Skip to main content

Will G. W. Bush era culture make sense to people years from now?

Listening to Sage Francis's 2005 album, A Healthy Distrust. The opening track, 'The Buzz Kill', is, among other things, about an American denial of supposedly quintessential American values via our rhetorical offensive on the French. 'Freedom fries' are referenced, but never mentioned. These are juxtaposed with '50s-sounding clips about 'the Sage', a supercomputer protecting America from the nuclear threat of the Soviet empire.

This is (sadly) complex enough to render its meaning obtuse to many. But how will future generations of those smart enough to unravel the song interpret it? If America gets the break it so clearly desires from the general feel or effects of the Bush era (perhaps as was afforded those of my generation with the fall of the USSR and its walls), how will a girl who's ten now understand Sage's lyrics when she's twenty and getting into hip-hop?

Back, then, to the titular question. Those of us who were paying attention at the time should be able to put them into context, but what will post-9/11 political and social statements of pop culture mean to those who weren't really around for them?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Magical Unrealism

The same men who say global warming is a hoax, Obamacare has been failing for eight years, and abstinence-only sex-ed works are also convinced even basic gun control is an impossible and useless approach which would only make us less safe. These are also the dudes most likely to tell you black and brown folk have it too good, Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya, and Sharia law is being forced on American legal systems. I wonder if there's some sort of overarching thread or theme to all this.

An introduction to a book that doesn't exist:

Prose and verse are generally accepted as distinct writing formats with their own rules, styles, and grammars.  Though their borders are somewhat vague, they have come to be seen as something of a dichotomy in the eyes of the general public.  There are, however, at least 3 other popular approaches to writing as exhibited in picture-books, comicbooks, and plays.  Though sometimes given short shrift, these styles are accepted as literature.  They are included in libraries, book stores, and academic study.  Most importantly, they are read. In the general case, there is clearly writing being done in the creation of any one of these.  But what of the wordless comic or silent play?  Should we consider scripts written, but fully realized plays, comics, and picture-books, to be performance, art, or some other kind of non-literature?  These worries of theory are kinks to be worked out, surely, but they are not of immediate practical concern to the writer...

'((BORDERS))' & 'The Blue Trees' at Westlake Park

For the last few weeks, two public art projects have coexisted at Westlake Park, in the thick of Seattle's downtown. '((Borders))' is by Steinunn Thorarinsdottir , a metal sculptor who seems primarily interested in featureless people in various states and positions.  Originally installed outside of the U.N. headquarters, it is supposed to reflect something (or other) about multiculturalism.  Passersby seem most interested in the composition of the statues. Thoraninsdottir's site is pretty cool, by the way. Konstantin Dimopoulos's 'The Blue Trees' is meant to bring trees into contrast with their surroundings, and so remind people of them.  By extension, this is supposed to bring attention to deforestation, over-logging, and the like.  The actual effect is mere surreal wonderment, but anyone so confused can read the small sign standing in the middle of the park for clarification. I'm not sure how successful these are in achieving their stated int...