job). I was once hit by a car, back when I was 20 years old, which flung me some distance into the air and caused me to land on my head, resulting 30+ stitches in my scalp. But as far as pain is concerned, compared to the dental infections, that was really a piece of cake. (Though maybe, I imagine, terminal cancer is more painful - probably another thing I can look forward to when - or if - I get old, if I don't get it before I get old.)
Anyway, especially while I was on the subway platform, I was in horrible pain. This, combined with the heat, put me pretty much on the verge of passing out. While I was grimacing in pain, I noticed a couple of people looking at me, but it was really a wary kind of look that made me think they were deciding whether it would be a good idea to move further away from me.
Or maybe I was reading too much into it – I’m not much of the opinion that people can read faces so well, and I know I certainly can’t. But my impression was, they were thinking to themselves, maybe this is another psycho who's about to go into a seizure or something, so maybe it would best to move away.
I have had similar experiences repeatedly since I was a child. When I was a child of about ten, I had some serious stomach problems, which caused me to squirm around a lot one time on the bus, probably with an expression of pain on my face. I remember an adult across from me on the bus scowling, as though I were some bad or disturbed child whom that person didn’t think should be left alone on the bus. But it was hardly an expression of sympathy, for the poor latchkey kid who spent too much time on the public bus. (Though the school bus years earlier had been worse; on this bus, at least I didn’t get the shit beaten out of me every day.)
Anyway, I was getting into a phase in recent months where I was thinking how much I still do love cities and what a vital resource they are. Probably, it had something to do with all the time I've spent lately walking around and getting turned on by steel bridges and old piano factories. But once in a while, we need to be reminded that the city could use some humanizing. And we will always be reminded of that fact when we walk around in pain.
Of course, I wouldn’t have even needed to ride the subway to go through the ordeal of trying to get seen at the dental clinic at closing time (another awful story, within an awful story) if I had some kind of health coverage. There are some dentists two blocks away that I hear are pretty good, but I can't afford them. You would think that dentists might be affordable in the South Bronx, even with gentrification somewhere on the horizon. But they’re only affordable if you have health insurance or are able to get into the not-so-easy-to-get government-subsidized plans for extremely poor people.
And whenever I walk around in pain, it also reminds me of how awful it is that this country does not have a national/universal health plan. Really, it is simply barbaric, but our "great," "wealthy" nation is, indeed, barbaric in a few ways. It's not as overt a sign of barbarism as sending soldiers to Iraq to commit massacres or sending millions of dollars to the State of Israel so they can commit massacres, but it is still pretty barbaric all the same. And I would bet a lot more citizens of the U.S. die from lack of health coverage than die in wars.
I'll have to do some research on that front – a good start for another pissed off post somewhere down the road...
Sunday, July 23, 2006
The Real Sides of the Conflict in the Middle East
The three sources that I’m quoting below are very different in many ways, but they all seem to be echoing the same general idea, one which I hope will spread a little more over the Internet and well beyond it. That idea, to me, amounts to a truthful perspective on the conflict in the Middle East (not so easy to find) and points to the only effective way of opposing or even stopping these atrocities.
From Turn the World Upside Down:
...[T]he two sides in the conflict raging now in Palestine, Israel and Lebanon are:
#1. Ordinary people of all religions and ethnic groups in Palestine/ Israel/ Lebanon who want to live in peace with one another as equals (the opposite of Zionism's Jewish privilege and apartheid). This is the vast majority of people of all ethnic and religious persuasions.
#2. Those who are, or want to be, ruling upper classes, who want inequality, and who want to control ordinary people by setting them against each other along religious/ racial/ ethnic lines as mutual mortal enemies.
From Maxims and Reflections:
People will throw off this shit, nationalities and religions and all the other stickers we put on each other's kids saying it's okay to kill them, and we'll realize that there's only one enemy, the killers. The killers secure our allegiance by pretending to be enemies to each other. But the killers are playing on one team and we are playing on the other and we are losing.
And from the International Communist Current:
If all of capitalism’s peace plans are doomed to fail, what alternative is there to the imperialist disorder that dooms them? Certainly not the various nationalist/religious gangs which claim to be "resisting" imperialism in Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan - Hamas, the PLO, Hizbollah, al Qaida… They too are entirely caught up in the logic of imperialism, whether striking out on their own or lining up directly with existing capitalist states. Their aims - whether the establishment of new national states or the dream of a pan-Middle East Islamic Caliphate - can only come about through imperialist war; and their methods - which always involve the indiscriminate massacre of the civilian population - are precisely those of the states they claim to be opposing.
The only opposition to imperialism is the resistance of the working class against exploitation, because this alone can grow into an open struggle [against] the capitalist system, a struggle to replace this dying system of profit and war with a society geared towards human need. Because the exploited everywhere have the same interests, the class struggle is international and has no interest in allying with one state against another. Its methods are directly opposed to the aggravation of hatred between ethnic or national groups, because it needs to rally together the proletarians of all nations in a common fight against capital and the state.
From Turn the World Upside Down:
...[T]he two sides in the conflict raging now in Palestine, Israel and Lebanon are:
#1. Ordinary people of all religions and ethnic groups in Palestine/ Israel/ Lebanon who want to live in peace with one another as equals (the opposite of Zionism's Jewish privilege and apartheid). This is the vast majority of people of all ethnic and religious persuasions.
#2. Those who are, or want to be, ruling upper classes, who want inequality, and who want to control ordinary people by setting them against each other along religious/ racial/ ethnic lines as mutual mortal enemies.
From Maxims and Reflections:
People will throw off this shit, nationalities and religions and all the other stickers we put on each other's kids saying it's okay to kill them, and we'll realize that there's only one enemy, the killers. The killers secure our allegiance by pretending to be enemies to each other. But the killers are playing on one team and we are playing on the other and we are losing.
And from the International Communist Current:
If all of capitalism’s peace plans are doomed to fail, what alternative is there to the imperialist disorder that dooms them? Certainly not the various nationalist/religious gangs which claim to be "resisting" imperialism in Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan - Hamas, the PLO, Hizbollah, al Qaida… They too are entirely caught up in the logic of imperialism, whether striking out on their own or lining up directly with existing capitalist states. Their aims - whether the establishment of new national states or the dream of a pan-Middle East Islamic Caliphate - can only come about through imperialist war; and their methods - which always involve the indiscriminate massacre of the civilian population - are precisely those of the states they claim to be opposing.
The only opposition to imperialism is the resistance of the working class against exploitation, because this alone can grow into an open struggle [against] the capitalist system, a struggle to replace this dying system of profit and war with a society geared towards human need. Because the exploited everywhere have the same interests, the class struggle is international and has no interest in allying with one state against another. Its methods are directly opposed to the aggravation of hatred between ethnic or national groups, because it needs to rally together the proletarians of all nations in a common fight against capital and the state.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
70th Anniversary of the Spanish Revolution
Happy anniversary of the Spanish Revoluton. One might say happy anniversary of the Spanish Civil War. But that wouldn't sound too happy. The thing worth celebrating on the 18th (or 19th) of July was the brief revolution of the anarchists. Despite the bad mistakes, betrayals, and horrific defeats that would ultimately characterize the Spanish Civil War, some amazing things happened at first. And, as many of us know, this was a great moment for the anarchists...
Andrew Flood wrote a nice description of the moment it started (from his 60th Anniversary page):
Fortunately in Spain the anarchists were strong in numbers and already had a limited quantity of arms and previous experience of rebellion. So on the night of the 18th/19th when the army was taking up position and the left was urging people to stay at home and rely on the government; the CNT was declaring a general strike, sending militants out to mount raids for arms (from ships in Barcelona harbour) and asking activists to gather at its centres with whatever weapons they had to hand.
This meant that as the rebelling troops took up position on the morning of the 19th instead of the unarmed and passive population they had expected to face they found the working class districts barricaded off and tens of thousands of workers gathered to resist them. Furious street fighting waged in Barcelona where the anarchists were aided by the Assault Guards and later the Civil Guards. Army strong points were gradually over-whelmed by waves of poorly armed but heroic workers, with the balance shifting decisively in favour of the workers when an artillery column was captured and its guns brought to bear on the army strong points. The anarchists suffered many casualties, including leading militants like Francisco Ascaso, but at the end of 36 hours the workers controlled Barcelona.
...
Alongside the fighting a social revolution was breaking out. Defeating the fascist uprising put the workers in control of the streets and this control rapidly expanded to include their workplaces. This revolution flowed from below and was carried through to varying extents in different regions and in different industries. The first organisations to spring up were the Supply Committees, set up in each of the working class districts. These opened up communal restaurants, serving food expropriated from local shops. Later they obtained supplies and made exchanges by sending teams to the market gardens and local villages. Where there were shortages, a rationing system was introduced and some foods reserved for those with special needs.
...
In the countryside the revolution was more far reaching. The absolute poverty and harsh oppression most peasants suffered, along with years of anarchist propaganda and the practical examples of land take-overs and the founding of short lived independent communes in previous years, resulted in a massive social explosion. In many areas money was abolished within hours of the revolution and mass meetings called to collectivise the land. The extent of the revolution varied from region to region but only a minority chose not to join the collectives (and many of these later changed their minds). By the end of the first couple of weeks of the revolution hundreds of villages were collectivised and arranging distribution of food for the front and the cities.
I found that article through a link on the excellent page, Anarchism in the Spanish Revolution of 1936 - Spanish Civil War.
This page also had a link to a good article by Murray Bookchin commemorating the 50th Anniversary. Curiously, Murray makes some of his strongest points here quoting a BBC documentary:
The wave of collectivizations that swept over Spain in the summer and autumn of 1936 has been described in a recent BBC-Granada documentary as "the greatest experiment in workers' self-management Western Europe has ever seen," a revolution more far-reaching than any which occurred in Russia during 1917-21 and the years before and after it. In anarchist industrial areas like Catalonia, an estimated three-quarters of the economy was placed under workers' control, as it was in anarchist rural areas like Aragon. The figure tapers downward where the UGT shared power with the CNT or else predominated: 50 percent in anarchist and socialist Valencia, and 30 percent in socialist and liberal Madrid. In the more thoroughly anarchist areas, particularly among the agrarian collectives, money was eliminated and the material means of life were allocated strictly according to need rather than work, following the traditional precepts of a libertarian communist society. As the BBC-Granada television documentary puts it: "The ancient dream of a collective society without profit or property was made reality in the villages of Aragon.... All forms of production were owned by the community, run by their workers."
It's appalling how much these incredible social accomplishments are completely omitted from official history, in both articles and books. I've already seen a couple of articles giving the standard line that this war was just a prelude to World War II. Yet, as Bookchin points out in the above article:
It is not a myth but a sheer lie - the cretinous perversion of history by its makers in the academy - to depict the Spanish Civil War as a mere prelude to World War II, an alleged conflict between "democracy and fascism." Not even World War II deserves the honor of this ideological characterization. Spain was seized by more than a civil war: it was in the throes of a profound social revolution.
There's also a good Spanish Civil War page over at the Anarchist Archives. I recommend reading a bunch of this material, too, in order to get a good picture of why this was a moment so well worth remembering.
Andrew Flood wrote a nice description of the moment it started (from his 60th Anniversary page):
Fortunately in Spain the anarchists were strong in numbers and already had a limited quantity of arms and previous experience of rebellion. So on the night of the 18th/19th when the army was taking up position and the left was urging people to stay at home and rely on the government; the CNT was declaring a general strike, sending militants out to mount raids for arms (from ships in Barcelona harbour) and asking activists to gather at its centres with whatever weapons they had to hand.
This meant that as the rebelling troops took up position on the morning of the 19th instead of the unarmed and passive population they had expected to face they found the working class districts barricaded off and tens of thousands of workers gathered to resist them. Furious street fighting waged in Barcelona where the anarchists were aided by the Assault Guards and later the Civil Guards. Army strong points were gradually over-whelmed by waves of poorly armed but heroic workers, with the balance shifting decisively in favour of the workers when an artillery column was captured and its guns brought to bear on the army strong points. The anarchists suffered many casualties, including leading militants like Francisco Ascaso, but at the end of 36 hours the workers controlled Barcelona.
...
Alongside the fighting a social revolution was breaking out. Defeating the fascist uprising put the workers in control of the streets and this control rapidly expanded to include their workplaces. This revolution flowed from below and was carried through to varying extents in different regions and in different industries. The first organisations to spring up were the Supply Committees, set up in each of the working class districts. These opened up communal restaurants, serving food expropriated from local shops. Later they obtained supplies and made exchanges by sending teams to the market gardens and local villages. Where there were shortages, a rationing system was introduced and some foods reserved for those with special needs.
...
In the countryside the revolution was more far reaching. The absolute poverty and harsh oppression most peasants suffered, along with years of anarchist propaganda and the practical examples of land take-overs and the founding of short lived independent communes in previous years, resulted in a massive social explosion. In many areas money was abolished within hours of the revolution and mass meetings called to collectivise the land. The extent of the revolution varied from region to region but only a minority chose not to join the collectives (and many of these later changed their minds). By the end of the first couple of weeks of the revolution hundreds of villages were collectivised and arranging distribution of food for the front and the cities.
I found that article through a link on the excellent page, Anarchism in the Spanish Revolution of 1936 - Spanish Civil War.
This page also had a link to a good article by Murray Bookchin commemorating the 50th Anniversary. Curiously, Murray makes some of his strongest points here quoting a BBC documentary:
The wave of collectivizations that swept over Spain in the summer and autumn of 1936 has been described in a recent BBC-Granada documentary as "the greatest experiment in workers' self-management Western Europe has ever seen," a revolution more far-reaching than any which occurred in Russia during 1917-21 and the years before and after it. In anarchist industrial areas like Catalonia, an estimated three-quarters of the economy was placed under workers' control, as it was in anarchist rural areas like Aragon. The figure tapers downward where the UGT shared power with the CNT or else predominated: 50 percent in anarchist and socialist Valencia, and 30 percent in socialist and liberal Madrid. In the more thoroughly anarchist areas, particularly among the agrarian collectives, money was eliminated and the material means of life were allocated strictly according to need rather than work, following the traditional precepts of a libertarian communist society. As the BBC-Granada television documentary puts it: "The ancient dream of a collective society without profit or property was made reality in the villages of Aragon.... All forms of production were owned by the community, run by their workers."
It's appalling how much these incredible social accomplishments are completely omitted from official history, in both articles and books. I've already seen a couple of articles giving the standard line that this war was just a prelude to World War II. Yet, as Bookchin points out in the above article:
It is not a myth but a sheer lie - the cretinous perversion of history by its makers in the academy - to depict the Spanish Civil War as a mere prelude to World War II, an alleged conflict between "democracy and fascism." Not even World War II deserves the honor of this ideological characterization. Spain was seized by more than a civil war: it was in the throes of a profound social revolution.
There's also a good Spanish Civil War page over at the Anarchist Archives. I recommend reading a bunch of this material, too, in order to get a good picture of why this was a moment so well worth remembering.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Music and Related Stuff on My Mind This Week
Kendra Smith - I've been listening once again to Five Ways of Disappearing, a haunting album from 1995... It's been called goth, folk-rock, psychedelia... On the one hand, it's pretty contemporary sounding, but it's also got a wonderfully archaic quality to it, probably due to the pump organ. It's also got a great cover of Richard and Mimi [Baez] Farina's song, "The Bold Marauder" (which seems as relevant today as ever, if you notice all the war mongering in this world at the moment).
Speaking of folk singers, thanks to Wood's Lot (of course) for reminding us that July 14 was the birthday of Woody Guthrie. No, I didn't actually listen to Woody Guthrie yesterday - just wasn't in the mood for that kind of music, exactly. But I looked at some quotes and lyrics and appreciated them as much as ever. If only we had more people in music today with the social awareness of Woody Guthrie. And if only some of that music could fulfill the promise written on his guitar, "This machine kills fascists."
Chumbawamba and Negativland - The ABCs of Anarchism - Well, Chumbawamba's politics may be great, but I don't have the easiest time listening to most of their albums these days. (Their music, as far as I'm concerned, has been good and bad, hit and miss, and my roommate back in Staten Island played them to death in order to remind himself and everyone around him that he was an anarchist.) But, from my point of view, Chumbawamba benefits a lot from being chopped and scrambled by Negativland. As far as I'm concerned, this collaboration was Chumbawamba's best album.
Rx covering Syd Barret's "Scarecrow" - Syd Barret died this past week, so I popped this song on my CD player as a tribute. I like the Barret-era Pink Floyd all right (it was better than most Pink Floyd), but I tend to prefer it when other musicians do things that are influenced by Syd Barrett (see my mention of Swell Maps earlier) or do their own unique covers of his material. And this cover, from a fairly obscure industrial album called Bedside Toxicology (by a duo comprised of Ogre, from Skinny Puppy, and Martin Atkins, from PiL, Pigface, etc.), is compelling. It's an almost-folk (but not really), acoustic version, much more minimal than the psychedelic original, but at the same time, much darker-sounding. It makes "Scarecrow" sound more like a nice gothic horror story, as opposed to a drug trip.
Speaking of folk singers, thanks to Wood's Lot (of course) for reminding us that July 14 was the birthday of Woody Guthrie. No, I didn't actually listen to Woody Guthrie yesterday - just wasn't in the mood for that kind of music, exactly. But I looked at some quotes and lyrics and appreciated them as much as ever. If only we had more people in music today with the social awareness of Woody Guthrie. And if only some of that music could fulfill the promise written on his guitar, "This machine kills fascists."
Chumbawamba and Negativland - The ABCs of Anarchism - Well, Chumbawamba's politics may be great, but I don't have the easiest time listening to most of their albums these days. (Their music, as far as I'm concerned, has been good and bad, hit and miss, and my roommate back in Staten Island played them to death in order to remind himself and everyone around him that he was an anarchist.) But, from my point of view, Chumbawamba benefits a lot from being chopped and scrambled by Negativland. As far as I'm concerned, this collaboration was Chumbawamba's best album.
Rx covering Syd Barret's "Scarecrow" - Syd Barret died this past week, so I popped this song on my CD player as a tribute. I like the Barret-era Pink Floyd all right (it was better than most Pink Floyd), but I tend to prefer it when other musicians do things that are influenced by Syd Barrett (see my mention of Swell Maps earlier) or do their own unique covers of his material. And this cover, from a fairly obscure industrial album called Bedside Toxicology (by a duo comprised of Ogre, from Skinny Puppy, and Martin Atkins, from PiL, Pigface, etc.), is compelling. It's an almost-folk (but not really), acoustic version, much more minimal than the psychedelic original, but at the same time, much darker-sounding. It makes "Scarecrow" sound more like a nice gothic horror story, as opposed to a drug trip.
Monday, July 10, 2006
A Place Where You Can Find Good Photos of The Bronx
No, I'm not going to post any here, because I don't post photos here (at least not yet). But I wanted to recommend a very good page for photos of The Bronx, from a guy named Ixtayul. I especially appreciate some of his photos from my present neighborhood, such as the shots of the Third Avenue Bridge. I live right off the Willis Avenue Bridge, but the Third Avenue Bridge is just a few blocks west, and the area between the two bridges is fast becoming one of my favorite industrial walking grounds.
My regular blog readers (all five or ten of them?) should also note that the photo set includes pictures of the Clocktower Building (which I mentioned sometime ago), the one really chic - but still very interesting - building around here. And there's a picture of the silly History Channel sign, which I see on my way to or from the Dunkin Donuts where I sometimes go to get fixes of sugar and caffeine.
There are several other photo series that Ixtayul has of my neighborhood, which he refers to as pictures of "Port Morris." I suppose some clarification is in order here... I live at the southern end of Mott Haven, which may include Port Morris or end just above it, depending on whom you ask. Port Morris is a tiny strip of land that can't be more than about three blocks wide for the most part (though maybe a little wider all the way east), going from Bruckner Boulevard to the water. Port Morris is actually the strip of land that includes the "Art and Antiques District," and it's the place where the artists, developers and Yuppies have set their sights (somewhat) right now.
I live on 136th Street, between Willis Avenue and Brown Place (which maybe I shouldn't say, just in case someone reading this blog wants to track me down, but, oh well, I said it). Where I live, the closest walk to Bruckner Boulevard is three blocks due south - it's basically 133rd Street - and the southernmost numbered street in The Bronx, at least on the map that I'm looking at, is 132nd. But Bruckner turns a little north all the way east, so there are a few more numbered streets at the east end, where maybe Port Morris fills out a little...
At the north end of Mott Haven, we have the intense shopping district known as The Hub. Lots of retail business gets done here, but it may take a bit longer for money-making gentrifying types to move in (and it's more likely that things will get a little uncertain before that can happen, once the whole economy crashes). Meanwhile, I confess, I wish I had a little more money so I could get more things at all those wonderful junk stores...
Ixtayul also has a good photo essay on Casa del Sol. This was written at the time of the fire in 2004, and while mentioning that, he links to the anarchist site, A-Infos. Considering that, maybe it's not so strange for the Commie Curmudgeon to link to him...
My regular blog readers (all five or ten of them?) should also note that the photo set includes pictures of the Clocktower Building (which I mentioned sometime ago), the one really chic - but still very interesting - building around here. And there's a picture of the silly History Channel sign, which I see on my way to or from the Dunkin Donuts where I sometimes go to get fixes of sugar and caffeine.
There are several other photo series that Ixtayul has of my neighborhood, which he refers to as pictures of "Port Morris." I suppose some clarification is in order here... I live at the southern end of Mott Haven, which may include Port Morris or end just above it, depending on whom you ask. Port Morris is a tiny strip of land that can't be more than about three blocks wide for the most part (though maybe a little wider all the way east), going from Bruckner Boulevard to the water. Port Morris is actually the strip of land that includes the "Art and Antiques District," and it's the place where the artists, developers and Yuppies have set their sights (somewhat) right now.
I live on 136th Street, between Willis Avenue and Brown Place (which maybe I shouldn't say, just in case someone reading this blog wants to track me down, but, oh well, I said it). Where I live, the closest walk to Bruckner Boulevard is three blocks due south - it's basically 133rd Street - and the southernmost numbered street in The Bronx, at least on the map that I'm looking at, is 132nd. But Bruckner turns a little north all the way east, so there are a few more numbered streets at the east end, where maybe Port Morris fills out a little...
At the north end of Mott Haven, we have the intense shopping district known as The Hub. Lots of retail business gets done here, but it may take a bit longer for money-making gentrifying types to move in (and it's more likely that things will get a little uncertain before that can happen, once the whole economy crashes). Meanwhile, I confess, I wish I had a little more money so I could get more things at all those wonderful junk stores...
Ixtayul also has a good photo essay on Casa del Sol. This was written at the time of the fire in 2004, and while mentioning that, he links to the anarchist site, A-Infos. Considering that, maybe it's not so strange for the Commie Curmudgeon to link to him...
Saturday, July 08, 2006
Revisiting the Definition of "Generation X"
Over at Infoshop, there have been articles and links to articles and, especially, comments on those articles, that inaccurately represented the meaning of the term "Generation X." I've written a few things in response but decided to get rid of most of that. However, I thought it might be worthwhile to post the following summary, a slighlty edited version of a comment that I posted under the most recent of those articles at Infoshop...
"Generation X" was popularized first in a novel by Douglas Coupland in 1991, then in a nonfiction book called 13th Gen. The term came from the idea that people born in this particular age period (roughly 1960 to 1981) had to deal with the mess that was left in the wake of the '60s generation, which included declining expectations all around, as well as the big shadow cast by the prior generation, which loved to leave the world with the feeling that they were the last generation that mattered (although most of the well-publicized aspirations of the '60s generation had proved a failure, because so many people had either sold out or bottomed out (depending on which class they were in or wound up in)).
The "X" in "Generation X" probably referred to the fact that this generation was left kind of blank in the wake of the hoopla over the '60s gen. In that way, the term is also reminiscent of Richard Hell's Blank Generation, which was really the first true punk rock anthem. Of course, it also reminds one of the British pop-punk band Generation X. (Though curiously, all of these rock performers are several years older than Generation X.) In both cases, and in much of the punk rock movement - the first cultural/musical movement of Generation X - the focus was on how to create a meaningful, effective, or at the very least visible/audible youth movement when the loudest and possibly most numerous group of "rebellious" youths in modern history had packed their bags and left, taking their whole over-inflated promise of a new future with them.
Actually, the end of the '60s probably also marked the end of so much emphasis on youth being the vanguard of rebellion or revolution (although there seemed to be some revival of this notion in the late '90s within the anarcho and anti-glob protest crowds). Probably, people should have given up trying to lend any significance to the idea of a "new generation" before all the vultures of the advertising industry swooped down (which didn't take very long).
RS (born October 1961)
---------------------
P.S. There is a very good and accurate description of Generation X over at Wikipedia. In fact, it influenced my own summary quite a bit, now that I think about it, to a point bordering on plagiarism. But it really did hit the nail on the head...
"Generation X" was popularized first in a novel by Douglas Coupland in 1991, then in a nonfiction book called 13th Gen. The term came from the idea that people born in this particular age period (roughly 1960 to 1981) had to deal with the mess that was left in the wake of the '60s generation, which included declining expectations all around, as well as the big shadow cast by the prior generation, which loved to leave the world with the feeling that they were the last generation that mattered (although most of the well-publicized aspirations of the '60s generation had proved a failure, because so many people had either sold out or bottomed out (depending on which class they were in or wound up in)).
The "X" in "Generation X" probably referred to the fact that this generation was left kind of blank in the wake of the hoopla over the '60s gen. In that way, the term is also reminiscent of Richard Hell's Blank Generation, which was really the first true punk rock anthem. Of course, it also reminds one of the British pop-punk band Generation X. (Though curiously, all of these rock performers are several years older than Generation X.) In both cases, and in much of the punk rock movement - the first cultural/musical movement of Generation X - the focus was on how to create a meaningful, effective, or at the very least visible/audible youth movement when the loudest and possibly most numerous group of "rebellious" youths in modern history had packed their bags and left, taking their whole over-inflated promise of a new future with them.
Actually, the end of the '60s probably also marked the end of so much emphasis on youth being the vanguard of rebellion or revolution (although there seemed to be some revival of this notion in the late '90s within the anarcho and anti-glob protest crowds). Probably, people should have given up trying to lend any significance to the idea of a "new generation" before all the vultures of the advertising industry swooped down (which didn't take very long).
RS (born October 1961)
---------------------
P.S. There is a very good and accurate description of Generation X over at Wikipedia. In fact, it influenced my own summary quite a bit, now that I think about it, to a point bordering on plagiarism. But it really did hit the nail on the head...
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
Going to Try to Have a Quiet Day at Home, Reading Murray Bookchin
Well, it is July 4, so it's unlikely I'm going to get work today. There's a chance that I might go somewhere, but that seems more and more unlikely too. I thought I'd post something really appropriate to the blog, but the "holiday" itself just bores me, and other people already posted the most appropriate Emma Goldman stuff. (Actually, I had started to post her scathing thing about patriotism - but the article I just mentioned is even more appropriate.)
I really don't feel like doing a lot of anything right now, because I'm just tired. I did gruelling proofreading work on the overnight shifts the nights of July 1 and 2. I was slaving away non-stop, because work is getting harder for me to get these days and I need to be called back for more. I need to get work, so they've got me, at least for now...
So, anyway, I think I will try to spend a quiet day at home, reading (for content - good content - not for typos in charts). A couple of times during the day, I'll have to go outside, so I only hope that there isn't too much firecracker mania today. The Bronx used to be crazy that way; the kids would start blowing up their little bombs as early as March, with a constant build-up to the Fourth of July. Things haven't been that way in recent years. I've heard only two firecrackers so far, and it's already the morning of the Fourth. But I shouldn't speak too soon. I'm sure the night of the Fourth will be intense, and it won't be a time that I want to go outside, because I do not like firecrackers. In fact, I hate those fucking things - always have and always will. And I'm not so thrilled by genuine fireworks either.
I have to agree with Guerillas in the Midst on the statement, "Isn't it odd that people celebrate their independence by igniting things that sound like bombs and machine guns?" (If you read the rest of the post, you might also find that interesting. And the post before that is interesting too, though I have a few problems with it - which is why I wrote a very long comment (which I kind of rushed without editing, so it's a bit repetitive, but I hope I made my points). I don't know if I always agree with these people, but there are enough points of agreement, and this blog often makes me think and sometimes makes me laugh.)
But as I was saying... If I don't go anywhere, I'm just going to sit at home and read a good book. A couple of weeks ago, when I was badly in need of reading material for the subway, I stopped at St. Marks Bookstore and picked up a copy of Murray Bookchin's The Ecology of Freedom. It's strange because, while I'd read quite a few of Bookchin's other books, I'd never gotten to this one, which is considered one of his defining works. But now I'm glad that I finally did get to it, because I'm finding it fascinating. As I've said in a few places, Bookchin has become the only living anarchist theorist whose work I actually find satisfying as theory. It's funny, because some years ago, I got in trouble with an elder anarchist for allegedly insulting Bookchin, for calling him a "cranky fart." My comment should not have been perceived as such an insult, because I never considered being a cranky fart to be so bad, and I always knew that I'd become one myself. But, for those who do perceive this as insult, I have to ask, how else would you characterize Bookchin's many comments about anarchists who don't exactly share his views? Nonetheless, when he gets down to actually writing theory (and to writing so much other stuff that would fit into various disciplines, from history to natural science to anthropology), it becomes a lot more difficult to criticize him. In fact, right now, I feel like praising him even more than I have already: Among the anarchist writers whose works are being published, he is the only one I feel like reading right now.
So, if I don't end up going anywhere today, I'm going to stay in my room and curl up with Murray Bookchin - that is, with a good Murray Bookchin book.
I really don't feel like doing a lot of anything right now, because I'm just tired. I did gruelling proofreading work on the overnight shifts the nights of July 1 and 2. I was slaving away non-stop, because work is getting harder for me to get these days and I need to be called back for more. I need to get work, so they've got me, at least for now...
So, anyway, I think I will try to spend a quiet day at home, reading (for content - good content - not for typos in charts). A couple of times during the day, I'll have to go outside, so I only hope that there isn't too much firecracker mania today. The Bronx used to be crazy that way; the kids would start blowing up their little bombs as early as March, with a constant build-up to the Fourth of July. Things haven't been that way in recent years. I've heard only two firecrackers so far, and it's already the morning of the Fourth. But I shouldn't speak too soon. I'm sure the night of the Fourth will be intense, and it won't be a time that I want to go outside, because I do not like firecrackers. In fact, I hate those fucking things - always have and always will. And I'm not so thrilled by genuine fireworks either.
I have to agree with Guerillas in the Midst on the statement, "Isn't it odd that people celebrate their independence by igniting things that sound like bombs and machine guns?" (If you read the rest of the post, you might also find that interesting. And the post before that is interesting too, though I have a few problems with it - which is why I wrote a very long comment (which I kind of rushed without editing, so it's a bit repetitive, but I hope I made my points). I don't know if I always agree with these people, but there are enough points of agreement, and this blog often makes me think and sometimes makes me laugh.)
But as I was saying... If I don't go anywhere, I'm just going to sit at home and read a good book. A couple of weeks ago, when I was badly in need of reading material for the subway, I stopped at St. Marks Bookstore and picked up a copy of Murray Bookchin's The Ecology of Freedom. It's strange because, while I'd read quite a few of Bookchin's other books, I'd never gotten to this one, which is considered one of his defining works. But now I'm glad that I finally did get to it, because I'm finding it fascinating. As I've said in a few places, Bookchin has become the only living anarchist theorist whose work I actually find satisfying as theory. It's funny, because some years ago, I got in trouble with an elder anarchist for allegedly insulting Bookchin, for calling him a "cranky fart." My comment should not have been perceived as such an insult, because I never considered being a cranky fart to be so bad, and I always knew that I'd become one myself. But, for those who do perceive this as insult, I have to ask, how else would you characterize Bookchin's many comments about anarchists who don't exactly share his views? Nonetheless, when he gets down to actually writing theory (and to writing so much other stuff that would fit into various disciplines, from history to natural science to anthropology), it becomes a lot more difficult to criticize him. In fact, right now, I feel like praising him even more than I have already: Among the anarchist writers whose works are being published, he is the only one I feel like reading right now.
So, if I don't end up going anywhere today, I'm going to stay in my room and curl up with Murray Bookchin - that is, with a good Murray Bookchin book.
