[vienna teng]

I’ve just discovered Vienna Teng, a lovely and powerful singer-songwriter. Her music reminds me of Noe Venable and of Fiona Apple, though Teng is distinctly her own thing (and in fact there’s a YouTube video of her covering Noe’s “Midsummer Night’s Dream”). Visit her site and listen to “Blue Caravan.” Then check out her MySpace page and listen to “Grandmother Song.” It’s an Americana stomp about being an aging singer-songwriter, a common enough theme, yet it manages to tie in (allusively) the whole Taiwanese-American experience, with the weight of war and deprivation that weighs so heavily on the youngest generation.

[moving]

For a while now, I’ve been talking about moving to Manhattan. At this point, it’s more a question of when than whether. Bay Ridge is pleasant enough, but it’s far away, and I like to have a home that people actually visit. Plus, I’m tired of the long commute, and of feeling like once I’ve gone out for the day, popping back home is simply too far to go if I want to go out again. And then there’s school: if I go back to school, living as far away as I do now will make things all the harder.

So I’d like to move to Manhattan, preferably somewhere very close to my office, in Chelsea or the West Village. Most of my life happens around here anyway: Korean dance in K-town, swing dance near Penn Station or Times Square, work in Chelsea, socializing in the Village or the East Village, shopping in Union Square.
As for the timing, well, I guess my life is pretty full. I’m just not going to get it together by the end of January, and anyway January is a rotten time to be going around, looking at apartments. Also, I have jury duty. So that rules out February 1. March 1 would be feasible, but I’m leaving for India on March 5, and that double stress is more than I need, nor do I want to come home to the chaos of a new apartment when I’m all jet-lagged. There’s pretty much no way, coming back from India on March 21, than I’ll find an apartment and get packed in that final week of the month. And so it looks like May 1 is the next really good date.
May 1.
I have until then to clean out my junk drawers, give away my old clothes, and generally scale down the stuff. That’s plenty of time, but also plenty of time to worry over it.

[scattered thoughts about precious]

1. OK, so who at Sunkist thought a product placement in Precious was a good idea? It’s there twice: once as a can next to Precious’s abusive mother as she hunkers in her gloomy apartment, then again as the label across the drink machine at the welfare office. Peculiarly, Mariah Carey’s character comes back with two cans of fake-label soda, drawing all the more attention to the product placement. In fact, throughout the movie, the only brand label we ever see is Sunkist. (McDonald’s and, inevitably, Oprah get mentioned, but we don’t see either. Oprah had been nationally syndicated only since September 1986.) The tag lines that come to mind are not good. “Sunkist: What your incestuous mama drink while she beat you.” “Thirsty? On welfare? Sunkist is for you!” This is not exactly ET eating Reece’s Pieces.

2. Mariah Carey was actually very good. Mo’Nique was extraordinary. Gabourey Sidibe was just OK. Her face isn’t terribly expressive.
3. There are very few men in Precious’s world. I think that’s probably an accurate depiction of a life like that, and it points to a very serious social problem.
4. I saw the movie with a couple of people who work in social services. It’s like seeing Office Space with your cube-mates. Afterwards, one of them told me, “When I found out she was HIV-positive, I was like, ‘Oh, now she can get housing!'”
5. Speaking of HIV, the film takes place in 1987, and a number of its characters are very poorly educated. When Precious tells the class that she’s HIV-positive, it seems anachronistic that there’s no fear, no panic, no immediate freakout, particularly considering that a number of these girls were in contact with Precious’s blood earlier on. The first anti-HIV drug, AZT, was introduced only that year, so AIDS was widely perceived as an absolute death sentence. ACT UP was founded in 1987. Public understanding was primitive at best.
6. The whole welfare process, as depicted in the film, is incredibly humiliating. You’re forced to answer incredibly personal questions from a case worker who has the power to take away your minimal livelihood. What’s your home life like? What’s your mother like? What’s your father like? They’re the kinds of questions it’s actually illegal for the HR department of a private company to ask. It’s painful to watch, and it must be painful to live through. At the same time, the process is shown to have failed utterly — Precious had never even been to a doctor — so it’s largely an exercise in humiliation and enforced lying before power.

7. The teacher and her partner have a beautiful home. Was that affordable in Harlem in 1987?

[the plan, as it unfolds]

For a while now I’ve been thinking about graduate school. Here are my reasons:

  • Everyone else seems to be doing it.
  • My brother and sister are doing it, which means I’ll be the least educated member of my family if I don’t (dad has an MBA, mom an MA and JD, grandma a Ph.D., grandpa a JD, sister and brother both working on MAs).
  • Barack Obama asked every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education, and while this obviously meant at least one year past high school, which I have, I’m taking it to mean at least one more year than I already have.
  • It might be vaguely useful professionally to have a higher degree, though that sort of depends what it is.

Those are my reasons for thinking about grad school. So I talked to a few coworkers who’d done the whole master’s thing, and one of them told me to study something I love, because it’s a ton of work, and I won’t want to see it through if I don’t feel passionate about it (he has an MFA in creative writing).

So that got me thinking about specifics. An MBA is right out, ’cause I completely don’t give a shit. International affairs? Maybe. Central Asian history or linguistics? Off chance. Asian studies?
Duh.
I mean, look at what my plans were for the weekend: go to a lecture at the Korean Cultural Service on Friday night, by myself, to learn about traditional Korean music; meet a new Korean conversation partner on Saturday and study; meet an old Korean conversation partner on Saturday and study; meet a friend from the Korean Mission to the UN on Sunday; go to my Korean dance class.
Sure, I read articles from time to time on foreign policy. And sure, I’ll slog my way through tomes on Central Asia. But I waded through nearly 5,000 pages of East Asian history and translated political and philosophical documents as a self-study program. And on weekends I study the Korean language and go to lectures on Korean culture for fun. When I arrived in Seoul in October, I was ecstatic to discover that here was an entire city completely dedicated to my hobby. For reasons I’ve never been able to pin down, the study of Korea has become my passion.
You knew that. I knew that. But I only just realized that this had a direct bearing on what I should study.
An obvious practical question arises: What will I do with an MA in Asian Studies? And a practical answer: No idea. Yes, it’s a lot of work for no concrete result. Yes, it’s expensive. But I want to do it. And the advantage of being passionate about the subject while not needing the degree is that I can drop out without feeling like the whole thing has been pointless.
My plan, then, is to do this … eventually. I’m hoping to move to Manhattan when my lease is up, in September of next year. Starting grad school at the same time that I move strikes me as pointlessly exhausting. So I’m going to shoot for spring of 2011 to begin my studies. Between now and then, I’d like to make substantial progress on the language. I’ll also need to talk to people at the Asian Studies programs at Columbia and NYU, and also maybe CUNY. And study for the GREs. And that, in sum, is the plan so far.

[memory, history, and the beatles]

What does it mean to remember an experience? Sitting with my parents recently, listening to the Beatles remasters that just came out, it became clear that what my parents remembered about the Beatles — the order things came out, which songs were on which albums — was a kind of visceral memory, often inaccurate when measured against the archival record. My father compared it to the way people of his parents’ generation remembered World War II versus the way he grew up learning about it: they knew better what it was like, while he knew better what had actually happened.

Time also has a way of distorting our views. I know that I take Kurt Cobain a lot more seriously now than I did when he was alive. Until his suicide brought his art back into focus for me, I thought of Nirvana as a pretty good if simplistic and overhyped grunge band that was never as cool or interesting as Soundgarden or Pearl Jam. He wasn’t the voice of my generation until he no longer had a voice.

That effect is probably even stronger with the Beatles, who shaped a generation far more intensely than Cobain ever could have. In the many years since the Beatles were a going concern, we’ve seen Wings, and Plastic Ono Band, and the Concert for Bangladesh. We’ve seen The Compleat Beatles and Anthology. We’ve heard Let It Be de-Spectorized. We’ve seen John Lennon martyred, and Yoko Ono transformed from witch to hipster icon. And we’ve grown more familiar with the canonical materials, while the uncollected detritus of abandoned pop culture — radio and television interviews, DJ chatter about new Beatles songs, the speculation of one’s friends about whether the Beatles turn on, the newspaper and magazine articles — all fade into oblivion.

Above all, we know how it ends now. We know that Sgt. Peppter’s Lonely Hearts Club Band is the highwater mark, that Abbey Road is the coda. We know that no Beatle ever did anything solo that was as impressive as the Beatles together. And we know that the story was closed forever by a pointless murder.

But what was it like to here “Tomorrow Never Knows” without knowing what was to come?

Sitting with my parents, listening to their memories of these songs when they were new, I got a taste of what that might have been like. And that got me to thinking about my own first experience of the Beatles.

Until 1987, what we had were the records — the American records. I grew up with an album called Song, Pictures and Stories of the Fabulous Beatles, a decidedly silly repackaging of Vee-Jay’s Introducing… the Beatles that included a gatefold, drawings of the Beatles, blurbs on their likes and dislikes, and places to put heart-shaped photographs of oneself under photos of each Beatle and the words, “JOHN LOVES,” “PAUL LOVES,” “GEORGE LOVES” or “RINGO LOVES.” It was a record meant to be bought by a schoolgirl, and it was, and that has some meaning to it.

What changed in 1987 was that the surviving Beatles and George Martin released something resembling the whole Beatles catalogue in what became canonical form, based on the British albums, with the stray bits and pieces gathered onto Past Masters I and II. I say something resembling the whole because they did away with the instrumental versions of several songs that populated the American versions of A Hard Day’s Night and Help!, and because all of the canonical CDs were in stereo. To muddy the waters even further, in 1987 George Martin took it upon himself to redo the stereo mixes of Help! and Rubber Soul, so we’ve been listening to different versions of those LPs than the already somewhat obscure British stereo records.

The newly released remasters are a useful corrective. The music sounds grand, which is obviously the most important thing. I don’t imagine that it sounds quite like a brand new pressing of British wax played on a brand new hi-fi from 1965 — certainly not when I play it on my iPod, through quality earbuds — but it sounds clear, resonant, full, and punchy.

And the release of the mono remasters, complete with the original stereo mixes of A Hard Day’s Night and Help!, makes it possible to hear something much closer to what everyone heard when the Beatles’ music was new. For the first couple of albums, the stereo mix is pretty arbitrary, mostly an artifact of how the music was recorded for mono: the vocals are all in the right channel, and the instruments are all in the left. I’d go so far as to say that Please Please Me and With the Beatles are actually preferable in mono, even on headphones.

There’s also the peculiarity that certain songs have different bits in them, depending on whether you’re listening to the mono or the stereo version. The Sgt. Pepper that played endlessly on the radio was probably the mono version, in which “She’s Leaving Home” is a faster number in a different key, avoiding some of the soupiness of the stereo version, and the reprise is noisier, layered with more crowd noise and crescendoing with some great shouting by Paul that’s missing in stereo. (In other cases, the stereo versions are better. Who wants to miss out on Paul reaching for the high notes as he sings, “Every single day!” during the fadeout of “Got to Get You Into My Life,” or Ringo’s famous “I’ve got blisters on my fingers!” as “Helter Skelter” fades back in?)

Getting to hear all this music, in a variety of formats, is wonderful. And it’s not too difficult to create a playlist that recreates the American discography (although you do have to live without those instrumentals).

So what’s the difference? Well, often the songs were in different orders, and the whole experience of the early Beatles was shaped by the overlapping releases of Introducing and Meet the Beatles!. The latter album, which launched American Beatlemania, opens with the world-conquering “I Want to Hold Your Hand,” but leaves out “Twist and Shout” (not released by Capitol until The Early Beatles came out in 1965).

Even more significant were the changes to the middle-period albums, which were my parents’ favorites, and whose structure and release schedule helped to map their courtship and coming of age. The now-canonical albums aren’t the ones my father remembers. Help! opened with a James Bond theme intro (not digitally available), and was full of instrumentals. It didn’t contain Yesterday, which wasn’t on a US album until after Rubber Soul.

And it’s maybe Rubber Soul where the changes matter most. My father remembers that record as part of his experience of traveling around Europe in the summer of ’66, being in love with my mother. In the US, it opened with Paul’s lovely, folkie “I’ve Just Seen a Face,” not the smirky “Drive My Car.” Side two opens with “It’s Only Love,” a considerably sweeter number than “What Goes On.” And the dark moods of “Nowhere Man” and “If I Needed Someone” are left off completely. The result is an album that has a different ratio of love to chagrin. There’s a different vibe.

Then there’s the whole sea change that seems to come with Revolver. In the US, that change was spread out over two albums, with “Yeterday”…and Today coming first, opening with “Drive My Car,” “I’m Only Sleeping,” “Nowhere Man,” and “Dr. Robert,” and closing out with “Day Tripper” (not found on any UK album). In America, Revolver was a bit less trippy than in the UK, and provided almost a lull in the psychedelic experimentation before the summer of Sgt. Pepper and love in 1967.

Somewhere in my parents’ house is a reel-to-reel recording of my parents calling in to a radio show and chatting with John Lennon while they were tripping on LSD. I’m not entirely sure whether I’ve actually heard this tape, or just heard of it. I can’t remember what anyone said. But this sort of relic reveals the unbridgeable gulf between the canonical text and the lived experience. No one will ever release a handsome boxed set of snippets like that. But chatting with John on the radio was another kind of listening to the Beatles. I’ll have to dig up that tape one of these days and find out what, if anything, they talked about.

[so what’s this korean dance you’re learning?]

This is a reasonable question that a number of people have asked me, including my mom. A quick search for Korean dance on YouTube turns up mostly pop, and if you throw in the word “traditional,” you get mostly women. And I had to admit that even I wasn’t very clear on what the dance style I’m learning is supposed to look like when a man does it. (When it comes to men’s dancing, I’m much more familiar with the twirly hat stuff and the 사물노리 (samulnori) farmers’ dance.)

So I went searching, and I’ve turned up a few examples, which I will present for you here without further ado (better to link through where you can see the YouTube videos in a bigger size):
The first one is, I believe, roughly what my teacher has in mind for me. The odds of my dancing that well are not high. My parents told me about a budding jazz singer they knew who started weeping when they played a Sarah Vaughan record for her, and I kind of feel like that watching this video.
All of these dancers are impressive, and having taking a few classes, I have a much clearer idea of just how challenging it is to move gracefully through these poses. It’s a beautiful form of dance, and extraordinarily foreign to me. I remember how startling it was when a crowd of people started up with a folk version of this sort of thing during the halftime of Korea’s quarterfinal game in the 2002 World Cup, dancing in a circle and banging drums and cymbals there in the dirt field of the local middle school.
Bonus: For those who don’t know, Korea has perhaps the world’s most badass b-boy culture. Please to enjoy. 멋있다!

[visiting my congressman]

This morning I went to Representative Michael McMahon’s Brooklyn office to present my support for health care reform in person. I met a young, friendly staffer who’s on the same side as me, but made it clear to me that McMahon sees himself in a tough spot on this issue.

McMahon is the Representative for NY-13, a district that until the last election was held by Republican Vito Fossella. Fossella was caught in a scandal and declined to run for reelection. Then the favored Republican candidate, Francis Powers, died of a heart attack. In the end, McMahon took 61 percent of the vote in a district Obama lost.
According to the staffer I met, the people coming to McMahon’s office to talk to him on health care have been about 80 percent against, and this has got McMahon worried. He also said that they’d decided not to hold any town halls because of concerns that they would be unproductive shouting matches. I reminded the staffer that shouters are not the same thing as polls or surveys, and that the last time we had a major poll, back in November, we elected McMahon on a Democratic platform that included health care reform.
But I think there are two important points here. The first is that a Democratic Congressional Representative is saying that his position on health care is being swayed by the overwhelming number of people coming into his office to speak against health care reform. We need to get out there and talk to our Reps to make sure they do the right thing!
The second point, which I hope our Representatives will grasp, is that the shouters and doubters on health care were never going to vote for them in the first place. Does McMahon truly believe that if he caves on health care, these nuts will come around to the Democratic side in 2010?
If health care reform passes, the Democrats will look strong. They’ll have a record of achievement. And they’ll get shouted at by loonies during the next election cycle. If health care reform doesn’t pass, the Democrats will look weak. They’ll come into the next election cycle facing accusations of incompetence. And they’ll still get shouted at by loonies.
I hope the Democrats in Congress realize that voting down health care reform is not a winning proposition.

[more dancing with the ajummas]

As my grandfather tells it, he always thought of himself as rather weak and small. He’s short, and as a child he seems to have been somewhat bookish (though his idea of bookishness was to run five miles to the library, get a book, and run five miles back), and as an adult he became a corporate lawyer, not a role that necessarily calls for strapping men.

Then, in his forties, he took up mime. Now, this was before mimes became a horrible punchline, before that awful time in the eighties when mimes, like the homeless, became a constant urban menace. The way her learned mime, it was a serious, strenuous art form. He lost weight, gained strength, and developed a sense of physical presence and spatial awareness that was still serving him well into his eighties, as he would dance about the kitchen, closing cabinet doors behind him with his foot.
I take after my grandfather in a lot of ways, and certainly physically. As a kid, I was small for my age, and I was never much good at sports. Compulsory Israeli folkdance at summer camp was always a horror of ineptitude and humiliation. And you might have noticed that I have certain bookish tendencies.
But in the last couple of years, I’ve started to dance. I was not the quickest student in my swing classes, but I wasn’t consistently the slowest, either. And at this point in my life, I’m willing to learn slowly and awkwardly. It’s really OK. I make a grownup living and can spell and all that, so it’s not really a big deal if my Charleston is a little sloppier than some other people’s.
And now I’ve managed to find my way into Korean dance. Karen, the resident American who’s been studying this stuff for 15 years, insists that I’m learning faster than most students, that I’ve got great lines, that I’m a natural. I kind of think this might be similar to the way Koreans have been telling me my language skills are amazing ever since I learned to say hello, but she might also be being honest. For once, it seems, my odd little duck walk may be paying dividends. I tend to walk back on my heels, with splayed feet, and I’ve been told this is the walk of a yangban, or traditional Korean gentry. And my years of swing dance practice have taught me to keep my knees bent. So maybe I am better at following dance instructions than I used to be. Maybe my physical prowess is greater than it was when I was 12 and practicing layups.

[more on japanese vs. korean coolness]

I was going to follow up on an earlier post about Korean vs. Japanese coolness, and wondering whether anyone in Korea would ever be doing something like this:

Yes, it’s awful. But it’s also cool in a way that I didn’t think Korean culture would quite grasp: the cool of the avant garde.
So I went fishing on the Interwebs to see if I could find an equivalent, and lo and behold, I discovered Balloon & Needle, a Korean artists collective that does things like this:

For some reason, this gives me hope.

[make health care a movement]

Sudden thought: If small groups of right-wing teabaggers — crowds of a thousand or so — are disrupting town hall meetings and shouting down Democratic congresspeople, why not show them up with some giant marches in favor of health care reform? I think that progressive activists could probably muster a few big crowds in the tens of thousands at least.