Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Come on up for the Rising
Hello from Minnesota again, where I've returned for another business trip--and for the fall colors, which have intensified since I was here only a few days ago. Good thing I came back, too, or else I might have missed one of the all-time great boneheaded political quotes, from Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty. He's a Republican, and he chairs the state's Bush/Cheney reelection committee. He's also a Bruce Springsteen fan, frequent concert attendee, and owner of an autographed painting of the Boss that hangs in his Capitol office. Springsteen plays St. Paul tonight as part of the anti-Bush Vote for Change concert tour. Pawlenty says he's "heartbroken." "I really appreciate [Springsteen's] music, but I wish he wouldn't interject his music with politics."
Say what?
Apparently Pawlenty likes Springsteen's music because it has a good beat and it's good to dance to. It sure as hell can't be because he listens to the words. Although Bruce has steadfastly remained apolitical up until now in terms of endorsing candidates, his work has always been deeply concerned with issues that are, indeed, political, such as working people struggling, war and peace, civil rights, and how we treat veterans and the elderly. Today, one political party stands up for the kind of people who populate Springsteen's work, and the other clearly does not, and will not. Deciding to take a stand this time was easy. Springsteen famously said in the New York Times last summer, "The stakes have risen too high to sit this one out." That Pawlenty can claim to be a Springsteen fan without, apparently, having ever responded to Springsteen's core values is, at the very least, evidence of how people can hold contrary positions at the same time without feeling conflicted about it.
The Vote for Change tour also hits Madison tonight with the Dave Matthews Band, while James Taylor and the Dixie Chicks play Iowa City. Sharing the bill with Springsteen here in the Twin Cities are REM and John Fogerty, who made his mark in the music biz with Creedence Clearwater Revival, back when it wasn't unusual for recording artists to be political. (Fogerty will be backed by Springsteen's E Street Band tonight, and I am guessing that "Fortunate Son" will be pretty damned intense.)
The Dixie Chicks are Exhibit A for why more artists don't take political stands these days. They criticized Bush and the war last year, and since then, their career has tanked. A recent concert in St. Louis was performed in a half-empty arena. The problem is that despite the huge sales of their last couple of albums, the Chicks aren't a crossover act--they simply twang too much, and Natalie Maines' Elly May whine will never be confused with, say, Faith Hill. As a result, the Chicks will never be able to pick up enough pop listeners or get enough pop airplay to compensate for the country listeners and airplay they've lost. So the Chicks have already put more on the line than Springsteen, REM, Matthews, or Pearl Jam, who are also playing some Vote for Change dates, because their audience was (and is) less likely to accept their political stance. (As for lesser, albeit rising, lights on the Vote for Change tour, such as Bright Eyes and Death Cab for Cutie, the publicity they’re receiving far outweighs any damage their politics might do to their careers.) And unlike the other major artists on the tour, the Chicks weren’t necessarily set for life thanks to their earlier success. It’s not hard to imagine them having to play county fairs in the hinterlands when they’re all 50 to keep their mortgages paid.
Recommended Reading: I haven't shilled for Harper's for a while, so it's time. The October cover story, "Whitewash as Public Service: How The 9/11 Commission Report Defrauds the Nation" is excellent. It details how the commission, when confronted with clear evidence that Bush lied about how much he knew in the summer of 2001 about Al Qaeda's plans to attack the United States, chose to accept his words at face value rather than risk "the possible rending of the nation's social and political fabric." The commissioners did this as much to protect and enhance their own reputations in history as to shield the public from a truth they believed we would be unable to handle. According to author Benjamin DeMott, the commission's apportionment of equal blame to Bill Clinton for "missed opportunities" to hit Al Qaeda or catch Osama Bin Laden represents a skewing of history. While it's true that Clinton did not strike Bin Laden, it was owing to a lack of clear intelligence and fears of inflaming the Muslim world--all legitimate concerns absent a clear provocation. But in the commission's eyes, "Clinton's prudent hesitation to strike Bin Laden, in other words, becomes the moral equivalent of Bush's lack of concern, even post 9/11, about Bin Laden."
Hello from Minnesota again, where I've returned for another business trip--and for the fall colors, which have intensified since I was here only a few days ago. Good thing I came back, too, or else I might have missed one of the all-time great boneheaded political quotes, from Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty. He's a Republican, and he chairs the state's Bush/Cheney reelection committee. He's also a Bruce Springsteen fan, frequent concert attendee, and owner of an autographed painting of the Boss that hangs in his Capitol office. Springsteen plays St. Paul tonight as part of the anti-Bush Vote for Change concert tour. Pawlenty says he's "heartbroken." "I really appreciate [Springsteen's] music, but I wish he wouldn't interject his music with politics."
Say what?
Apparently Pawlenty likes Springsteen's music because it has a good beat and it's good to dance to. It sure as hell can't be because he listens to the words. Although Bruce has steadfastly remained apolitical up until now in terms of endorsing candidates, his work has always been deeply concerned with issues that are, indeed, political, such as working people struggling, war and peace, civil rights, and how we treat veterans and the elderly. Today, one political party stands up for the kind of people who populate Springsteen's work, and the other clearly does not, and will not. Deciding to take a stand this time was easy. Springsteen famously said in the New York Times last summer, "The stakes have risen too high to sit this one out." That Pawlenty can claim to be a Springsteen fan without, apparently, having ever responded to Springsteen's core values is, at the very least, evidence of how people can hold contrary positions at the same time without feeling conflicted about it.
The Vote for Change tour also hits Madison tonight with the Dave Matthews Band, while James Taylor and the Dixie Chicks play Iowa City. Sharing the bill with Springsteen here in the Twin Cities are REM and John Fogerty, who made his mark in the music biz with Creedence Clearwater Revival, back when it wasn't unusual for recording artists to be political. (Fogerty will be backed by Springsteen's E Street Band tonight, and I am guessing that "Fortunate Son" will be pretty damned intense.)
The Dixie Chicks are Exhibit A for why more artists don't take political stands these days. They criticized Bush and the war last year, and since then, their career has tanked. A recent concert in St. Louis was performed in a half-empty arena. The problem is that despite the huge sales of their last couple of albums, the Chicks aren't a crossover act--they simply twang too much, and Natalie Maines' Elly May whine will never be confused with, say, Faith Hill. As a result, the Chicks will never be able to pick up enough pop listeners or get enough pop airplay to compensate for the country listeners and airplay they've lost. So the Chicks have already put more on the line than Springsteen, REM, Matthews, or Pearl Jam, who are also playing some Vote for Change dates, because their audience was (and is) less likely to accept their political stance. (As for lesser, albeit rising, lights on the Vote for Change tour, such as Bright Eyes and Death Cab for Cutie, the publicity they’re receiving far outweighs any damage their politics might do to their careers.) And unlike the other major artists on the tour, the Chicks weren’t necessarily set for life thanks to their earlier success. It’s not hard to imagine them having to play county fairs in the hinterlands when they’re all 50 to keep their mortgages paid.
Recommended Reading: I haven't shilled for Harper's for a while, so it's time. The October cover story, "Whitewash as Public Service: How The 9/11 Commission Report Defrauds the Nation" is excellent. It details how the commission, when confronted with clear evidence that Bush lied about how much he knew in the summer of 2001 about Al Qaeda's plans to attack the United States, chose to accept his words at face value rather than risk "the possible rending of the nation's social and political fabric." The commissioners did this as much to protect and enhance their own reputations in history as to shield the public from a truth they believed we would be unable to handle. According to author Benjamin DeMott, the commission's apportionment of equal blame to Bill Clinton for "missed opportunities" to hit Al Qaeda or catch Osama Bin Laden represents a skewing of history. While it's true that Clinton did not strike Bin Laden, it was owing to a lack of clear intelligence and fears of inflaming the Muslim world--all legitimate concerns absent a clear provocation. But in the commission's eyes, "Clinton's prudent hesitation to strike Bin Laden, in other words, becomes the moral equivalent of Bush's lack of concern, even post 9/11, about Bin Laden."
