Photos by Daryn Wright
Hip hop trio Friends With The Help perform at the journal’s launch on May 23
The Humanities Student Union launches inter/tidal vi, an interdisciplinary journal.
Jeff Fedoruk, editor of inter/tidal vi.
Album reviews: Queens of the Stone Age, Wild Nothing, and a throwback to Talking Heads
By Max Hill
Queens of the Stone Age — …Like Clockwork
The easiest reviews to write are always the ones fueled by intensity, by passion, by that indescribable feeling of having something worth writing about. However, with …Like Clockwork, the new album from Josh Homme’s alternative rock collective, Queens of the Stone Age, inspires no such feeling. It’s not bad, maybe that’s the problem. It’s not great, either, and it certainly doesn’t reach the lustful, grungy highs of the Songs for the Deaf or Lullabies to Paralyze.
Adopting an overarching theme of desperation and misguided lust, the 10 songs on …Like Clockwork see Homme imagining himself as several different animals, rueing the ephemeral nature of love, and balancing the theatrical (Elton John-featuring “Fairweather Friends”) with the bleak (album opener “Keep Your Eyes Peeled”).
As per usual, Dave Grohl’s drumming is incredibly tight — it’s easy to forget that his real talent is behind the kit, not the mic — and usual suspects Troy Van Leeuwen and Michael Schuman are in fine form here.
There’s a positive correlation between the volume of Homme’s voice and its quality, slower, sparser tracks like “Kalopsia” and album closer “…Like Clockwork” fall flat. On the other hand, early single “My God is the Sun” and “I Appear Missing” are album highlights, recalling the seductive, murky stoner rock of the group’s earlier albums.
The lyrics are unremarkable, but rarely distract. Homme’s refrain of “Does anyone ever get this right?” at the album’s beginning seems to refer to his lack of conviction, which colours the album even during its strongest moments.
Homme, who is spread thin as a part-time member of Them Crooked Vultures and Eagles of Death Metal, just doesn’t seem to have his heart in it; …Like Clockwork sounds more like an obligation than a labour of love. “Most of what you see, my dear / Is purely for show”, he sings on “…Like Clockwork,” and although many moments on the album don’t ring true, this one certainly does.
Wild Nothing — Empty Estate EP
Jack Tatum’s work under his Wild Nothing moniker has never inspired descriptions of experimental or game-changing. Despite his idolization of Berlin-era Bowie, The Cure and Brian Eno, all of whom had a hand in building the foundations of their own genres, Tatum’s summery dream pop has never aspired to upset the status quo: his strength lies in economic, accessible pop, and both of his full-lengths — 2010’s Gemini and 2012’s Nocturne — have found the perfect balance between catchy hooks and nostalgia-laden instrumentation.
With Empty Estate EP, Tatum has adopted a more electronic-oriented sound: Where his synths once filled the empty space between jangling guitars and his thin, Jim Reid-voice, Tatum’s newest EP is built around a core of sweet, synthesized melodies.
“On Guyot” and “Hachiko” mark Tatum’s first attempt at instrumental pieces, and although neither comes off as a strong point in the EP, both speak to Tatum’s growing talent for sonic landscapes — we’re sure to see him try his hand at more ambient music-inspired tracks in the future.
Disco-inspired single “A Dancing Shell” and groovy opener “The Body in Rainfall” are Tatum at his exuberant best, incorporating his new fascination with electronica into typically Wild Nothing-style pop songs. Empty Estate EP also comes off as Tatum’s most cohesive work to date; Tracks bleed into one another and seem to take cues from each other, making the EP an engrossing, singular listening experience.
As a format, the Extended Play is underrated. As often as it’s used as an excuse to release B-sides or tracks left on the cutting room floor, artists use the format to push the boundaries, to test out new styles of musicality to a less expectant audience. Although Empty Estate EP’s high-water mark is below that of either of his previous full-lengths, Tatum’s bold stylistic shifts and experimental bent speak to his growth as a songwriter, and certainly raise the bar for his eventual third LP.
Throwback: Talking Heads — Remain in Light
Talking Heads are easy to mistake as being grounded by a frontman / backing band dynamic. Lead singer and guitarist David Byrne earns more than his fair share of the spotlight in retrospectives of the band’s decade-long career: his erratic vocals, abstract lyrics and frenzied dance moves have immortalized him as one of the most remarkable leading men in rock music history.
Released in 1980, Remain in Light was born out of the band’s desire to emancipate themselves from this short-sighted classification. Percussive, polyrhythmic and playfully experimental, the songs on the LP each began as heavily improvised jam sessions. Whereas on earlier albums, Byrne had retained creative control, here he shelved his ego in favour of bassist Tina Weymouth and drummer Chris Frantz’s burgeoning fascination with native Haitian percussion styles
The two — who had been married since the band’s inception — had vacationed in the Caribbean following the release of 1979‘s Fear of Music, vexed by Byrne’s creative dominance. Their leave of absence inspired them to purchase an apartment in the Bahamas, where Byrne and guitarist Jerry Harrison soon rejoined them. Under the guidance of producer Brian Eno, the band combined their new, collaborative songwriting style with instrumental loops and samples which, at the time of the album’s release, seemed positively futuristic.
Byrne’s vocals were never stronger during the Heads’ tenure: his typically distinctive lyrics are shouted, chanted, and even rapped throughout the album’s eight tracks. Weymouth and Frantz are perfectly in sync; The bass and drums are mixed into the foreground of songs like “Born Under Punches (The Heat Goes On)” and single “Once In a Lifetime,” giving the album a swaggering, danceable quality that never undermin es its brilliance.
Though Remain in Light catches the band between its punk rock roots and its adoption of the New Wave aesthetic, the Heads never sounded more assured or innovative. In a decade that would come to be defined by superficiality and inanity, Remain in Light is a shining beacon, the best album by a band that was never more exceptional than when they worked together.
Letter to the Editor – May 27, 2013
By Clay Gray
Photos by Siyavash Izadi
Dear SFU community,
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) will be gathering in Vancouver, from Sept. 18-21, 2013 for one of its six national events. The TRC is mandated to seek the truth and play a part in the healing and reconciliation process for the Aboriginal people of Canada who suffered atrocities under the Canadian residential school system.
The Simon Fraser Student Society is asking you for letters of support for our proposed action, a closing of all three campuses on Sept. 18. These letters will be taken to the June 10 Senate meeting for the purpose of showing the extent to which students support this initiative.
Although many may be aware of the existence of the residential school system within Canada, few are cognizant of the extent to which this government initiative damaged the Aboriginal community. Over 3,000 child deaths occurred at institutions throughout the 150-year history of residential schools, with the last residential school closing its doors in 1996. Accompanying the death toll is well documented and rampant physical, psychological, and sexual abuse.
Along with playing a part in the healing and reconciliation of the Aboriginal community, the TRC also seeks to create awareness among the Canadian public regarding this page in Canadian history. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is a crucial aspect in the process of recognizing the systematic disenfranchisement of Aboriginal communities across Canada.
Currently, the University of British Columbia has committed to suspending all classes on September 18 to allow students, staff, and faculty to attend the opening day ceremonies of the TRC. In its Aboriginal Strategic Plan SFU states, “The University is committed to: Engaging the Aboriginal community in every way possible to contribute to their social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being” (ASP 2013, p 2).
The Simon Fraser Student Society is requesting the University to stand behind its statement to be “the leading engaged university in Canada” (ASP 2013, 2) by closing all three SFU campuses and formally inviting all SFU community members to participate in this historic event. At the very least, we believe as an expression of SFU’s commitment to the Aboriginal community, all classes should be cancelled to match UBC’s acknowledgement of this landmark event.
We are at a pivotal moment in Canadian history, if SFU is serious about establishing itself as an ally to the Aboriginal community; this is an opportunity to be exemplars for the rest of Canadian universities.
Yours in gratitude,
Clay J. Gray
SFSS At-Large Representative
Offices located at MBC 2220
(for more information or to submit a letter go to MBC 2220)
What role do SFU’s ethnic clubs play?
By Leah Bjornson
Photos by carnivalsensations
Where is the line drawn between camaraderie and exclusion?
Unlike our melting pot neighbours to the south, Canada prides itself on being a mosaic — on celebrating a myriad of cultures from around the world. Our country’s diversity is well reflected in SFU’s student body, and by its various ethnic-based clubs. However, organization based on ethnicity walks a fine line between camaraderie and exclusion.
At SFU, students are given a wide variety of ethnic-based clubs to choose from. Perhaps the Korean Storm (K.STORM), a not-for-profit student group aiming to promote the Korean culture to all students from all nations, is the right fit. Maybe it’s the Pakistan Students Association, which promotes Pakistani culture, cuisine, and way of life while advocating multi-culturalism at SFU. Or it could be the Canadianized Asian Club, where Canadians of Asian heritage aim to promote Asian-cultural awareness to all students on campus.
Such clubs are important for students for multiple reasons. First of all, it can be difficult to engage SFU when you’re not interested in things such as cheerleading, writing, or gaming. Ethnic clubs provide students with the opportunity to join a network of students and gain support and friendship without having to latch onto a particular interest.
Second, being with people from similar ethnic backgrounds can help international students who may feel overwhelmed in a new country. Having a break from English by speaking your mother tongue, or just being with friends who have similar beliefs and who face likewise challenges, can be extremely valuable.
Finally, by sharing their heritage with other SFU students, ethnic-based clubs can create a spirit of multiculturalism and acceptance on campus.
However, this kind of club can do the exact opposite if it doesn’t act as a bridge to the rest of the community. Instead of sharing its culture, it becomes a social club — a group of people hanging out because they’re ethnically similar, not because they necessarily have shared interests.
There is definitely a place at SFU for ethnic-based clubs. In an increasingly homogenized world, diversity is becoming even more sacred, and should be celebrated. But an ethnic-based club loses its purpose if it fails to do just that: celebrate its heritage.
When a club appeals to members of a certain ethnicity or race, its intention should stem from this. For example, the purpose of a Canadianized Asian Club, members of which are mainly second or third generation Canadians, should be (at least in part) to look back to the values of their old culture and explore their past. It should not simply be about throwing events, however charitable or noble they may be.
While the merits of a club supporting friendship and engagement are admirable, labelling it as an ethnic club is unnecessarily isolating. Therefore, a choice must be made: Does a club remain ethnic-based and try to promote and share its heritage with the SFU community, or does it transform into a social club, removing ethnic labels from its title that might — even unintentionally — exclude other students?
There is only so much you can learn and experience by hanging out with people from a similar background. Sure, it’s a safe zone, but university is all about exploration and discovery. This being said, it is not solely the responsibility of ethnic-based clubs to reach out. SFU students have to respond to and engage with these clubs themselves.
It can be easy, especially for the cultural majority, to dismiss the importance of belonging when surrounded by people of similar heritage. Taking the initiative to cross the floor and engage these groups is the next logical step in the evolution of ethnic clubs and culture at SFU.
From feeling Canadian to being Canadian
My journey from St. Martin to a small Canadian mountain town
I was born on St. Martin, a small colonial island in the Caribbean Sea. My family lived on the French side of the island, with the west side being under Dutch control. My roots are French and Italian, but my parents had lived around the globe before meeting and settling down in St. Martin and popping me out into existence.
Tensions began to rise in neighboring islands however, due to poor living conditions, and locals began fighting for their independence. Adding into the mixture the constant stream of hurricanes every year, my family decided it was best to move and find a new place to call home.
At the age of 11, I found myself in a vast mountainous region lost in a small rocky mountain town in the heart of British Columbia. Environmentally I underwent a massive shift, coming from a tropical island surrounded by a warm ocean to being placed in a mystical snowy valley. I had never witnessed snow before my arrival to Canada, and I soon grew to love the mountains and jumped into a variety of thrilling sports granted by the glorious peaks.
The Canadian culture was another factor that changed my life dramatically. In the Caribbean, racism and poverty was much more prevalent, but people were disarmingly relaxed and content. I found that Canada has a much higher standard of living, but people seem tenser.
Throughout my adolescence in Canada, I realized how materialism and one’s image is an apparent factor in how individuals judged and treated you. I found this challenging to grasp at first, and had a hard time understanding why other kids would pick on me for my appearance and the way I acted. But I soon adapted and became assimilated to the style of interactions and appearances in my small Canadian mountain town.
After I graduated from high school, I underwent four years of privileged Canadian university, and I took an interest in understanding my new home’s rights and politics. I soon fell in love with the Canadian system and felt honoured to be a permanent resident of Canada. However, I’ve always felt Canadians were a bit spoiled, for overlooking so many of the privileges and freedoms granted to them. With that said. I loved the polite and easy going attitude of the endless people I met across the country.
I could not wait to become a true Canadian citizen, and 12 years after setting foot on this grandiose land, my parents and I finally applied for citizenship. Sixteen months later, we found ourselves swearing our oath to the Queen and being accepted with open arms by a country I grew to love and cherish.
This wonderful event happened not even two weeks ago, and three days after, I was granted the one privilege I never had as a permanent resident — the opportunity to vote and help dictate which path my country would head in.
I had already spent half of my life in Canada before becoming a full citizen. I felt a sense of identity within Canada. In fact, not much changed when becoming a full-fledged citizen, but on that day I truly felt I belonged to Canada. It turned out to be an emotional event, and I was filled with joy after the ceremony. I voted shortly after, and felt proud to be fully part of this diverse country and to call myself a Canadian.
Take your degree into your own hands
Directed studies lets you graduate with something to show
The vast majority of the time, the work we do as students does nothing but get us a grade. Some amazing research happens in universities, but for the most part, few people outside the university setting appreciate it. Education does not have to be like this; it should not be like this.
One way of shaping your degree into something that more directly reflects your own interests and aspirations is to literally design your own course through the underutilized Directed Studies options. Students often complain about how irrelevant their course material will be once they’ve obtained their degree. It’s true that having a well-rounded degree is crucial, but that doesn’t make taking courses that don’t interest you any more palatable.
To start, you have to come up with a plan for what your perfect course would look like. In order to implement this, you then approach a professor who you think would be willing to supervise you. Assuming they agree, you simply fill out the paperwork required by your department and go from there.
Maybe you already know of a community group that you could approach, and then relate their research or project request to your degree. If you can find a professor who will support you, that project could be the basis of your directed studies course.
If you don’t know what group you could do it for, there are campus resources you could check out, such as SFPIRG’s Action Research eXchange (ARX) program. Community social and environmental justice groups submit a project proposal for assistance and interested students can then browse the ARX listings and apply for the opportunity.
As an undergraduate, Jennifer McRae pursued three directed studies courses. She wanted to have more autonomy to further research areas of interest not covered within her department’s courses. Through directed studies, she was able to co-author two book reviews with a professor, both of which were subsequently published in a well-known academic journal.
Another one of these courses led to her current employment position as a project coordination in the Experiential Education Project for SFU, a position she has held for the past two and a half years.
As students, we spend a huge part of our lives at school and doing school-related activities with hopes that our efforts will matter one day. However, it is worth questioning the notion that we have nothing to offer right now and that we cannot be relevant to our communities until we graduate. Students are capable of all kinds of contributions and it feels better to put energy and time into a project when you know it actually matters to someone.
Because job-readiness is a real issue, it is also worth pointing out that this kind of engaged project really does look good on a resume. In today’s competitive job market, creativity, independence and ingenuity are highly valued, and completion of a directed studies course, particularly one that involves real work in the community, can only help you to stand out when it comes to applying for your dream job.
Getting our degree is a tremendous commitment of time and energy, so why shouldn’t we make the most of it? There are lots of ways that we can really engage with our studies, and directed studies courses are one excellent tool for taking charge of our university experience.
Violent anarchists not helping the fight against gentrification
There’s got to be a better way than burning down the house
By Joel Mackenzie
Photos by Ben Buckley
Self-proclaimed “anarchists” have taken responsibility for the recent burning of a housing development in Vancouver’s downtown Eastside, all in the name of anti-gentrification of the area. Aside from being immature and dangerous, this act benefits neither the anti-gentrification movement, nor anarchist philosophy.
The DTES Anti-Gentrification group has great intentions. Its members do not want to see the community of the area driven out in favour of expensive housing projects, stores, restaurants, etc. The people who live in this community deserve to be treated as people, not run out by developers who put profit over their welfare. Of course, these folks realize the area needs to be changed, but they don’t want it done at the expense of these peoples’ well-being.
Anarchists, philosophically, fit right into this side of the debate. The website which claimed responsibility for the attack, anarchistnews.org, claim they did so “for a world where no one is homeless, hassled by police, the state or capitalists.” But attacks like these aren’t promoting equality. Yes, they prove that people are upset about gentrification in the area, and yes, they might cause fear in the real estate developers that perhaps could be called responsible for the problem.
However, the violence of this act simply creates a divide between these people and everyone else. The businessmen, the police, and the general public won’t see a reason to believe in anti-gentrification, nor in anarchy; they will simply see people who purport a belief that appears to be based on violence.
Creating a divide is most of what this accomplishes, and such a divide between people does not help the political ideology of anarchy. Setting fire to a developing housing complex does not fight the egos that make people in a capitalist system put monetary profit over respecting people.
These attackers appear engulfed in similar mindsets: setting this fire seems more about being right than standing up for their beliefs, more about fighting an enemy than making their own perspectives known to the “capitalists,” or, in this particular case, “yuppies.” Fighting the people inside a system is hardly taking a stand against that system itself. It is not changing the minds of those within it, but is doing just the opposite by creating more strongly set opinions on either side, and a stronger divide between the two groups.
My argument here reminds me of one that bothered a friend of mine who protested at a neo-nazi rally. He was upset by a “hippie” proclaiming that even just shouting at the racist participants was merely fighting violence with another form of violence, which ultimately leads nowhere. My friend was upset that the man was using a philosophical debate which wouldn’t solve the immediate problem (the individuals whose rallying projected hatred).
I feel I’ve taken the philosophical side of the “hippie” — the one that points fingers, that complains, and that can’t offer practical solutions. But I, too, see the need for immediate protestation when neo-nazis, or in this case, gentrification, is endangering people’s livelihoods and stripping them of respect.
A violent one like this though, does more bad than good. It widens the gap between the protestors and the general public, and brings people further from the real issues while adding nothing to the debate at hand.
Voting is not irrelevant, but it sure feels like it
Average voter turnout from 1945 to 2001 within the G8 nations
By Mohamed Sheriffdeen
Photos by Eleanor Qu
As is often the case given an article on this subject, I should preface it by stating that I did vote in the recently completed Provincial elections — though I neglected to update my Facebook status accordingly — before settling down on my couch to gaze in abject disbelief as the Liberals made off with an absolute landslide at the polls. The resultant beating was so thorough that it cast into doubt whether the outcome was actually an upset at all; the underdog rarely crushes the Goliath in such a devastating manner, so maybe we were simply misled by some shadowy Liberal-pollster conspiracy all along.
Given the events, politically bent minds within the media, social media and blogosphere erupted in a series of frenzied questions targeted at digging out the buried truth; specifically “What the hell happened?” A number of valid concerns regarding campaign strategies were raised by an array of sources, but the quickest point to catch on was the once again abject voter turnout. More significantly was the absolute void of eligible voters under the age of 35 who apparently had far better things to do than show up to the polls to perform their civic duty.
Public nattering has been palpable, and has easily stolen the thunder from Clark’s thunderous win. The venomous reaction targeted towards young voters has been swift and merciless, almost to the point of sheer mockery. Busier categorizing youths as lazy, slovenly, ineffectual primitives with little or no connection to the important events of the day, these cackling condemnations rarely made any headway into questioning why voter turnout was so low, preferring to scribble with a broad pen. Sadly, this blanket “Why the hell aren’t you voting? What’s wrong with you people?” mentality has sprouted legs everywhere, even University newspapers.
The Peak itself published two articles last week that commented on voter apathy in tones varnished with eloquence but seething with pure bile and presumed civic outrage. “Instead of directing anger at those who opted to vote for one of the smaller parties, blame should be rightfully placed on the shoulders of those who elected not to cast a ballot” fumed Gloria Mellesmoen, while trying to allocate blame for the Liberal win.
Alison Roach, of the same paper and apparent doomsayer apostle, sighed “Overall, the election seems to be saying that BC doesn’t care much about change; or rather, that we don’t care much about any of this.” In scrawling through message boards and comment threads on various websites, multiple commenters appeared to come up with variations on the same brilliant joke independently (“We should put a Like button next to each candidate on Facebook, maybe the kids could vote between status updates!”) while laughing churlishly, wiping their monocles and sipping on cups of not-too-hot tea.
Voter participation has been on a downward trend in BC for a number of years, so allow me to immerse you in a few more (fun!) facts and figures by way of Elections BC. While numbers for the most recent election are still not fully available, overall voter participation (across all age groups) has declined from 70.34 per cent in 1983 to 50.99 per cent in 2009, falling every year. In the 2009 general election, an abysmal 26.88 per cent of voters between the ages of 18 and 24 decided to cast a ballot (25–34 year olds won the silver in this dubious category, logging votes from only 33.69 per cent of all those eligible.) So why the apathy with young voters?
First of all, let’s stop pretending that this affliction is limited to youth in BC. During their presidential election in 2012, the US grappled with the same issues despite record turnouts in 2008. Disaffection in Japan has reached a modern high as fewer than 50 per cent of young voters turned out in their December 2012 election.
In an excellent article published in ThinkAfrica Press in October 2011, Celeste Hicks interviewed young adults in Tunisia with higher educations, who “tearfully clutched” at their diplomas as they bemoaned the state of their job market in the aftermath of the Jasmine Revolution. “I’ve got no confidence in these elections at all. I’m not going to vote” proclaimed 26 year old Neila Herela, qualified in publicity and marketing but living on the street.
For the sake of our discussion however, let’s limit our focus to the so-called infotainment addicted, attention-span-compromised youth of BC who are attached by the hip, heart and mind to their smartphones. Truly, if you are a young voter, there is very rarely any good reason provided to actually impel you to vote, despite the proclamations of those voting-snobs out there who thumb their noses as they rifle off inane lines of dignified disbelief that do nothing to get at the real heart of the issue — “If you do not vote you don’t get to complain about decisions made in government;” “there are people out there your age dying for the right to vote;” “show these crusty old politicians that you matter and make your voice heard!” — let’s address the first and last comments first.
An individual’s voice is not nullified just because they don’t exercise their right to participate in a democratic forum. Often those who decide not to vote feel marginalized, as if their thoughts already don’t matter to the outcome. By adopting such a divisive tactic, we further drive those individuals out of the social arena without addressing why they feel their voices carry no timbre.
Furthermore, a selective decision to not vote can be made as a form of silent protest. I say that because I have done it in the past. Why vote for a party you consider the lesser of two evils? A party that does not represent your moral, economic or social viewpoints? A vote cast for the sake of voting by an uneducated individual with only the most basic understanding of a party’s platforms is, by this ridiculous statement, elevated as much grander than an individual who exercised their own choice to sit out an election — a vote in and of itself.
In a sense, this resounding echo heard by those politicians vanquished in an election is the voice of the people. In an election where less than 30 per cent of the eligible members voted, that is a loud bloody noise.
As far as kids our age dying for this right, that is an indisputable truth. One needs only to flip open a newspaper and cast a glance at the atrocities committed in Syria to witness the plight of the disenfranchised. However, just as it would be impossible for us to explain the internet to a cryogenically frozen and revived Walt Disney today, it is impossible to communicate that viewpoint to a youth who has grown up in North America with all the benefits of a free and modern society. Individuals here need to be reached with a message that they understand. One which is sadly absent in politics today: passion.
Paul Kershaw aptly labeled the Millennial generation when he founded the Generation Squeeze campaign. His driving point is simple: parties in power don’t feel the need to court the youth vote because the youth vote doesn’t affect campaign results. As a result, the youth stay away from the polls because public policy is rarely shaped in a manner that affects them. And because they stay away, they are not counted.
It is an absurd cycle that most politicians appear uninterested in breaking despite the ridiculously vast pool of untapped voters that they are allowing to fall by the wayside (ask Obama how much the youth vote helped his 2008 campaign before you claim that an investment in this age group is a waste of time.) Public policy is almost invariably catered to middle class earners, families and older people. Individuals trying to afford school or crack the job market are routinely ignored by lawmakers, yet our taxes are diverted to fund social systems for people already of retirement age who, in today’s economic reality, cannot afford to leave their jobs.
This creates a simultaneous shortage of opportunities and support systems for those much maligned and chastised youth. We get squeezed at the pump by an uncaring and distant government, and are castigated when we choose not to elect one that continues to pretend we don’t exist.
Furthermore, the current political system has bred an enormous disconnect between government and the average working and voting Canadian. Politicians are no longer feted on high as honourable civil servants, but viewed as walking scandals, punchlines and pompous gasbags squabbling amongst one another in an environment that breeds complacency and reduced accountability. Political viewpoints and party outlines are no longer a means to an open and pragmatic discussion of views in the interest of provincial and national agendas.
Every event, idea or platform is politicized in an endless display of exhausting one-upmanship and chicanery that means nothing to the voting public. Very little information about important and vital social programs ever seeps down the ladder to the information starved masses; instead, we are deluged by vulgar attacks on candidates by candidates.
Is it any wonder that 18–24 year olds (every marketing analyst’s indicator of broad population trends) are tuning out in droves? Here’s a crazy idea: maybe Adrian Dix didn’t lose the unlosable election because youth voters didn’t turn out. Maybe he lost it because he centered his entire campaign on attacking the bloated and hobbling Liberal government without discussing what his own party would do while in power. Maybe he was unable to allay voters’ fears about the disastrous NDP governments of the 90s, an attack line the Liberals have trotted out in every single election over the last twelve years.
In a rant on March 29, 2011, Rick Mercer personified the patronizing and paternalistic viewpoint of an older generation nonplussed by youth apathy, when he beseeched young people to “scare the hell out of the people running this country [by doing] the unexpected. Take 20 minutes out of your day, and vote.” There is no compelling reason or passion in that statement. Vote because it’s your job. Vote because you should vote. Vote because increased polling numbers makes us all feel better about ourselves.
But how about vote to effect an actual change? That won’t happen until a candidate arises that commands that passion. Instead of going to your local candidate hat in hand, offering your feeble support, demand your candidate comes to you, and illustrate why they deserve your vote. That tactic may actually bring some real change.
Paying for it
Is crowdfunding the way of the future?
By Rachel Braeuer
Photos by Ariel Mitchell
If there’s a tape of a shady politician smoking crack, I want to see it. As a writing plebe, when people like Rob Ford try to divert millions of dollars from AIDS prevention because “if you’re not doing needles or you’re not gay,” as he alleges, you won’t get AIDS; or state that oriental people work like dogs, “sleeping beside their machines,” ergo they’re more successful, there’s little to nothing that I or anyone like me can do besides bang out a few vitriolic words and hope to inform more people and inspire them to care.
Still, it’s heavy and hard work, and at the end of the day, it doesn’t change anything. And then these people do something like (allegedly) smoke a crack pipe on film. For a day, they’re your assistant. They did all the heavy lifting for you, and now you can watch the video and laugh maniacally in all your well-deserved schadenfreude glory. But am I willing to spend my own money for this pleasure, and should I even have to?
Crowdfunding is becoming an increasingly popular way for creative-types to make a go at it in a world where, up until 20 years ago, consumers could be happily removed from the process the goods they consume go through to get to them, and more importantly from the producers, whether we’re talking about the illegal immigrant trafficked into Canada to work on a farm in the valley that our blueberries come from, or the singer behind our latest favourite song.
Cue the internet: individuals who we would only have a hope of really getting to know after a stunning rise to fame, chronicled in Rolling Stone after their second successful world tour, we now know on a very personal level. Amanda Palmer is arguably the most successful crowdfunded artist of our time, attributing her success to focusing on the give and take of a relationship defined by monetary exchange.
The give, on her part, seems to be equal parts music and a controlled yet voyeuristic look into her life through a commitment to connecting with fans via social media. When she cancels a tour, we don’t get a hollow press release about family health and a wish for privacy. She tells us her friend has cancer on her blog, offering us real emotions behind her choice, posting pictures from the hospital, humanizing her celebrity. We seem to appreciate this, as we’ve collectively given her over $1.2 million.
The people behind Ford’s crack-tape are no Amanda Palmers, though. The person or people holding on to the alleged tape and asking for the hefty $200, 000 investment are (again, allegedly) drug dealers. While I was initially prepared to fork over at least $20, after realizing this, I hit pause. Not that I haven’t, uh, funded local hydroponic efforts ever, just that helping to give $200k to someone who probably sells crack cocaine is a pretty dark cloud, even if the silver lining is roasting a pig of epic proportions. Many have brought up this same issue, saying there are much more worthwhile endeavours to donate to. “There are starving children in China!” they bellow, before picking through the “Made in Bangladesh” discount piles of Joe Fresh clothing at Superstore.
Naysayers aren’t wrong, but in a world with such nefarious ethics, define right. It’s clear that governing bodies aren’t going to hold public figures accountable for their actions. A former police officer has stated that the purchase of the tape itself poses interesting legal issues surrounding the proceeds of crime and money laundering sections of the Criminal Code. What about the legality of someone purchasing and smoking crack cocaine? Last time I checked, that was still, unquestionably, illegal. Proof allegedly exists, but instead of confirming the validity of this and holding people accountable, we’re pontificating about questionably ethical, maybe illegal activity that hasn’t happened yet.
Gawker, the media conglomerate that wants to raise funds to buy the tape, is a gossip blog geared towards entertainment. It’s understandable why people would have a hard time taking them seriously. But other, more highbrow, media outlets don’t seem any less suspect when it comes to fair reporting.
In an interview with Jian Ghomeshi, Conrad Black, who headed the third-largest newspaper group in the world, characterized the recent scandal in the PM’s office surrounding a $90, 000 personal cheque being used to divert attention away from a potential misuse of Government funds as a friend looking out for another friend. By this logic, if the crack-tape exists, we can just write it off as Ford supporting local small business owners, I guess.
It’s a sad day when the public has to spend their own income, the taxes from which pay for Ford’s habits (whether they’re late night trips to McDonalds or to his dealers), to hold public figures such as him accountable. While we choose to fund individuals like Palmer, or efforts like Kony 2012 or even the crack-tape purchase, we, via proxy, fund politician’s illegal activities whether we like it or not.
Given the passionate response to this scandal and others like it by those who could actually do something about it, it’s clear that whether we’re it comes directly from2 our pockets or elsewhere, of our own volition or not, we’re going to be paying for it.
Top Five Google Glass Competitors
While the world might be abuzz about Google’s latest essential innovation, a computer that you can wear on your face, Google Glass isn’t alone in the creepy, silly-looking technology marketplace. Although they haven’t received as much public attention as Glass, Google’s competitors are also hoping to get a product on your face as early as next year. Here’s a look at some of the most exciting Google Glass-esque products soon to be owned by the few idiots who for some reason don’t use Google.
1. Bing Binoculars
While certainly not as popular as Google Glass, Bing Binoculars are essentially the exact same thing except they won’t be released until many years after Google’s product has become firmly planted as the standard wearable computer. Bing Binoculars only real unique differences are that they are much less convenient to use and people will make fun of you if you use them in public.
Key Feature: As they are “binoculars”, Bing has included a feature that allows users to look ahead and into a future in which “Bing” no longer exists.
Estimated Cost: Free, just use it . . . please!
2. Yahoo Contact Lenses
Yahoo’s take on Google Glass is the Yahoo Contact Lenses which was designed to take into account the shame of Yahoo users and gives you the ability to check your Yahoo or
RocketMail e-mail account, on-the-go, without anyone having to know that you use a Yahoo or RocketMail e-mail account.
Key Feature: Since Yahoo now owns Tumblr, the Lenses will probably have some sort of new feature that doesn’t seem very special and you probably won’t understand it, but its going to be really popular with teenage girls for some reason.
Estimated Cost: Pretty cheap but includes splash-page advertising which can be dangerous when you’re walking down a busy street.
3. Ask Jeeves Monocle
Ask.com (formerly AskJeeves.com) has brought back their stuffy butler image with the high tech Ask Jeeves Monocle. Despite being much more inconvenient than just saying keywords, the Monocle requires all commands to be asked in the form of a question. The most common questions tracked so far during their limited release include: “Why did I waste so much money on this stupid monocle?”; “Exactly how big of an asshole do I look like right now?”; “Does this thing still work after falling onto the ground?”; and “How can I exchange this for Google Glass?”
Key Feature: Its frame can be fitted with any of your prescription monocle lenses.
Estimated Cost: Standard monocle price.
4. Reddit Self-Superiority Spectacles
While not exactly a competitor of Google, popular social news and entertainment website, reddit, has also been collectively designing their own glasses. While the Reddit Self-Superiority Spectacles have been described by members of the site as “the greatest invention EVER” and have a ton of “up votes,” the glasses actually do very little other than make people feel as if they’re a lot smarter than everyone else while the device mostly just flashes stupid memes in their eyes.
Key Feature: The spectacles “ask me anything” button, which is really the only reason to ever wear them.
Estimated Cost: About $25 (With an additional $15 for each “sub-specs”)
5. Webcrawler Hat
The Webcrawler Hat is a baseball hat that says “Webcrawler” on it.
Key Feature: A brim.
Estimated Cost: The Webcrawler Hat is only available to Webcrawler.com workers.
The Rest . . .
Here’s a few more Google Glass competitors that didn’t make the top five.
Blogspot Bifocals
McAfee Safety Goggles
Craigslist Secondhand Google Glass
Linkedin Telescope
