Hi everyone!
It's been four years since Queen Madge's last album release--2008's "Hard Candy," an album I enjoyed at the time but one that hasn't aged overly well and one that certainly will never be remembered for being one of her best albums. Fast-forward to 2012. After much hype and speculation in the weeks since Madonna's epic Super Bowl performance last February, "MDNA" finally released today. Having listened to it now several times, I am very happy to report that the Queen of Pop is back. Indisputably so. Epically so. In fact, "MDNA" is easily her best album not only since 1997's "Ray of Light" but (I'm going out on a limb here) since 1989's "Like a Prayer." Yes, this is the Queen of Pop's best album in 22 years.
What made "Like a Prayer" stand out at the time of its original release was the fact that it was the first album Madonna released that could truly be called confessional. While the title song "Like a Prayer" (which will probably always be remembered as one of history's best pop songs) and other hits like "Express Yourself," "Cherish,""Oh Father," and "Keep It Together" solidified Madonna's dominance on the world's pop charts, the album's best moments were its quieter, more introspective tracks: "Til Death Do Us Part," "Promise to Try," and the slightly psychedelic Prince duet "Love Song." These songs dealt with pain: the pain of divorce (from Sean Penn) and the pain of losing her mother at such a young age. After the bubble gum pop of "Like a Virgin" and "True Blue," "Like a Prayer" gave the world a more sensitive side of Madonna that was often lost amidst her rise to superstardom, the controversy, and her turbulent short-lived marriage to Sean Penn.
In the years since 1989, Madonna has released a slew of albums--some iconic (1992's "Erotica" and 1997's "Ray of Light" leap to mind), some decent but not great (1994's "Bedtime Stories," 2000's "Music" and 2005's "Confessions on a Dance Floor) and others that could have been great but were too inconsistent to truly work (2003's "American Life" and 2008's "Hard Candy.")
"MDNA" is one of the iconic albums. Similar to "Like a Prayer," many of the tracks here again deal with the subject of divorce--this time from British director Guy Ritchie--loss, and spirituality. The album runs the gamut from revved-up dance-floor ecstasy (with tracks like "I'm Addicted," (a techno barn-burner) "Girl Gone Wild," "Some Girls" and a really f**cked up track called "Gang Bang" whose culminating moment comes when Madonna screams "Drive, Bitch, and while you're at it Die, Bitch over and over and over..." You just have to hear it ) to beautifully poignant confessional ballads ("Masterpiece," "Best Friend," "Falling Free," and "I F**ked Up") to tracks that fall somewhere between the two (the heartbreaking and wistful "Love Spent" comes immediately to mind, a song that makes me want to dance while crying my eyes out...go figure, but it works beautifully.)
Added to this already compelling but rather volatile mix is the up-tempo pop confection "Turn Up the Radio" which I've already dubbed my 2012 summer anthem, "I'm a Sinner" (which flips "Like a Prayer" on its ass while transporting us back to some LSD-laced late-1960s psychedelic magic bus ride), "I Don't Give A" which has Madonna flipping Guy Ritchie the bird while pseudo-rapping with Nicky Minaj only to end with an epic electrified choral bit that channels Queen, and "Superstar" a catchy little romp that goes nowhere but is still kind of fun. Even the more-or-less throwaway tracks "Beautiful Killer," "B-Day Song," and the album's first single "Gimme All Your Luvin'" have their appeal.
If you're already a Madonna fan, "MDNA" is the comeback album you've been waiting for. For those of you on the fence or indifferent, "MDNA" is the Madonna album you want in your collection. It's hypnotic, schizophrenic, and really quite extraordinary. I can't wait to see what she does with these tracks in her tour this summer.
Download: "Gang Bang," "I'm Addicted," "Turn Up the Radio," "Love Spent," and "I'm a Sinner."
Ciao.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Kony 2012
Hi everyone!
In the high school sophomore class I tutor in every day, we watched this video that raises awareness about Joseph Kony, the Ugandan rebel leader who, for the past 26 years, has kidnapped thousands of children for the Lord's Resistance Army. I've been a little slow on the uptake about this video, having heard about it for the past several weeks but never actually seeing it until today. It is a powerful film.
The film was made by Invisible Children, an organization created to bring attention to the plight of thousands of African children who are essentially enslaved and brainwashed to fight on behalf of the rebel cause. The Kony 2012 campaign was designed to put pressure on world leaders to prioritize the capture of Joseph Kony this year and put an end to his insidious methods. According to the film, Joseph Kony is number one on the ICC's (International Criminal Court) list of international war criminals. But for various reasons--mostly having to do with the fact that the U.S. doesn't have any purported defense or natural resource interests in Africa--Kony has been able to avoid capture and arrest. This film and this campaign--which has employed both international entertainers and policy-makers on its behalf--seeks to change this.
I have included the film here. Please watch it and pass it on to everyone you know. This is an important cause and one that needs grass roots support.
Ciao.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Two Film Reviews: Incendies and Saving Face
Hi everyone!
I wanted to take a few minutes today to talk a little bit about two amazing films I saw this week, both of which present insight into the Middle East in ways that we don't necessarily get from reading about it online or in our newspapers.
The first is "Incendies" a French-Canadian film from 2010 that was nominated for a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar last year and a BAFTA this year. Directed by acclaimed French-Canadian director Denis Villeneuve, "Incendies" tells the story of two twins--Simon and Jeanne Marwan--who travel to Lebanon at their recently deceased mother's behest to find out the truth about their father and a long-lost brother. In so doing, they discover more than either could ever have bargained for about their mother's secret past during the Lebanese Civil War that engulfed the country from 1975-1990, originally pitting Lebanese Christians against Muslims before the Israeli invasion.
The film, adapted from a play by Wajdi Mouawad, is a jigsaw puzzle that shifts between past and present, showing us brutal glimpses of a prolonged war that many of us in the West have forgotten but whose wounds remain and very much influence politics and culture in the Arab World today. It might help to read up on the war prior to seeing the film as without at least some background knowledge the politics of the conflict may seem a little murky. Nonetheless, "Incendies" is necessary viewing for anyone interested in learning about modern Lebanese history and why the country is such a powder keg of regional and religious tension, though technically it has been at peace since the early 1990s. One criticism I do have is that because the film frequently juxtaposes between 2009 and the mid-to-late 70s without any real transition--not to mention the fact that the actresses playing Nawal, the mother (Lubna Azabal), and the daughter Jeanne (Melissa Desormeaux-Poulin) bear an uncanny resemblance to each other--the non-linear narrative style takes a bit of getting used to. And while the climactic revelation is shocking and works from a narrative and character perspective, the logistics of it didn't quite sit with me. Regardless, "Incendies" is a powerful statement about the ties that bind and how sectarian conflict continues to destroy lives and families long after the final shots have been fired.
The second film, "Saving Face" just won the Oscar for Best Documentary Short Film and was given its broadcast premiere this evening on HBO. In only 40 minutes, "Saving Face" packs a powerful punch as it presents the stories of two brave but tragic Pakistani women --Zakia and Rukhsana--who have been horrendously disfigured by acid attacks inflicted upon them by their husbands. Zakia and Rukhsana represent only two of the hundreds of women who are similarly attacked each year, most of whose cases go unreported. The film documents the efforts made by a Pakistan-born London-based plastic surgeon, Dr. Mohammad Jawad, to help reconstruct these womens' faces as a first step toward rebuilding their lives while also showing the fight within the Pakistani Parliament to get legislation passed that would put the perpetrators behind bars. "Saving Face" is an important film in that it raises awareness to the injustices being inflicted upon women in a part of the world where women are still considered second-class citizens while also highlighting the bravery of these women in facing down a male-dominated society in an attempt to achieve legal protection.
"Incendies" is available from Netflix. Check your local listings for repeated showings of "Saving Face" on HBO, HBO Go, and HBO On Demand.
Ciao.
I wanted to take a few minutes today to talk a little bit about two amazing films I saw this week, both of which present insight into the Middle East in ways that we don't necessarily get from reading about it online or in our newspapers.
The first is "Incendies" a French-Canadian film from 2010 that was nominated for a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar last year and a BAFTA this year. Directed by acclaimed French-Canadian director Denis Villeneuve, "Incendies" tells the story of two twins--Simon and Jeanne Marwan--who travel to Lebanon at their recently deceased mother's behest to find out the truth about their father and a long-lost brother. In so doing, they discover more than either could ever have bargained for about their mother's secret past during the Lebanese Civil War that engulfed the country from 1975-1990, originally pitting Lebanese Christians against Muslims before the Israeli invasion.
The film, adapted from a play by Wajdi Mouawad, is a jigsaw puzzle that shifts between past and present, showing us brutal glimpses of a prolonged war that many of us in the West have forgotten but whose wounds remain and very much influence politics and culture in the Arab World today. It might help to read up on the war prior to seeing the film as without at least some background knowledge the politics of the conflict may seem a little murky. Nonetheless, "Incendies" is necessary viewing for anyone interested in learning about modern Lebanese history and why the country is such a powder keg of regional and religious tension, though technically it has been at peace since the early 1990s. One criticism I do have is that because the film frequently juxtaposes between 2009 and the mid-to-late 70s without any real transition--not to mention the fact that the actresses playing Nawal, the mother (Lubna Azabal), and the daughter Jeanne (Melissa Desormeaux-Poulin) bear an uncanny resemblance to each other--the non-linear narrative style takes a bit of getting used to. And while the climactic revelation is shocking and works from a narrative and character perspective, the logistics of it didn't quite sit with me. Regardless, "Incendies" is a powerful statement about the ties that bind and how sectarian conflict continues to destroy lives and families long after the final shots have been fired.
The second film, "Saving Face" just won the Oscar for Best Documentary Short Film and was given its broadcast premiere this evening on HBO. In only 40 minutes, "Saving Face" packs a powerful punch as it presents the stories of two brave but tragic Pakistani women --Zakia and Rukhsana--who have been horrendously disfigured by acid attacks inflicted upon them by their husbands. Zakia and Rukhsana represent only two of the hundreds of women who are similarly attacked each year, most of whose cases go unreported. The film documents the efforts made by a Pakistan-born London-based plastic surgeon, Dr. Mohammad Jawad, to help reconstruct these womens' faces as a first step toward rebuilding their lives while also showing the fight within the Pakistani Parliament to get legislation passed that would put the perpetrators behind bars. "Saving Face" is an important film in that it raises awareness to the injustices being inflicted upon women in a part of the world where women are still considered second-class citizens while also highlighting the bravery of these women in facing down a male-dominated society in an attempt to achieve legal protection.
"Incendies" is available from Netflix. Check your local listings for repeated showings of "Saving Face" on HBO, HBO Go, and HBO On Demand.
Ciao.
Monday, March 5, 2012
President Putin and the Vocal Opposition
Hi everyone!
It should come as no surprise that Vladimir Putin won Russia's presidential election yesterday with some 64.7 percent of the vote, thus avoiding the inconvenience of a run-off. The fact is the opposition candidates never stood a chance, chiefly because at least politically no credible opposition party exists. Sure, you've got Gennady A. Zyuganov who ran once again on the Communist ticket as he has in the past four elections; Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist party; and Sergei M. Mironov of the Just Russia Party; not to mention new candidate and billionaire businessman (and New Jersey Nets owner) Mikhail D. Prokhorov, but no one really took him seriously to begin with. So it stands to reason that Mr. Putin won yet again, thus assuring himself six years at the head of the Kremlin with the possibility of another six beyond that.
But while Putin claims "victory" as everyone expected him to, this should be tempered by the fact that for the first time in eighty-something years, an opposition force is gathering strength at the grass-roots level. Last December's protests drew record crowds as did subsequent protests last month which were all the more impressive given the fact that outside temperatures dipped well below freezing and even this didn't seem to alter the numbers who came out to express their dissatisfaction with Putin and the whole Kremlin regime. Another such protest is scheduled for today.
Of course it remains to be seen whether President (formerly Prime Minister) Putin pays these protesters any heed. Up until now he's chosen ridicule as his primary response and that was before the election. Now, despite the fact that yesterday's election was widely seen as having been rigged in Putin's favor--regardless or resultant of the widespread presence of Kremlin-sponsored election observers--Mr. President may decide he can act as he wishes and crackdown on the protest movement with impunity. It's still very early days yet. In the meantime, it's imperative that foreign governments continue to encourage democratic reform in Russia, though Putin has time and again refused to bow to any outside pressure even if that pressure is done in the name of the greater collective good, as we've seen with Russia's position on Syria.
Taking a long-term outlook, it is important that the opposition movement be allowed to gather strength and to coalesce around leaders who--in six years' time--can actually pose a serious threat to another Putin six-year term. The problem leading into yesterday's election was that the opposition lacked any real cohesive leaders. It is all well and good that anti-Putin bloggers such as Aleksei Navalny are able to rally thousands of middle-class citizens onto the streets of Moscow, yet this isn't going to win elections. A more determined effort has to be made to encourage those living in rural areas--where Putin still derives huge support--to come out in support of the opposition. An organized and credible opposition party needs also to be developed, though Putin will be loath to allow this.
Still anything can happen in six years. What Putin faces now--for the first time ever in his political career--is a vocal opposition. While his election yesterday was a shoo-in, this doesn't mean Putin can run roughshod over his electorate. The Russian people have rediscovered their collective voice and are proving that they aren't afraid to use it. We should encourage them.
Ciao.
It should come as no surprise that Vladimir Putin won Russia's presidential election yesterday with some 64.7 percent of the vote, thus avoiding the inconvenience of a run-off. The fact is the opposition candidates never stood a chance, chiefly because at least politically no credible opposition party exists. Sure, you've got Gennady A. Zyuganov who ran once again on the Communist ticket as he has in the past four elections; Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist party; and Sergei M. Mironov of the Just Russia Party; not to mention new candidate and billionaire businessman (and New Jersey Nets owner) Mikhail D. Prokhorov, but no one really took him seriously to begin with. So it stands to reason that Mr. Putin won yet again, thus assuring himself six years at the head of the Kremlin with the possibility of another six beyond that.
But while Putin claims "victory" as everyone expected him to, this should be tempered by the fact that for the first time in eighty-something years, an opposition force is gathering strength at the grass-roots level. Last December's protests drew record crowds as did subsequent protests last month which were all the more impressive given the fact that outside temperatures dipped well below freezing and even this didn't seem to alter the numbers who came out to express their dissatisfaction with Putin and the whole Kremlin regime. Another such protest is scheduled for today.
Of course it remains to be seen whether President (formerly Prime Minister) Putin pays these protesters any heed. Up until now he's chosen ridicule as his primary response and that was before the election. Now, despite the fact that yesterday's election was widely seen as having been rigged in Putin's favor--regardless or resultant of the widespread presence of Kremlin-sponsored election observers--Mr. President may decide he can act as he wishes and crackdown on the protest movement with impunity. It's still very early days yet. In the meantime, it's imperative that foreign governments continue to encourage democratic reform in Russia, though Putin has time and again refused to bow to any outside pressure even if that pressure is done in the name of the greater collective good, as we've seen with Russia's position on Syria.
Taking a long-term outlook, it is important that the opposition movement be allowed to gather strength and to coalesce around leaders who--in six years' time--can actually pose a serious threat to another Putin six-year term. The problem leading into yesterday's election was that the opposition lacked any real cohesive leaders. It is all well and good that anti-Putin bloggers such as Aleksei Navalny are able to rally thousands of middle-class citizens onto the streets of Moscow, yet this isn't going to win elections. A more determined effort has to be made to encourage those living in rural areas--where Putin still derives huge support--to come out in support of the opposition. An organized and credible opposition party needs also to be developed, though Putin will be loath to allow this.
Still anything can happen in six years. What Putin faces now--for the first time ever in his political career--is a vocal opposition. While his election yesterday was a shoo-in, this doesn't mean Putin can run roughshod over his electorate. The Russian people have rediscovered their collective voice and are proving that they aren't afraid to use it. We should encourage them.
Ciao.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Show Trial in Egypt: SCAF vs the NGOs
Hi everyone!
Craziness in the Egyptian courts. The trial against seventeen NGO employees accused of fomenting revolution and other "anti-government" activities kicked into action on Sunday. The fear has been that this case was nothing more than anti-American grandstanding by the military tribunal (SCAF) currently running the country in the lead-up to May's presidential elections. On Tuesday, the three presiding judges abruptly stepped down and then yesterday it was announced that a travel ban against seven Americans--including Sam LaHood, head of the Egyptian office was the International Republican Institute--had been lifted after over $300,000 in bail had been posted for their release by an undisclosed payee. The trial has officially been adjourned until the end of April. It is unclear, without the three judges, whether the trial will resume at that time.
This case was set in motion last December when the police unexpectedly raided several offices belonging to three leading NGOs in Cairo--the International Republican Institute, Freedom House, and National Democratic Institute--confiscating documents and equipment. At the time, the ruling military council justified its actions by claiming these organizations were violating Egyptian sovereignty by influencing the protest movement and essentially training people on how to rebel against the Mubarak regime. The council said the NGOs were operating illegally without the necessary permits. In truth, these NGOs had been stuck indefinitely in bureaucratic red tape as they repeatedly attempted to apply for these licenses only to have their applications either rejected or conveniently lost in the transom. The thing is, for years Mubarak had tacitly allowed these organizations to function although he levied severe restrictions on their movement.
The irony of course is that these organizations are not in any way, shape, or form independent of the U.S. government. The International Republican Institute is closely affiliated with the Republican Party while its sister organization, The National Democratic Institute, is aligned with the Democratic Party. So at least on paper the Egyptian government was right in its claim that these organizations are branches of the U.S. government and are involved in promoting U.S. interests in Egypt.
It is anyone's guess what will come of this. Most of the defendants have not even appeared in court and those that have treated it quite casually. There's a great photo in today's New York Times of Nancy Okail of Freedom House reading a paperback copy of George Orwell's classic history of the Spanish Civil War, "Homage to Catalonia." When the accused don't even take the proceedings seriously, it doesn't bode well for the legitimacy of the military council's case.
What we're seeing are the actions of holdovers from the Mubarak regime who are desperately trying to prove their ridiculous claim that the Egyptian revolution was not home-grown but rather the results of foreign meddling. Bashar al-Assad in Syria at least publicly has said as much about his own country's revolution. Libya's Muammar Qaddafi said the same before he was killed. Unfortunately, in Egypt as in all these countries affected by the Arab Spring, the jury is still out on whether its revolution will result in true democracy or whether the military and, to a certain extent, the Muslim Brotherhood--now the majority voice in Parliament--will concern themselves merely with preserving their stake in power at the expense of the democratic freedoms upon which the April Spring was launched.
I am becoming more and more skeptical every day.
Ciao.
Craziness in the Egyptian courts. The trial against seventeen NGO employees accused of fomenting revolution and other "anti-government" activities kicked into action on Sunday. The fear has been that this case was nothing more than anti-American grandstanding by the military tribunal (SCAF) currently running the country in the lead-up to May's presidential elections. On Tuesday, the three presiding judges abruptly stepped down and then yesterday it was announced that a travel ban against seven Americans--including Sam LaHood, head of the Egyptian office was the International Republican Institute--had been lifted after over $300,000 in bail had been posted for their release by an undisclosed payee. The trial has officially been adjourned until the end of April. It is unclear, without the three judges, whether the trial will resume at that time.
This case was set in motion last December when the police unexpectedly raided several offices belonging to three leading NGOs in Cairo--the International Republican Institute, Freedom House, and National Democratic Institute--confiscating documents and equipment. At the time, the ruling military council justified its actions by claiming these organizations were violating Egyptian sovereignty by influencing the protest movement and essentially training people on how to rebel against the Mubarak regime. The council said the NGOs were operating illegally without the necessary permits. In truth, these NGOs had been stuck indefinitely in bureaucratic red tape as they repeatedly attempted to apply for these licenses only to have their applications either rejected or conveniently lost in the transom. The thing is, for years Mubarak had tacitly allowed these organizations to function although he levied severe restrictions on their movement.
The irony of course is that these organizations are not in any way, shape, or form independent of the U.S. government. The International Republican Institute is closely affiliated with the Republican Party while its sister organization, The National Democratic Institute, is aligned with the Democratic Party. So at least on paper the Egyptian government was right in its claim that these organizations are branches of the U.S. government and are involved in promoting U.S. interests in Egypt.
It is anyone's guess what will come of this. Most of the defendants have not even appeared in court and those that have treated it quite casually. There's a great photo in today's New York Times of Nancy Okail of Freedom House reading a paperback copy of George Orwell's classic history of the Spanish Civil War, "Homage to Catalonia." When the accused don't even take the proceedings seriously, it doesn't bode well for the legitimacy of the military council's case.
What we're seeing are the actions of holdovers from the Mubarak regime who are desperately trying to prove their ridiculous claim that the Egyptian revolution was not home-grown but rather the results of foreign meddling. Bashar al-Assad in Syria at least publicly has said as much about his own country's revolution. Libya's Muammar Qaddafi said the same before he was killed. Unfortunately, in Egypt as in all these countries affected by the Arab Spring, the jury is still out on whether its revolution will result in true democracy or whether the military and, to a certain extent, the Muslim Brotherhood--now the majority voice in Parliament--will concern themselves merely with preserving their stake in power at the expense of the democratic freedoms upon which the April Spring was launched.
I am becoming more and more skeptical every day.
Ciao.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)