Press Action

The Left and Popular Culture

Posted 10/28 |

You must register to comment.

Tell me, again, Jordy, what’s good about the Sopranos, okay? And keep in mind that I’m not coming from a place where I think Kubrick endorsed nuclear war, please. To say “whether he says to vote for Kerry or Nader or Cobb is secondary to someone who writes songs like “41 shots” and “The Ghost of Tom Joad” (in speaking of Bruce)...begs the question WHY? I’m not clear at all on how creating a song (which the Powers’ parameters allow to be published and performed) can be sufficient...relative to an endorsement of Nader instead of Kerry. Bruce is not coming from the same brain-alive place as, say, Zinn...in endorsing Kerry. For one, he doesn’t understand --like I think you don’t-- that (as Jensen makes clear)...the Powers’ will allow ranting from the stage...easily/at no cost. That’s the diff between words and actions. It’s the death knell w Pearl Jam joining Bruce & others on this count. They don’t see Kerry as Bush and they’re teaching their audiences...the same.

Posted by Richard Oxman from on 10/28 at 01:24 PM

There’s nothing “subjective” respecting what I’m about to say concerning Bruce and the Sopranos. My “personal aesthetic” has zero to do with the statements that follow. And Adorno and all the intellectual masturbation surrounding words, words, words is not helping to clarify some very important points associated with your article, Jordy. What I have to say has nothing to do with trying to impose a point of view on cultural activity. To wit, Bruce endorsing Kerry is an abomination; he’s a genocidist and ecocidist, and Bruce is doing a lot of harm by leading people to believe that there’s a difference between the Texan and the Mass Man. The Sopranos, for the most part, appeals to the worst visceral instincts of American culture; it glorifies/elevates values/characters in much the same way that all of today’s products touting gratuitous violence, revenge, etc. do. I think I once read something of yours on this site praising “24,” Jordy. No one is telling you to not vicariously enjoy ANYTHING privately. But to applaud such fare in public is tantamount to taking Bruce’s words as “real action,” mistaking his lyrics for concrete activism. It’s a problem for us all in both cases.

Posted by Richard Oxman from on 10/28 at 04:25 PM

I honestly respect you too much to say “whatever.” But that is all I can say. To wit, Sopranos is in a long and left-invented (Abe Polonsky, other screenwriters) tradition of using the gangster aesthetic to critique capitalist/bourgeois banality. Otherwise, your response prove my point for me… And I don’t need to get into anything else on that..

Posted by j cummings from on 10/28 at 05:07 PM

I don’t say “whatever” to anyone; it’s an indication of how out of synch I am --willingly-- with cultural fads, particularly the ones that ring of...a lack of civility. Regardless, there’s nothing “uncivil” about directly confronting something that’s seriously off-putting, dangerous. Approaching things from a different vantage point (without involving personal attacks), I am compelled to ask WHEN Bruce might play for the likes of Nader. When? When the numbers behind “the candidate” warrant it? At some mythical future date...when the cultured mob has absorbed the lessons of his onstage qualifications/reservations? Ditto for the other stars...who have to be brain-dead to be supporting Kerry...irrespective of Bush-dangers and their own past good works. Nothing works when one hedges so, passing up an opportunity like Peltier, an op like Nader, etc. The “stars” should drop.

Posted by Richard Oxman from on 10/28 at 10:57 PM