The Jazz Feeling

Jazz is really important music. I am amazed everyday as I listen to all kinds of music, non of it shows any influences of jazz. If you read Ken Burn's book, maybe it would make more sense. With the onset of hurricane Katrina, the very roots of our only native American art form are in question. Society needs to take this music more seriously, and we as a country need a resurgence of the jazz spirit. What am I talking about? Jazz music feels like no other music. It took tribal African drummers to be able to loosen up metronomic rhythmic feel. Once you learn that you can never go back. I have been playing cruise ships for about three years. Almost the entire time I have been confronted with all types of music, most of them not swinging. I guess it took Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, and Thelonious Monk, the Bebop School, to hip us up. They took traditional square ass, run-of-the-mill swing music, and made it really groove. That is what bebop is. The rhythmic feel of Bebop music swings on the off beat, not the on beat. 1&3 traditionally have been straight beats for upper crust Lester Lanin-type suits. Jazz loosens that rhythm up and makes it feel better and stronger. Accents in a bop melody swing on the off beats. Reggae swings on the off beat. Afro-Cuban swings on the off beat. Once you get that bubble in your soul, it is hard to go back. There has been no music in recent years that exhibits the desirable traits of jazz music. Our society is not swinging. Swing is almost real feeling personified. Unlike pop that glorifies a string of perfectly articulated eighth notes, bop adds soul to those melodies. The phrase or the sentence becomes more important than keeping perfect metronomic time. Why would anybody talk in a perfect rhythm with no accentuation? It is polite but boring. There are some interpretations of music from the Classic period that use this style. Jazz comes more from the Romantic period where phrases undulate.

Take the Lead, Brah

The arts are necessary, because they are one of the few things that transcend social and racial boundaries. That was the beauty of the movie Take the Lead.

Aristocracy's Mail Order Bride

The Break Up wasn't the easiest movie to watch. Luckily about 2/3 of the way through the" break up" Vince and Jennifer decided they still liked each other. That made the hateful things they were doing to each other more comedic. I sighed a sigh of relief when the movie reached this point. Unfortunately a relationship I once had that bore a remarkable resemblance to this one did not turn out as well. The majority of my past relationships with women have been successful. I am not saying no one ever got hurt, but for the most part we separated on peaceful terms. That allowed closure for both parties, and we were free to go on with our lives with no bleeding wounds. Only once have I had the challenging experience represented in the movie "The Break Up." To this day we still have no real closure on the situation. It is with this post I would like to explain what happened. Recently there was a program on National Public Radio that said marriage was becoming an institution for the elite. This struck a chord with me, because twice I have been involved with women where the 'break up" was caused by money. The first occurred years ago. I had lost my gig teaching at a major university, so I had to redirect and find another means of support. I began playing music live in bands. I was able to make just enough money to support myself, but the lifestyle I had before which allowed me to have a relationship was gone. It was a monetary issue. My girlfriend was enrolled in college at the time but for some reason decided to stop going to class. She seemed happy sleeping on my couch all day long. This was disturbing to me anyway, but in view of my current financial situation I needed help from her, not sleep. This was causing stress, because I did not have a full-time job that allowed me to support the both of us. Considering she was a college student still tethered to her parents purse strings, I felt it wasn't my responsibility. Courtship is another matter. Dates and gifts and restaurants are all worthy receivers of a man's money, because these are the things that assure we get what we need. There is a process between men and women. You either pay in the short term or you pay in the long term. Paying in the short term would mean going to a prostitute and buying sex. Paying in the long term would mean investing in a "relationship" hopefully that will yield what you need. I feel this is the tried and true method of courtship in America. It is a full-time undertaking and has been a major part of our culture for a long time. I have left this process behind, because the older you get the less you want to subject yourself to the possibilities of humiliation and rejection. As an adult why should our emotional fate be left to someone else? The answer is because traditionally we are reared as co-dependant beings. We are taught a kind of relationship where partners are intimately tied as soul mates sharing everything. The heart bleeds and emotions are worn on the sleeve. At least that was how my first and most successful relationship was. This is a vital component of youth, and you can see it personified in the eyes of John Travolta and Olivia Newton John on the CD cover of the soundtrack for the movie Grease. There is wonder and amazement and a sense of the unknown in their eyes. The older you get the more this disappears, and reality sets in. The things you need are crystallized, and it is easier to barter for them in a tangible process rather than trusting "fate." It seems a little naive to surrender your feelings to the wind. My most recent relationship was like this, and I grew to appreciate it. Now you were no longer vulnerable to the prospect of being hurt by another person. You grew a tough skin and hunkered down to live your life albeit devoid of the traditional trappings of love. As I posted earlier, I channel those feelings into music. In the first relationship its demise was the result of lack of money, but she never knew that. I never have been able to express that to her. She married a drummer, and that was the end of that. I am not saying the split was a mistake, but for me the 'break up" had no closure although it ended. Many of the quirky things Anniston resorted to in the movie happened in our own "break up." It wasn't pleasant to re-experience those, mainly because she was using manipulation and persecution as tools to make him jealous. That is a mistake. It doesn't make sense to use someone else even in the inexplicable and irrational world of women. Vince worked long hard days, and when he came home in the afternoon wanted to sit down and take a load off his tired feet. That is a reasonable expectation. Somewhere in the mix the two planned a family dinner, and she had been preparing for it all day. Vince, because of his tiredness, was obstinate in resigning himself to setting the table or bringing her 12 lemons. He played her needs off as petty compared to his own. She on the other hand was demanding more respect and help in the relationship. It was untimely, but they both stood their ground, and so ensued the plot of "The Break Up." That was a difficult situation, because in the midst of strong feelings by both, it is difficult to find your compassionate self. All she wanted was his loving side to surface and reassure her he still was committed to the relationship. He was pissed off and needed to vent his anger first. It took a couple or weeks for this to happen, but so there was your story. What is confusing is the extreme tactics Anniston used to try to regain his love. Jealousy, public humiliation, and other acts could be seen as comedic in a movie, but one never knows the dividing line. He found that out later when she cried after he missed a concert, even though she had broken up with him. Her method was flawed, so we as an audience must acknowledge that. What she did was wrong. The grift is, much of Hollywood is doing the same thing, showing immoral behavior in an intended humorous context. It could be a suitable challenge for actors to play "bad guys" for a change. Many actors and actresses long to leave their "goodie two shoes" roles behind and play something meatier. When a producer casts a traditional actress into a traditional-appearing role, and that turns out to be evil or bad, what taste does that leave in the audience's mouth? You never see it cumming. Oops, I mean coming. My first exampleof this was Steve Martin;s role in Shopgirl. The movie is seen through the eyes of Claire Danes, who falls for a handsome, rich, prince-like character. In the end he turns out to be bad. We went through all that romance with her only to be jilted when he turned out to be a selfish user. Because of this the movie is morally ambiguous for the majority of the time. That is not fun for the audience to sit through. We don't know who the good guy is and who the bad guy is. I personally didn't want to rehash the experience of being in a bad relationship in the movie theater. "The Break Up" assured me I have made the right decision in abandoning people as a component for personal happiness. People these days don't really deserve to be married, because they don't know how. Marriage takes a commitment. That commitment means, even in times of strife and hardship and hatred and animosity, the commitment takes precedence. It people in a couple understand that, then you can get through periods of instability. Common decency and respect help. Parading other men in front of your intended spouse is no way to arouse him. Vince finally tells Anniston, "Why didn't you just tell me?" Instead it was a complex array of games and manipulations trying to get what she wanted. I guess it wouldn't have been very funny to watch rational adults work through these problems. Movies such as "About Last Night" and "The Break Up" wouldn't' exist. I came out of the theater thinking relevant thoughts but feeling just as maimed as I did seventeen years ago when my ex-girlfriend did these things to me. The funny thing is, she didn't want me back like Anniston did. She just wanted to hurt me for having hurting her, and she did. Three years of intimate good feeling has the incredible capacity to do damage when it turns to evil. That was the most difficult part of it all, not losing the girl, but watching her turn into something that seemed evil. That was an unprecedented wake up call to the presence of evil. Granted she misconstrued my actions as evil, but they were not. I always wanted to explain to her nothing that happened was premeditated, vitriolic, or antagonistic. It simply was a plea to find solstice in a difficult situation, and a suitable solution was never found. As a result I had no no closure, and all of those unrealized emotions came back to haunt me in almost five years of clinical depression. No one deserves to go through that, and it is unfortunate it all transpired as the result of a misunderstanding. In Anniston's and Vaughn's case one must ask, "Is a man that talks on a microphone all day and plays violent video games at night really compatible with a woman that sells art in a high brow studio?" Does a fast-talking character such as many as John Cusack portray really have what it takes to satisfy the needs of such a woman? Is a desire and an attraction grounds enough upon which to form a relationship? These are the questions that should be asked first, but then again that would be boring in the movie theater. I think this film was therapy for Vaughn, and I hope he gets the closure he seeks.

V for Ultraviolet in the Underworld's Fluxing Tomb

First I would like to suggest that Yahoo begin putting Erin Brokovich's picture in their advertisements rather than Angelina Jolie's. Not that I have anything against her. Evidently she is a humanitarian spreading her cause in Africa. I would like to see some evidence of her work rather than mug shots of her and Brad and their new baby. In terms of a successful movie career I would have to rate Pitt as one of the most successful actors of our time. He is a young Redford, and movies such as A River Runs Through It and Legends of the Fall will go down in cinematic history. There are epic qualities in his performances, and I hope he gets back to work after the hub bub of their new baby. Jolie on the other hand? Mr. and Mrs. Smith, as its director suggested, was the first time Jolie exhibited these particular qualities on screen. What were these? They were "womanly" characteristics reminiscent of Marilyn Monroe, and they were directed at Brad Pitt. Just like the recent romance of Jennifer Anniston and Vince Vaughn, those interactions were strong enough to light semi-permanent fires in their loins. It just proves the emotions involved in acting are real. Artists are able to interject real life experiences into chosen situations lending an authenticity hopefully that transcends the screen and sustains the test of time. Does Jolie have a filmography substantial enough to merit plastering her mug all over pop culture America? I'm not sure, but her appearance on Anderson Cooper's 360 may spread some light on what she is trying to achieve. I don't know if Laura Croft, Tomb Raider does it. For that matter I am not sure any of the films in that category are doing much for American society. What is that genre, a group of films with desolate, lonely, female super heroes? I don't know where it came from, just like I don't know where the "metrosexual" movement came from. South Park made fun of the latter poking fun at a government that tried to feminize society only to be taken over by Crab People. I wish they would do an episode on these films.
V for Vandetta with Natalie Portman.
Laura Croft Tomb Raider with Angelina Jolie.
Ultraviolet with Milla Jovovich.
Underworld with Kate Beckinsale.
Aeon Flux with Charlize Theron.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon with Ziyi Zhang.
I would consider them women's lib films, because they glorify women as super heroes rather than sex symbols. Although the characters are feminine in certain situations, say Jolie's artificially enhanced breasts bulging from beneath her tight costume, that combination is not traditional. The film industry is breaking ground in a way liberating itself from that sexual stereotype of Marilyn. In doing so is their purpose well-conceived? What are they trying to accomplish? Redefining human perception is a risky concept, as we have found with the current Republican political regime. I would rather not wake up everyday with media and government redefining my sensibilities. Am I supposed to be attracted to these creatures, super heroes in Spandex, fighting world corruption trapped in a lonely, bleak, and desolate life? That isn't appealing. What is appealing is a character that has their feet firmly planted in reality. It is not a new problem, because many films are presenting similar scenarios of human ambiguity. Broke Back Mountain took the first step in trying to glamorize homosexuality. It seems our creative society is trying to become more liberal, but on what grounds? Does this trend have moral and ethical roots? Is the agenda going to help and enlighten American society, or is it just trying to create controversy to make money? I would say the latter, because upon examining human history these films are dealing with situations that aren't based in reality. Okay fiction, or say comic books. We know that has been a huge trend in the last decade, and I still say it is failing. Comic books don't translate well to the big screen, because the big screen traditionally has dealt with human perceptions. There have been lots of fictitious stories and situations, but they are usually dealt with in human terms. Now the film industry is interjecting inhuman characteristic, behaviors that are not traditionally human. When a film abandons traditional human emotions such as compassion, disappointment, love, and bemusement they are in essence trying to re-define humanity. Do we as a culture really want to question our emotions and ethical and moral systems? Should we allow Sony Playstation characters, DC Comics characters, and aliens to create a new belief system? Wouldn't we feel more comfortable and secure with a reassurance of our traditional belief systems? I really don't find soul searching that enjoyable in the theatre. I try to work those issues out in my own time. Watching films with confused characters isn't easy or fun. I usually attempt to find some basic human instinct in a film, and that is becoming more difficult. Isn't my gut reaction as a man supposed to lust after a busty Laura Croft? Is this what the creators intended? I'm not sure they know. What purpose do these characters serve? Take women as attractive as these and cloud human response with despondency? I don't get it. Beautiful sexy bodies wrapped in a shroud of despair and loneliness? I am waiting for a film where my sensibilities as a 43 year old are reinforced, that blessed feeling that allows me to be intrigued and titillated by a woman character without being chastised as a male chauvinist pig. My life as a single adult seems to have been reduced to a continual state of guilt, because I would like still to be attracted a women. Why should I have to defend what used to be the majority sentiment of man? That is why I enjoy the movie Lolita so much. It allows me to indulge in unbridled love with no societal agenda projected upon me. I don't have to try to understand what I feel and believe, because it is reinforced. This trend in film reinforces in my mind there is a Totalitarian regime trying to achieve some unknown agenda. It appears to be homosexual in nature.

Ana Dances

Delicate as a dollop of morning dew.
Effervescent as a red merlot.
Ana dances her way.
A tantalizing petal on the Destiny's wind.
Ana dances her way.
She's under your skin.
You feel her thoughts,
you betroth her desire like a soul mate
anticipating her action.
Her pain is deep.
Beelzebub tormenting her petite physique.
A war raging in her womb,
searching for solstice.
Equilibrium in the face of unrest.
Seasoned like a courtesan, she knows the game.
But a little girl craves candy from the corner drugstore.
Bobby socks rolled down,
Licking a sugar stick striped with peppermint.

A Word About Global Warming

Many people don't know the massive hole in our Ozone layer over the South Pole was caused by the American military. The Navy had to have a reliable way to communicate with nuclear subs around the globe, so so they put a transmitter at the South Pole. Those extremely powerful electro-magnetic waves burned a hole in the ozone layer. Talk about global warming! Many people believe the Navy is responsible for the beaching of whales, because their low frequency RADAR system interferes with the communication process of whales. Tests have been performed, and the pure decibel levels of the emitted energy was enough to cause loss of hearing and death to marine animals. People are concerned about Global Warming. Al Gore is concerned. Our federal government should become concerned and stop loosening policies rather than creating and enforcing them. The Environmental Protection Agency is a joke. The Office of Noise Abatement is defunct. President Bush continues to ease legislation on the energy industry. Coal burning power plants are the dirtiest hydroflouro-carbon producers, but they are inexpensive. Suggestions have been made by Congress to make these companies spend the millions to bring them up to acceptable EPA standards, but they fail. Diesel fuel emissions account for 50% of the microdust in our air, yet personal vehicles still squeak by as "farm machinery" unregulated by EPA standards. If our government became serious about reducing pollution and lessening global warming, they could. The problem is our current government is not concerned with the environment. All these problems will be left for future generations to solve as will the price tag for Social Security and the debt of the Iraq war. It is a "spend now, pay later" process. I for one am sick of it. I am so tired of watching rich old farts gets richer, snarling in the process. Lawyers are not always the best choices for leaders. In many countries other professionals are elected leaders. Doctors and teachers and artists are all capable of leading countries, but who is better equipped to manipulate the system for their own personal gain? The answer is someone that understands our laws. Lawyers win cases, because they know more about the system. It seems more and more good judgment and wisdom no longer play a role in our judicial system. Our legal system no longer "swings." Winning cases and collecting a pay check are the only goals. Forget about the journey. It's all about the end. Therefore our government has ceased to exist on a human level. They are pawns in a flawed, automated system that continues to revolve around an invisible Mecca unknown to the public. Money, money, money, money, money as the song goes. Back to "The War on Warming." Politicians and media spew a lot of rhetoric. It is so intense sometimes it becomes absurd. Words flying and yet no one knows anything about what is happening. For global warming to occur something unique must be happening. While over-population and our mass reliance on the internal combustion engine is problematic, I do not feel that is the sole cause of global warming. There has to be another phenomenon that is causing the "global" part of global warming. Global implies there is a unified cause. It seems to imply a particular thing is heating our planet like a giant blow dryer. Global implies a singular event is transpiring unwatched causing catastrophic damage to the environment. If Al Gore is right, the polar ice caps are beginning to melt. What possible man made thing could overcome the furies of nature, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, floods, and earthquakes and bring the planet to an untimely death? My answer is infrasound. While I have stood on the infrasound soap box before, it is in this post I will explain its possible effects on global warming. Considering the world is large, for global warming to occur heat must travel long distances. Without major changes in weather patterns there must be a man made mechanism in place that is pumping heat around the globe. How is this heat produced? That is the simple part. Go stand behind a running jet airplane. Put your hand on the engine compartment of any automobile. If you could without being arrested, walk up and observe a diesel-electric locomotive in action. What is the by product of their use? Heat, and lots of it. If it weren't for infrasound, that heat would probably rise like evaporating rain water. It will probably effect our planet in some way or other, but it may not contribute to the melting of the polar ice caps. Bring infrasound into the picture and you have a much more undesirable phenomenon. Infrasound is characterized by an ability to cover long distances and get around obstacles with little dissipation. Possibly the first observation of naturally-occurring infrasound was in the aftermath of the Krakatoa eruption in 1883, when concussive acoustic waves circled the globe seven times or more and were recorded on barometers worldwide. (thanks to Wikipedia for that definition!) We now know that infrasound waves travel great distances. How does that create global warming, and what is an infrasound wave? An infrasound wave is a normal sound wave (rapidly oscillating air) with a frequency too low to be perceived as sound by the human ear. It simply is moving air. Higher frequencies dissipate more quickly. Lower frequency sounds travel easily because their wavelengths are long. A 2 Hertz infrasound wave has a wavelength of about 1,100 feet. That means you will never feel the full amplitude of the wave until after it completes that one cycle. Therefore the effects of infrasound occur long distances away. The low E string on an electric bass guitar is a good example. I discovered mixing albums in the studio, you must stand back at least one wave length from the speakers in the control room to hear the true volume of the bass. If the wavelength is ten feet long, then you have to be that far away to hear its true volume. The same is true for infrasound, but instead of hearing sound you feel pressure on your body. When you add to the equation an infrasound wave that is continuous, you not only get a wave that travels great distances but gets stronger the further it travels. Each completion of the wave is summed with the previous ones. Place a heat source near the producer of the infrasound wave, and you literally are pumping heat around the globe. What man made machines are doing this? I'll bet you can guess. It is time to get worried and get something done.

This is not really about Celine... (copyrighted)

Celine Dion with glassed over eyes.
Why absurdly in a kitchen shies?
An engineer by nature toils,
On a ship the devil foils!
A warm heart and eager breath,
With not, only feigns death.
The Destiny reels into a black hole,
As melancholy takes its toll.
To surface only once in a while,
Wrought with passion, yet not a smile.
He only to bring some happiness,
A kindred spirit, with finesse.

A Breech of the Law of Credibility

Usually I like Anderson Cooper's approach to news. He is one of the better news anchors in recent years. Unbiased, honest, and thorough reporting are what make his program "360" appealing. I didn't like what I saw last night. For the first time I saw a breech of "innocent until proven guilty" and not as it applies to the company that owns an oil derrick next to a Beverly Hills school playground. Anderson's interview with Brokovich was biased in the direction of what will be the defendants in her case. His line of questioning led viewers to believe she was a quack and was an unfair assault on her current case. Why was this? Are his writers prone to influence from prominent businesses? Was he really in the dark about her successful past exploits in the legal world? Maybe Anderson used to be a lawyer, because his presentation was similar to how a prosecuting attorney would berate a defendant in court. For her crusading efforts in civil rights, Erin Brokovich should be a respected public figure. There was a Hollywood movie made about her struggle to expose corruption in big business. Real life subjects in films are not always so flattering. Hollywood has a history of building up its heroes and then tearing them down. That is media, or so we have been led to believe. The firing of Dan Rather by Les Moonves is an atrocity and a prime example of the contempt of this very system. Why would a respected newsman with professional accolades and decades of experience be forced to retire in failure and scandal? It was a joke, and the network is suffering as a result of his absence. Why would you take one of your fail-safe employees, and because of one professional error, fire them in disgrace? Why would we, as a nation, watch and support Martha Stewart building an empire only to revel in its failing? Why would we elect a President, reap the rewards of his accomplishments as a nation for eight years, and then impeach and humiliate him publicly for a small personal error? It is because we have come to live in an era of mass-produced, imported, sanitized, and disposable products and public figures. As China is showing us how can we have stability in our country without infrastructure? Our economic history has been out-sourced, and still we are waiting for a re-definition. As one notable member of Congress remarked on CNN, "Are we all supposed to work at Best Buy, Home Depot, Wal Mart, or Circuit City?" That is a fair assessment of the trend. With no middle-classed labor force the stability of our economic system is in flux and possibly in jeopardy. Our federal government continues to borrow billions of dollars from foreign countries to finance the" War on Terror." This weakens our dollar as well as the respect we receive from other countries. With no products being exported what exactly is driving the economy? Some say it has become the "financial sector." Companies are moving around large quantities of money through investments, futures, the stock market, and other systems. We have reversed anti-trust policies and have watched a slew of large companies buy and sell each other. Along the way their integrity and the crucial labor forces that drive these companies have been compromised. ENRON. The coming demise of Maytag is a good example. We always have imported cheap goods, but there were always stable companies that shored up our infrastructure. With the bankruptcy of major airlines and auto manufacturers, questions should be raised as to the real components of our economy. In certain states our government employs over a third of the people. That in itself suggests the failing of Capitalism. Without products and factories to produce them, what will our economic system become? Since our nation as a whole certainly does not own the "means of production," we must be headed toward a system where the government provides for the well-being of its populace. That sounds remarkably familiar to our past Cold War enemy, the Soviet Union. How in the name of our republic can we attempt to democratize foreign countries, when our own country is failing? Isn't that the definition of Imperialism? Isn't that why Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Hugo Chavez are squirming, pondering the thought of an invasion of their own countries in the name of the War on Terror by the US? I would try to build up my nuclear capability too in addition to buying assault rifles and aircraft from the former Soviet Union. Not everyone has respect for the policies of the United States. It is unfortunate many that disagree may be labeled "insurgents" of our own, "the Jihad Generation," "Extremists," or "non-Patriotics." It has been a continuing strength of our country and Constitution we in the US can form an opinion without being regarded as the enemy. It seems there has been in effect a Totalitarian movement represented by our Republican Party, where the nature of man's desires has been re-defined. As a result we have hypocrisy and the blurring of reality. Anderson's unenlightening commentary just reminded me of how shallow our country has become. We, as a people, slowly are beginning to forget our history, and with that comes extreme ignorance. Our federal government's unconstitutional policies of Eminent Domain and right of "freedom of speech" in the work place are evidence of this. If someone does not step up to the plate and reassert the principles of this nation and our constitution, the right wing faction will surely drive us into bankruptcy. Government, media, and big business are separate entities. The beautiful thing about the system is they all require different processes. Government should provide leadership through philosophy and wisdom. Media should be a medium of impartial information, the arts, and entertainment. Business is business. Government should not be run like business, as it is being done now. Media should not be run like business as evidenced by the failure of FM radio. Government should be allowed to regulate the practices of businesses to prevent corruption and monopolies. Media should watchdog government. All of these "checks and balances" assure that what is happening now, won't. Steven Spielberg was wise enough to remark films are the medium that can remind us of things that are important. It seems we need films about everything, because with a country plagued with ADD and media accelerated beyond human capability, life truly seems like survival of the fittest. We really are living life in a video game or a little black box. Thanks to David Lynch for discovering the truth.

It Should be Matchpoint for the Sentinel

There is a simple reason why movies have been failing. Over the last 2 to 3 years media decided we were all going to morph into androids. An android is a robot devoid of human emotion. They, with cool detachment, ramble through the trappings of a day experiencing nothing. They try as best they can to execute their agenda. They get up in the morning, exercise, drink coffee, get dressed, and go to work much like Michael Douglas's character in The Sentinel. As in the movie nowhere do they actually allow themselves to feel or experience anything soulful. Mindlessly but with conviction they spout worthless sentences confirming their selfishness and superficiality. Nowhere do they ever represent anything good or evil. Nowhere do we learn anything about them to be able to grow to care about them. The number one mistake cinema is making at the moment is telling the story through the perspective of moral ambiguity. I guess this technique is coming from the Sony Playstation or other recent computer games that make us solve a problem. You don't know what the hell is going on, until you solve some riddles, and near the end things make sense. Formulaic. Done. Over. The problem this creates in ethics and morality is, when an audience watches a movie through the perspective of a seemingly good person, what happens to them when the character murders their mother? Is that the experience directors are trying to convey? No one wants to watch a movie through the perspective of evil, unless they are evil. To subject the American audience to this in what has formally been an avenue of pleasure and escape is a heinous assault on our sensibilities. It will have a negative effect on our world. Traditionally movies play out good versus evil with a clear delineation between the two. The bad cowboy wears the black hat, and the good cowboy wears the white hat. Even when evil abounds we are seeing the movie through the eyes of good. There is hope and love. Even when the enemy wins we take away a positive feeling about the world. To distort good versus evil as in the War on Terror only creates confusion. That is why we as an audience must ask, with so many examples of films like these, is this a conscious attempt to blur the lines of reality? As video game designers at Sony have openly admitted, their goal is to do this. With advance computer technology they want to conceal the division between real human behavior and programmed behavior. What we have are getting now in media is programmed. That is why it is failing. Big Brother and Newspeak or not ideals our media industry should be promoting. The re-writing of history and the contrivance of human reality is something that needs to be left in a George Orwell novel. So many movies have failed as a result of this. Matchpoint follows the self-serving and immoral desires of a poor tennis pro who almost rapes a friend's fiance because of her ample bosom. Then he shoots her landlord to cover up his crime. To like this movie means you morally think his actions are appropriate. The only alternative is to hate the movie. Maybe that is what directors are trying to achieve. If they don't have the talent and the stories to create good movies, then they can be remembered for creating evil and controversy. It is wrong falsely to make the audience care about a character portrayed as good, to assault them later in the movie with a grievous breech of morality. Human beings fail, but do we really want to see that firsthand? Of what benefit will that be to the human race? The answer is none, and directors should stop doing it. Shopgirl is an example of a movie that takes a traditionally romantic character that is inately good and has them fail miserably in the end. As in The Sentinel this condones distasteful and immoral behavior. "Gee mama. That Michael Douglas is cuckolding the most powerful man in the United States," and we somehow are supposed to like him. It seems we do need some religious conviction in this country. Is that what we really want to show our children? What a giant step for the human spirit! It seems the Cannes Film Festival was full of spiritually devoid and bleak movies this year. The Da Vinci code suffers from the same ill. The tone of the movie is dark, despondent, and detached and never once uses a traditional human quality as a vehicle for entertainment. What's wrong with a little sex and romance? Have we really become like these characters as a nation, devoid of traditional human needs and desires, living our android lives in solidarity? It is time for film makers to move on.

Cruise Ship Marriage

One additional event occurred while working for a particular cruise line. Our Showband was a diverse collection of personalities from various countries. Somehow in this band a theme of gay-tinged humor took over the bandstand. Because there were many gay workers on board, I guess this was explainable. How do heterosexuals respond when a close-knit community becomes overtly gay? Humor, I think, is one way to ease the tension. In a particular work environment the gay influence seemed exceedingly strong. How does one define that? Recent studies have shown gay men and women respond differently to sexual stimulus than straight men and women. It can be assumed the chemical reactions they have as a result to sexual stimulus are different. Therefore the emotional psyche of gays is different than straights. This is not a condemnation. It is merely an acknowledgment gays and straight have different feelings. If a straight person perceives feelings that are vastly different than their own, especially if they pertain to sexuality, then it would be logical to assume both parties can sense the "straight" and "gay" vibes. I made the mistake of saying, "The gay vibe seems really strong this cruise." It turns out a new musician in our band was gay but still "in the closet." Because sexuality is a personal issue, it wasn't his responsibility to express publicly he was gay, but it would have helped. He had acceptance anxiety, as I'm sure many gays do. Instead he complained to the Musical Director that he was sexually harassed from my one comment. Considering there had been a history of gay humor on our bandstand, my comment had not been intended to be antagonistic. It was just an assessment of what I was feeling at the moment. It turns out there were other issues of which I was guilty. I was a racist. After studying jazz music in college, a mostly African-American art form, and playing in a black R&B band for two years prior to working ships, I still was accused of being a racist. As a result I was transferred. It felt like I was being persecuted for being straight. It is not the first time I have felt this way. A second ship on a different cruise line reinforced a tendency for gay behavior. The first words to come out of the Cruise Director's mouth upon arrival to her new post were, "If you don't want to be here, then sign yourself off." How, as employees, were we supposed to respond to that? Her words should have been, "If you disapprove of the flamingly gay relationships in our Cruise Staff, then sign yourself off." Because cruise ships operate mostly in international waters, it seems they are not bound by the Constitution of the United States. Therefore your civil rights are not protected. They make you believe it is your social responsibility to accept gay behavior, much like the lobbying force in America at this time. After three months of successful work and enjoyment on that ship, suddenly my personality and job performance were in question. I left. It did not make my life easier, and it did not make it easier to get another job. In fact it complicated my life to an extreme degree. Not only was I out of work for months, I began to suffer health consequences from the emotional stress. All of this because I was asked to accept gay behavior without a choice. I am not a homophobe, and after years of life experience I understand in many instances why people are gay. I believe we all are entitled to a mate. If men or women in particular have not met with success in heterosexual romance, then that does not mean they are sentenced to a life alone. Everyone deserves someone. I just do not believe heterosexuals should be expected to openly acknowledge gay unions. I also feel immense displays of public affection are distasteful. "Get a room and work out your personal life first." Why do we as a community have to deal with private issues? That is what a private life is meant to do. A work environment, even on cruise ship, should be a professional environment. The recent decision of our Supreme Court does not support this contention. It seems the right of "freedom of speech" can not protect you from an antagonistic work place. It is with this decision we welcome John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the bench.

Groovin' in the Columbian Ghetto (copyrighted)

The world is an automated merry-go-round spinning endless circles.
Horses galloping madly for nothing, an imaginary prize hidden over the horizon.
Wheels turning, fire burning, a treadmill of destiny.
People squirming like frenzied rats in an endless maze.
Where is the peace?
Where is the solace?
Got to find it! Got to find it!


I don't know what I'm feeling but the tears they come.
Bitterness, Rage, Love, Compassion.
Brewing in a cauldron of volatile magic. Evil or good!?
I don't know! I don't know!
Oh my soul haunts me.
We're all alone in our hazy world of silence.
Nothing moves. Silence on the outside. Chaos on the inside.
Got to get it out! Got to get it out!


We try to reach out but nobody listens.
We try to question but no one answers.
People come, people go. But nobody lets on.
The world is a bottomless pit- full of nothing.


Will it come out? Got to get it out!
Or stay buried inside me like filthy vermin.
Tenacles stretched deep inside my very soul.
It must come out, like vomit spewing spittle and vermin parts into
the perfect world.
Tenacles crawling, guts quivering.
Coloring the world in orangy puke. No more virgins.
The world must be christened. The world must be christened.


We must get rid of the hate. Face our fears for the love to come through.
Overwhelm them with love.
God shows us the way! The way up, the way out!
To breathe the fresh air.
Leave the stale stench behind.
It doesn't belong and the pit begins to fill.
From the bottom up, or we float in eternity for eternity.
Love shows us the way up! Love shows us the way!

A Marriage in Mapplethorpe

There are certain things we must take for granted. If the world decides it wants to resurrect another conflict between God and science, there will be a lot of wasted time and energy that could be spent providing a better quality of life for all. Wasting time debating whether women or men should bear children or whether gays should be allowed to marry using the Socratic Method would take time away from the pursuits outlined in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." What happened? Did the plutocracy of the Old South suddenly empower itself through petroleum? Did the needs of the common man just suddenly lose their constitutional validity? It seems like the principles of our nation are being challenged on a daily basis. Does gay marriage align with the "pursuit of happiness?" The reason why gay marriage should not be allowed, is because the definition of "gay" is determined by sexuality. Sexuality is a private issue. When someone suggests a personal issue somehow should define an institution, then it really is not an institution, is it? Institutions are universal. Universal principles are ones that have sustained the test of time. Academia is an institution. Marriage is an institution. I don't think America would suddenly begin doubting the validity of our colleges and universities. Why would we suddenly begin to doubt the validity of God, marriage, and the various religions? How could man become so empowered he begins to think he is the master of the universe? Would it be in the intellectual realm of man to create all the sciences, the arts, and the universe? It isn't reasonable to lobby for gay marriage. Like the ancient Greeks showed, there are many choices in life and many iniquities. There were many vices in Sodom and Gomorrah. God destroyed those cities with fire and brimstone. Man may take advantage of these, but he shouldn't demand a religious and civil institution as validity for the act. I am not saying homosexuality is a depraved sin, but the institution of marriage throughout history holds credibility. Just because a recent proliferation of a minority becomes vocal in their desires does not mean we as a nation have to rethink an institution. If gays feel that strongly about the right to betrothal, then they, like our founding fathers should try to found or find another country for promoting their convictions. That is what our forefathers did. I am comfortable with the current charter of the United States coupled with a more stringent attempt to reinforce these principles. If groups are so discontent with the tried and true principles of our Constitution, then they should feel free to seek equality somewhere else. That is something I think about every day. "Capitalism is a socioeconomic system in which the means of production are predominantly privately owned and operated for profit, mostly through the employment of labor. In such a system, money mediates the distribution and exchange of goods, services, and labor in largely free markets." (thanks Wikipedia!) I have never felt an instinctual support of Capitalism, because I never was required to take a business course during 9 years of college. At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, we had various requirements in the General College. Both the Humanities and the Sciences were a part of our first two year curriculum. No where were there requirements for business courses. I didn't learn how to conceive, build, and market a product. I didn't learn how to book keep or account. I didn't learn anything about the law of the United States. How in the name of God, could I make a living in a capitalist society? Beats me. I received an education degree, because both my parents were teachers. I never wanted to be a teacher, because I didn't have the desire for control, nor the power and energy it took to discipline a classroom of students. Instead I opted to pursue college teaching, which I did successfully. It was only after I encountered the enigma that was Robert Mapplethorpe, that I stumbled and was diverted from teaching. It seemed my ignorance of the social validity of such an artist helped me lose my Graduate Teaching Associateship. It seems, "Mapplethorpe captured the perfect time in the American politics that enabled gay culture and activists to have a public voice against discrimination backed by the art community. Art is...the first and ideal weapon of those groups who seek to establish new cosmologies that will legitimize that group's particular values." I had no interest in contemplating Mapplethorp's views, because I felt a platform based upon individual sexuality is not relevant to our society. If sexuality and sexual orientation are the only driving forces in one's life, then they should feel free to exercise those practices in private. No where in the social institutions of man has it ever suggested this tendency deserves socio-political or religious consideration. It may have been with that experience I adopted a harder line against homosexuality. If a homosexual artist was claiming art was the forum in which he could defend his sexuality, I would agree. That is the nature of art. If I, as a teacher and artist, was being expected to agree with his platform, it was with that I had difficulty. I observed homosexuality first hand on many Carnival and Princess cruise ships with similar philosophies. I experienced "Don't ask, don't tell" first hand. I was required to share a room with an openly gay man who used the confined quarters of a crew cabin to assert his homosexuality. I sexually was harassed and ended up against my will (and against the wall!) having to file a complaint against a coworker. After two months of studying him I learned he lived for homosexual sex. Much like Mapplethorpe's philosophy homosexuality defined him, and nearly every tenant of his life revolved around sex with another man. Constitutionally it was unfair to require me to room with him, because his pursuit of happiness infringed upon my own. The simple solution was to separate us, and that is what Carnival did. Likewise I observed lesbians living together in relative peace. I observed "flaming" or aggressive gay men parading their naked bodies through the corridors of crew quarters expecting acceptance. Gay men can be extremely tenacious. Once in Columbia, South Carolina I had a gay older man chase me for two years, until I verbally had to tell him to leave me alone. Many gay men will try to plant the seed of doubt in you regarding your own heterosexually by constant badgering. These experiences have shaped my opinions. Sexuality is private, and if that self portrait of Mapplethorpe holding a bull whip in his anus is supposed to entice society into condoning gay marriage, an annihilation of marriage seems more appropriate.

The Ship (by the way, this is copyrighted...)

To put it in perspective,
you cannot be subjective.

You must take a step back,
to see what things did lack.

It’s a very simple premise,
not meant to be a nemise.

And this is how it goes,
a story, this it shows.


You come onto a ship,
you don’t expect a trip.

To the dungeons, made a slave,
the wait staff they do rave.

It’s not a noble job,
enough to make some sob.

Many hours they do work,
“My boss, he is a jerk!”

Scrubbing floors and wiping metal,
“Better food, that’s what we peddle!”

“We’re working all the time!”
at five the clock does chime.

To start another day,
before this one’s gone away.


Poor Ana she was small,
she sometimes dropped the ball.

Couldn’t carry heavy dishes,
against her bosses wishes.


She’d drop a heavy load,
and they’d treat her like a toad.

The shifts they do change often,
to see, “Where is my coffin?”

“Where will I be today?”
“To move, or here to stay?”


So you see there is no time,
although you had been kind.

The crew they have no life,
but only toil and strife.

The schedule isn’t fixed,
so your plans are often nixed.

No matter how you try,
on them you can’t rely.


But something I do wonder,
“Did I so encumber?”

She used to roam the ship,
she didn’t give a flip.

On crew deck or the gym,
you’d maybe see her in.

But slowly over time,
she did become a mime.


There could be several answers,
I hope they aren’t Black Panthers!

Either work became too much,
tired feet, no sleep, and such.

Or she really hunkered down,
to do her work and frown.

I hope she didn’t run,
because that would be no fun.


But sometimes I do wonder,
if indeed there’d been another.

Like Gavin maybe pressing,
not just work he was addressing?

And Tanya she did transfer,
you no longer have your hands full!


I wonder how you’re doing?
is it dance you are pursuing?

Or simply saving money,
to go back to your honey.

The ship became no fun,
it seemed like a long run.

No smiles, but lots of work,
all your time, yes it took.


But once, long ago,
we did have to forgo,

A better situation,
“Was it infatuation?”

I don’t think so, just some fun,
with people on the run.

It is now clear to me,
how hard that things can be.


In F&B and staff,
a tall, yellow giraffe.

Red roses for a darling,
as pretty as a starling.

I hope you kept some things,
good cheer they may bring.

Or tossed them in the trash?
to become a Monster Mash.


There was no time for love,
not sent from heaven above.

Although I think you felt,
sometimes you did melt.

You know I was sincere,
but it became clear.

The time wasn’t right,
do that as we might.


You were always kind and sweet,
I’d always want to meet.

But that B.S. waitress job!
for you it sure does rob.

A life though far away,
But here, I’d wish you’d stay.


P.S. Johnny Cash swings too.

War is not the Answer...

We are at war. It may not feel like World War ll. American factories haven't dropped their responsibilities and re-tooled to make tanks and shells. Glenn Miller isn't traveling around distracting young, dancing Americans from the brutal reality of war. There isn't a global alliance up in arms about the threat of nuclear dominance. We are still at war. As in Viet Nam, Korea, and the Persian Gulf we observe the war through media. In Iraq there has been a substantial amount of loss of life in the journalism profession. As a consequence it is more difficult in the War on Terror to get a sense of who the enemy is. I think there are similarities between "Charlie" and the "Insurgents." We don't see either of them very well. They rely on guerilla-type warfare practices. Insurgents are disguised within the civilian population. Rogue activities are being discovered in American troops. One difference is, to this point Americans have not turned against their military men. We are not spitting at them in the streets and yelling "Baby Burner!" For the most part George W. has been successful at keeping the promise of success alive. I applaud that, because to wake up every day in Iraq with your life at stake demands a thorough commitment to your cause. Is that changing? Are we beginning to see a more renegade type of behavior in our troops? Who is to say, but we must admit the war in Iraq is unconventional. It doesn't really seem like we are at war, but the existence of war predicates certain activities. One is the imprisonment of "detainees" at Guantanamo Bay military prison. The easiest way to shed light on this phenomenon is to change the title of detainee to POW, Prisoner-Of-War. I was glad to hear a commentator on CNN suggest we leave the Politically Correct agenda by the wayside. I, for one, am for that. Emotionally challenged or mass murderer? Economically deprived or poor? Follically limited or bald? The 1970's was a time of gritty realism, a kind of realism I prefer to the glamorized version being presented on television today. Back then there were junkies. There were whores. There was the mob, and there were hit men. We didn't need a "spin" to confuse the meaning of reality. We didn't have gaming software engineers trying to blur the line between fantasy and reality. What is wrong with recognizing reality? Sins and iniquities are a part of human behavior. They are what make us human. They are why we need a religion and a God to lead us in the direction of good. When society can see good versus evil, when we can see white and black, and truth versus lie you can get a sense of reality and yourself. Lose that depiction of reality and the result is chaos and confusion. Enter the millennium. Terror. Holy War. Jihad. Oil. Youth Violence. Fear. I do not want a Jihad Generation. I would settle for Generation X. After scrutiny it seems most of Gen. X turned out to be family-oriented, responsible people. What will become of Generation Jihad? I do not want to wait to find out. If it is symptomatic of the habits of our male youth generation as television suggest, Extreme Sports, X Games, X Men, and X Box it is time we as a nation stand up and guide the Gen. Jihad to a more human and rewarding existence. If Osama was an example, a misplaced, devoted youth wishing to serve Saudi Arabia in the war against Saddam, the Saudi government should have let him. Instead he got pissed off and raged war against the US. If our youth are in the same position, it is time for them to become empowered and take pride in a country that is their own. Instead of a Civil Rights Movement we can have a Youth Rights Movement. Let all the white-haired, conservative, republican politicians step down and pass on the septer of control to the future generation of leadership. Let's taste the bounty of success. The days of "getting what you can, canning it, and sitting on the can" are over. For our population to flourish as did the early state of Alaska, there needs to be abundance. Energy is not in abundance. Clean air is not in abundance. Clean water is not in abundance. Conservation is not in abundance. Love is not in abundance. Prosperity is not in abundance. I don't even know what abundance feels like. Instead we have superficial, commercialized television. We have political spin. We have corporate deception. We have war. Maybe the Hippie movement of the 70's is what we need again, a soul of humanity. Free love. Acid, and the Electric Kool Aid Acid Test. Maybe we need some Jack Kerouac and some jazz. A cell phone sticking in the ear of every high school kid isn't getting it. Activism. Art. It would just be nice to wake up everyday with something familiar around.

The International War Tribunal

What I am wondering is why is Saddam Hussein is being tried in a politically unstable, chaotic, war zone. If Saddam indeed was the arch enemy of the US and other countries, why we would we, the United Nations, or the EU decided to extradite him back to his own country to be tried? Is there an international law that says he is allowed to be tried on his own native soil? This seems like a joke. Amidst war, sectarian violence, governmental instability, and general anarchy, how would he ever received a fair and impartial trial? To turn Saddam back over to Iraq to be tried seems like the most irresponsible act in recent memory. Daily we hear reports of assassinations of political figures, weaknesses in the security forces, and delays of establishment of a stable governing body, yet we relinquished what we believed to be the mastermind of "weapons of mass destruction." The International War Tribunal in the Hague is the only logical choice of justice for Mr. Hussein. How can any official suggest a double standard for the genocidic war crimes in Bosnia compared to the atrocities in Saddam's history? If Slobodan Milosevic was assigned this fate, which he was, Saddam should also be there being held in captivity. Then we might have hope he might die of a heart attack before injustice could be carried out.

Catch a Rising Ringo

Good drummers are hard to come by these days. Turn on the tube and what do you hear? Drums and Bass? Acid Jazz? House? Techno? These forms of music are electronic in nature and use electronic drum programming in place of the performance of a live drummer. I like electronic music, and I have a large MIDI studio with a variety of vintage synthesizer modules, keyboards, mixers, and effects. Change gears. The key to MIDI is using sounds that are ultimately listenable to the human ear. Factories are not good at providing usable sounds. They often design and build prolific instruments, but it is left up to the user to program quality sounds. The manual, an index finger, and a trained ear are indispensable for this process. When you get a quality compliment of sounds in your instruments, it is easier to make music. I did not become a great trumpet player, until I began practicing jazz improvisation with my own programmed rhythm section tracks. I found Jamey Abersold play-along recordings too fast. They often felt a little off in tempo. To solve this problem I began sequencing my own rhythm tracks. Never once in this process did I ever use QUANTIZE function on the sequencer. Live feel comes from a live performance of an instrument. I would find the correct tempo instinctively, dial in that number in the metronome, and then practice until I could play a drum part with my fingers in time with good feel. I copied and pasted that pattern throughout the song. Then came bass, then piano. When I began to play along with the tracks, it was like I was listening to Miles Davis's rhythm section in Rudy Van Gelder's studio in Hackensack, New Jersey. I used stereo headphones and a miniature condenser mic clipped to the bell. Add a little reverb to your horn sound and you would be surprised how much fun it was to play. Today it sounds like that process has been overlooked. Techno-nerds must be pumping out mass-produced music for mass consumption. Ringo Starr was a great drummer. That was a major part of why the Beatles were so good as a group. They were concerned about producing the very best sound available at the time, but a good feel is what creates hit songs. If you ever watched Ringo play, the rebound from his sticks above the drums was massive. He hit the drums hard, didn't think much about playing a particular style, and let his body and instincts do the rest. That rebound is what made the Beatles "swing." The Beatles were a rock band, but their music swung. That is why they were so successful. Well, also the Beatles probably were the most influential song writers in Rock history, but the music felt good. It felt natural. Music today does not feel natural. It does not feel human. If feels computerized. Producers have increased the rhythmic resolution so high in their sequencers, there would be no way a human being could play the parts. Why would anyone want to listen to something that is generated by a non-human? There are places for electronic music, and loops and samples and beats can be used very creatively as in Hip/Hop, but the trend in commercial music today is headed in the wrong direction. As in the world no one really knows what path to take, but we as a musical community have got to find something better. If you alienate the human from the music making experience, eventually you are going to alienate the human from the music consuming experience. Music used to be one of our more visceral and sensual art forms. People took drugs, drank, and burned incense relaxing and making love to music. What is the music of today invoking? Gaming violence? Terrorist activity? Blogging? Internet Surfing? Chatting? Karioke and DJ's took away many music jobs in the 1980's. Even Disney fired their live musicians from the Magic Kingdom and Epcott. If we keep whittling away at our culture and arts, there will be no rising Starrs left to catch.

L'art

People are unreliable. God is not. That is why relationships with people fail. After observing my parent's relationship for 20 years, and having experiences of my own in the great world of romance, I finally came to my own conclusions about love and mental illness. A few years back after losing my college teaching gig at the University of South Carolina, I fell into a deep depression. This depression lasted more than 4 years, and it took longer than that to finally get my emotions back into whack. I had to change my perspective of love. In the South there is a tradition. Debutants, country clubs, and old money uphold a tradition I found to be oppressive. I left for the Midwest for a new chance at life. The cultural difference in the Midwest seemed startling, and it took a few years before I got used to the people. Once I did I became a Midwesterner and left the trappings of the South for good. I am glad I did, because in the process I solved the emotional issues that caused my depression. What was it? I grew up with a single relationship for seven years beginning in high school. It was one of the best times of my life, and the two of us were truly in love. I have a whole box of memorabilia I still go through from time to time to remind myself of what that feeling is like. It was part puppy love, part deep love, and part physical sexual love. The emphasis back then was probably on the sexual love seeing as we were budding adolescents with newly developing desires. Once I got a taste (literally) of sexual love, I was addicted. We were in a monogamous relationship, and we loved each other a lot, so our sexual activity was as normal if not premarital. We were careful to plan our activity and did not rush into intercourse hastily. Our relationship unfolded gently over time the way it seemed it should. It was one of the most fulfilling times of my life. Things change, and I have never encountered that feeling again. Only once for a brief time on a Carnival cruise ship did I feel the same feeling we had years ago. It was shocking. I wasn't quite sure how to respond to it, but I tried for a while to make the relationship work. With a language barrier it was impossible, not to mention the big rock she was wearing on her left hand. I ended up using her as a muse both for music and poetry and managed to capture those feelings in rhymes that conveyed the feelings almost as accurately as music. I became a poet! My last poem written for her was Angel from the Sea, and I am thankful for that brief time, although I came out disappointed. From then on I decided to rely on my new found definition for love, and that excluded the human being as the major component. I had found with experience with a human being your are destined to be disappointed. It is a formula, the great Greek formula for tragedy, and who can discount that? You love and you lose, so what is the point? Charlie Parker, jazz's Bird had similar feelings. How does one find love if the human being is excluded? For nuns and monks God suffices. I am too human and also a musician, so I had to find another way to actualize my love. It was through music. As a composer you can capture those same feelings in music, and they become preserved. That is the beauty of art. Once you discover this, that love is now no longer dependent upon a human being, you are immortal. There is no more heart ache, no more grief, and no more disappointment. Only the feelings you choose are actualized in your musical composition. You become the bard and the poet, and you alone choose what feelings will be had. There is great power in this process, because you are no longer reliant upon a human being for actualization. How can a mere human being be responsible for the happiness of another anyway? They can't really. This, I feel, is the mistake of human love. This is also why I think marriage fails so dismally. We cannot expect to receive everything we need from another human being. Who do we turn to for this? The answer is God. God will not fail us, when another human being will. Human beings simply are not equipped to provide this kind of spiritual insurgence we need throughout life. I watch as my parents, in their empty next phase, work so hard to maintain a life that is forever gone. Their children are grown and the life they have once known is over for good, yet they try with all their might to bring back to life habits that defined an existence gone. Experiencing this in close quarters, it is the same feeling of oppression I get from the traditions of the Old South. It simply puts death to the prospect of hope and new experiences with a drowning of life in the name of a staid and dead tradition. No one should live this way, and it is what I think causes mental illness and depression. Living in the past is fruitless. Pining for a lost existence is pointless. Actively trying to resurrect a past life by mere habits prohibits the act of life itself. These kinds of traditions should be abandoned. I have left those notions of love behind. It has not made me incapable of loving another, yet it has freed me from the tyranny of depending upon another for my own life. There are too many other things in life that are important. Marry yes. Love another, yes, but they should not be the only vessel to hold your wine.

Graphics and Music

Taste is an admirable quality. Taste in art comes from refinement, experience, knowledge, and sensitivity. Class and taste aren't necessarily the same thing. Social class in my book has nothing to do with class as an adjective. It is a noun meaning merely a group of people. I learned early in life many people expect respect only because they possess money. I decided after working on a Doctor of Musical Arts there were few people that could still expect that. "Shine my shoes, boy." Miles Davis must have been the most vocal of all jazz artists to openly detest the image of Uncle Tom. He adamantly refused in his lifetime to adopt the same techniques Dizzy Gillespie used to humor or entertain an audience. Miles focused on the music, and that is what made him one of the best band leaders of all time. Miles influenced jazz music probably more so than anyone else. He invented Jazz/Fusion with recordings leading up to Bitches Brews, he defined the "Cool School" of jazz, and he pioneered the use of modality in jazz harmony. Nowhere in his agenda was there any place for "playing the fool." We need more artists like this today. Miles was a leader and was often characterized as "marching only to the beat of his own drum." Even as he did this, his product never pushed the boundaries of taste and style. Modern day television could learn a lesson from Miles Davis. The cheap, childlike graphics and trite bubble gum music that have infiltrated television need a true test in longevity. The Golden Age of Television provides the history for what television should still be aspiring to. Just because time travels across the bridge to the 21st century doesn't mean the lineage of our art forms just somehow disappear. The only reason this would seem so is because the individuals responsible for their production are not versed in the respective crafts. It is difficult, often painful to watch a flailing adolescent sew their wild oats in a flurry of uncontrolled, unstudied jism. Professionalism requires more than daddy's money, and that is a lesson Hollywood needs refreshed.

Identities Thieves?

When I bought my first cellular phone from Cingular, the sales clerk at the store sold or gave away my social security number to a gentleman that ended up in prison. That did not stop his opening of three separate cellular phone accounts whose bills began showing up at my apartment a year later. First it was Sprint, then it was AT&T. By the time the third bill arrived, I had most of the problem solved. All of these companies have first rate fraud agencies. After reporting the crime to the local police, it was pretty smooth sailing after an initial period of shock and disbelief. The theft of thousands of social security numbers of active military personnel is disturbing, just as the news that a locally bred terrorist group wanted to behead the Prime Minister of Canada. "He is innocent until proven guilty in Canada," his attorney said. "This is NOT Guantanamo Bay." How should a country respond to such events? Is there really a trend now of government Corruption as Lou Dobbs suggests? To keep from rambling, it was important to uncover the story of the woman who had over 200 such incidences, ruining her financial life. The linking of this theft to illegal immigrants is an even more enticing story. It was enlightening to see the story where a Congressman merely recommended we adopt Mexico's stringent immigration laws for our own country. It is hypocritical to ask for amnesty when there is casual disregard for our own immigration policies. "Eh, you want to come to Tijuana boy? You want to score some weed, eh? Find some hookers? Jail for you in Tijuana!" That image is fairly clear as evidenced in more than one Hollywood movie. There should not be a double standard. If indeed Mexicans are the ones using these stolen ID's to get and maintain jobs, then the law must be adhered to and they must be punished, not rewarded. The law is the same for everyone. It is up to our judges to moderate sentencing in an ethical, moral, and thoughtful way. That takes experience and compassion. I wouldn't trust 'em, but that is one of the tried and true methods that is losing ground in our increasingly Totalitarian nation. Hard lines on everything. The beautiful thing about "Swing" music and jazz is, swing is accountable for the repercussion. In that form of rhythmic energy, the producing component is aware of and prepared for the repercussion. It is an expected part of the creative process. To enter processes, such as government and legislation, without a tenant for the repercussion is naive and silly. This process of divergent opinion and the embracing of it is what has made this country grow into what it is. Stifle that process with a Totalitarian regime and we will die. It used to be our two political parties represented the "swing" and the repercussion. They were able to work together, at times pushing, at times pulling, but always finding an acceptable and positive outcome. It seems our current government has failed in this objective and our country has turn monodynamic. How could this happen, considering the very history of our country as a melting pot? An Isolationist philosophy toward the rest of the world will only doom what once was the world's super power. It was refreshing to see on the news an examination of other countries' immigration policies, at least suggesting the United States does not know everything. A friendship with foreign cultures and an appreciation of alternative lifestyles surely cannot be that damaging to such a brute and powerful nation. Prostitution is legal in many countries as is moderate drug use. Do we see these countries falling into ruins or do we see advances in small ways? Without the goals and desires of the human being, a country would cease to exist. It is disturbing to see humanity being stripped from our lives in the name of some right winged agenda.

A Word about Time/Warner Cable

There have been two times I clearly can remember where I was knocked out by cable service. One time was at an Extended Stay America in Columbus, Ohio, and the other was at a Comfort Inn in Black Mountain, North Carolina. Each time the service that was offered for cable television was satellite produced. The first striking thing about the service was how pristine the audio quality was. I assume that is one reason why satellite radio may be doing well. The laws of physics state one property of electro-magnetic waves is, they are able to manifest themselves on pre-existing wiring. Electro-magnetic waves, organized by frequency, are a core part of our modern civilization. From bottom to top they encompass:
Aircraft and shipping band radio
AM Radio
Shortwave Radio
TV and FM Radio
Microwaves and RADAR
Infrared Light
The Visible Spectrum
Ultraviolet Light
X-Rays, and
Gamma Rays
One can surmise we are being bombarded by all frequencies of these electro-magnetic waves on a daily basis. It is, after all, the age of electricity. While not well-studied there is one more category of electro-magnetic wave that has not made it into our science of physics. Maybe it has, but much like the Navy's low frequency transmissions to keep in contact with our vast arsenal of nuclear warheads aboard our nation's submarines, AC Traction in the railroad industry is also producing another predominant frequency of electro-magnetic waves that could be effecting our health. Traction is a fancy word to describe the pulling power of diesel-electric locomotives. Traditionally they utilized DC traction motors, electric motors that literally are built into the axles of these mammoth pulling machines. They have brushes like the alternator in your care, and similarly wear out over time. That seemed to be putting a fair burden on our rail industry, so GE and Siemens both stepped up their production of an AC traction motor. This was not possible before the PC. Thank Hewlett Packard for providing the computing power necessary to process the electricity needed to power an AC traction motor. To make a long story short, the speed of the motor is now governed by the frequency of the AC electricity powering it. One cycle of AC, one turn of the motor. Two cycles, two turns of the motor. Each time the magnetic field in the AC motor's stator moves to pull the rotor, an electro-magnetic wave is formed. (I think, so physicists correct me if I am wrong) The frequency would be the same as the frequency of the electricity and the speed of the motor. How could this be a problem? There has been some study on ground wave transmission of radio waves, but for the most part it has been abandoned for safety reasons. It seems the effects of low frequency electro-magnetic waves is a bit sketchy. The brain's Alpha, Beta, and Theta waves hover ominously in this region, approximately 8, 10 and 12 Hertz. Conclusive studies have been done to prove bombarding electro-magnetic energy can change the existing frequency of the brain, thereby altering moods and thoughts. Well, enter all kinds of mood effecting syndromes that seemed to peak about the same time AC traction began to be widely used. Conspiracy no, but needed to be studied, yes. With that all said, cable service is a dinosaur. All that cable strung on poles across the US is susceptible to interference from any kind of EM wave. I haven't studied satellite to know what technology they are using, but I know from experience I liked the sound and picture quality way better than traditional cable. I also liked the package better. At the Comfort Inn, they offered a package of about 25 channels that gave me everything I needed to enjoy TV at night. No need to surf through 500+ channels to find something worth watching. We are being reamed by cable TV, and as John McCain suggested in an Op/Ed piece, competition is what this country needs to lower prices and raise excellence in the cable industry.

Animal Planet or Animal Hero?

We don't really need glorified pet super heros. If kids really want to see that, they can buy a comic book. We get warmth and satisfaction out of watching SPCA and Humane Society officials rescue animals in dire need of human help. It is about the animals. We don't need the network spinning the show, creating super hero pet rescuers. For God's sake! Does everything have to be a fucking Saturday morning cartoon? Are ratings that bad? Do we have to glamorize everything? Are we going to paint these professional men and women up like news anchors and ask them to do their jobs then? Put them in short skirts and hunky leather pants? Or can we just leave the shows alone, with self-repect and humility, directed toward the poor animals they serve? When it becomes all about the the wrong thing, the essence is lost. Don't ruin a good thing Animal Planet.

A Cry for Bop!

Bebop was hip. All the musicians I listed in my previous post with the addition of Charlie Parker and Miles Davis created a style of music all there own, different from the touring swing bands of the World War ll era. This music was labeled Bebop. They began to compose their own tunes over the pre-existing chord changes of popular standards of the day. Tin Pan Alley served as an endless source of popular songs, but they tended to be sentimental in nature. This group of musicians far extended the status quo of the music at that time. They began improvising over "chromatic altered tones" rather than the notes in the chord itself. They wrote more complex melodies that were played at break neck tempos raising the excitement level of the performances. This new music was confusing to some and pundits speculated if it was not exclusionary to the dancer patrons of the Swing Era. It didn't matter. It was freedom, liberation. To me democracy can be no better characterized than with jazz music. This music allows the musician the freedom to play whatever they want with no regards to trends, corporations, or radio stations. It is the ultimate freedom. With a compatible group of musicians, the experience of playing in a jazz band can be unrivaled. Unfortunately I have not been able to find that group of musicians.

To Swing or not to Swing?

It is interesting one connotation of the word "swing" is swapping partners for sex. "Does he swing?" "Wanna swing?" That definition certainly could not have come from purist America, land of Mormons, Quakers, Anglicans and the rest. Could we dare to be that.... hip? What is hip? Do we dare be square in the name hippness? I would like to suggest the US is not a hip country. We are not old enough to be hip. A country a scant 200 years old doesn't have much room for anything. Well, there is jazz. Jazz is supposedly our ONLY native art form. Listening? Not Rock 'n' Roll, not Disco, not R&B, not Punk, not Techno. What is it about jazz music that puts it into that category? Improvisation comes to mind. Jazz music is one of the few musics that incorporates improvisation as one of its major traits. (that means playing something that is not written down) While improvisation certainly existed in Western forms of music, it is to the extent with which it is utilized that makes jazz artistic. There is usually a melody or tune that the jazz artist has to learn. There are chord symbols that accompany this melody. After their statement of this melody, the musician is then expected to "improvise" or spontaneously create new melodies in a series that fit together in symmetry to form a complete statement. An improvised solo could be akin to a miniature movement of a symphony or string quartet. (at its highest form) Improvisation started as a paraphrasing of the melody. The likes of Louis Armstrong and King Oliver weaved new melodies around pre-existing simplistic tunes. In early jazz, three instruments did this at the same time in perfect harmony. Clarinet, trumpet, and trombone found appropriate roles together in a group. Over time the solo of the individual became more pronounced and therefore important. Playing the perfect solo became the goal of the jazz musician. Whereas this is not the only requirement of a good jazz musician, it is one. Taste, phrasing, rhythmic feel, sound, and expression are all important aspects of being a good musician. A simple definition of jazz music could be: a swing-oriented, improvisational music based mostly on the 32 bar popular song and the 12 bar blues. This music was the music of America from the turn of the century up until the emergence of Rock 'n' Roll in the l950's. Examination of early pop music shows a marked influence of swing feel. Low and behold as popular, radio music moved away from the 50's, the swing feel began to disappear. No one can discount that the amazing popularity of the Beatles, Elvis Presley, the Rolling Stones, and Jerry Lee Lewis was because of their incorporation of swing feel. Whether they thought about it or not, these groups swung. Well, what exactly is swing? Cruise ship musicians for one have difficulty figuring this out. Dizzy Gillespie, Thelonious Monk, John Coltrane, and Cannonball Adderly all were born in the American South. There was a musical feel in the Bible Belt that came predominantly from Gospel and church music that influenced these jazz artists. Although most of them transplanted to the north where it would be more likely to find success in a musical career, they all maintained the "feel" of that Southern music. Likewise Rock 'n' Roll bands such as the Allman Brothers, Lynard Skynard, and Marshall Tucker all used piano players which in certain ways created this unique feel. If the scholar would examine most musics based soly on the acoustic or electric guitar, they would find a slightly different "feel" in that music. Pop music as a genre could be categorized this way because the eighth note pulse is created by the strumming pattern of the guitar. Most of the music being broadcasted on today's airways is of this sort. Piano has fallen out of vogue. The MIDI decade of the 80's as well as the sample looped based Rap and Hip/Hop have also seemed to have lost their way. CMT is littered with guitar bands strumming away on those blasted boxes. As a piano player I do not prefer that feel. As a cruise ship musician I often have had to try to emulate that strumming pattern on the piano. It is next to impossible because the physical motion is unobtainable. There is no "up stroke" on the piano. Guitar bands like this basically establish a rhythmic feel where the eighth notes pulse is "laid back" and extremely close together. As a result it doesn't swing. Swing is rebound. Every hit must have an equal rebound most easily personified by the buoyant wrist motion of the upright bassist. The music "feel" in most 80's music does not swing. It is created by tightly compressing the eighth notes pulse with little or no rebound. A musician must ask the question, "How can music that does not recognize the one style of music considered America's art music, really be artistic and sustain the test of time?" My conclusion is, although there is a vast catalog of original, artistic-like music, non of it will stand the test of time without some kind of infusion of swing feel. Western orchestral music and American jazz both embrace a plethora of musical expression running the gamut in terms of mood. Neither would be satisfied utilizing only one emotion or feeling, such as pop music seems to do. Happy music has its place, but the human spirit is not happy all the time and requires a more diverse vessel from wince to drink. It is for these reasons I have never been interested in pop music. Only recently out of sheer boredom have I begun to explore some of this catalog. I would like to see popular music once again grow up and take the human condition seriously. Dispense with this vibe, I know its not real. The glam images on TV, the silly flat hair, the layers of make-up, making our women look like dolls. Is any real person going to buy this image? Also, music based on such superficial images are bound to come up short considering the United States seems to be on a path headed toward religious war. Surely such an subject merits more thoughtful scrutiny in the hands of America's musical artists. I think it is time for Simon to step down, surrender his self-serving record company, and leave the music in the hands of people that deserve to do it.

It is more blessed to give than receive...

There are many types of relationships. Your emotions evolve as you experience and assimilate new interaction in a relationship. As a result the emotion, love, can be defined and expressed in different ways. The recent news story of Mark K. Latourneau's marriage to her former student is a perfect example of the many ways love can be perceived and expressed. Looking at Ms. Latourneau, her demeanor reminds me of my first love. She is beaming with happiness, and they seem to have a very physical, intimate connection. This was my experience in my first relationship. I was lucky that I received this gift early in my life. What I had was such a pleasant change from the bullying of a predominantly African-American junior high school, I savored every minutiae of the experience. In fact as I reflect now, I can barely remember what it would be like to be in that state of mind. Betrothed to someone. Committed to someone in the most private and intimate way. At that age (which was 16) you don't realize the majority of your energy is exhausted on only one person. You receive enough spiritually through that one person to feel complete, so it is of no consequence other relationships flounder or stop completely. In essence you become co-dependent upon that person. If you are receiving all the things you seem to need at the time, it probably wouldn't seem abnormal. Many years later my perception of love is different. I made a conscious decision after re-experiencing the feeling of that early relationship to become independent. To be truly fulfilled you have to be able to find love within yourself. How else can you give love if you cannot find it within yourself? That seems like a daunting task and even one that may seem unsupportive of our whole dependence upon the "family unit" as a building block of American society. My views about love changed as I grew older, and that former interpretation no longer was relevant to my life as an adult. Did I want to become dependent on only one person, my wife? Do I want to live in a vacuum where every emotional turn will be experienced and reciprocated by only one person, or a family? I don't want that, and that decision has hampered my life as an adult in the United States. It is unusual, because the family unit (husband/wife) has been the traditional model for domestic life in the US. I still believe marriage is a sacred institution that doesn't need to be redefined. I do believe love can be expressed in many ways, liberal to conservative, just the way our country should suggest. Are we succeeding in upholding this view? I believe not. I think in recent years a Totalitarian perspective was set in place, and we have been feeling the effects of it. First the very basis of our lives, critical thinking, seems to have been replaced with complacent, apathetic inactivity. Is this because the American people don't care? It is not important enough to get up off the couch and go vote anymore? Is that because people feel that vote will not be effective? It would be easy to think that seeing as our government has turned into one great polling and lobbying machine. Gone are the days when individual politicians used their educations and experience to develop a philosophy of government and life and ran based on those beliefs. Government has become big business, and that change is killing the ideology upon which this country was founded. Checks and balances. Freedom of speech. Privacy. Protest. The essential elements that defined this country are being tossed aside at the suggestion of our bosses, and the Supreme Court recently ruled we are not protected from that aggression by the right of free speech. We have been led to believe we the people are required to submit to this ludicrous plan. Our government is not supposed to be big business. Our president, even in times of war, simply cannot rewrite the constitution to enact an agenda known only to him and his party. Institutions sustain throughout the course of time. That is why they are called institutions. Marriage is an institution, but so is our Constitution. If President Bush is going to suggest the sacrament of marriage cannot be redefined at the state level, he must also concede it is not within his power to rewrite the constitution. The needs of our country are not more important than the needs of a gay couple, because the gay couple is our country. To suggest a president can take liberties with the law during a time of war to protect this country is hypocritical, because the gay couple's needs are equally as important, because they are this country. To take this liberty would mean President Bush has to concede and allow gays to marry. Government by the people, for the people. We are suffering as a nation because of education. Public education is the only empowerment we have. Without it our population is destined to flip burgers. Where will our people gain the knowledge they need to be successful in life? Only the rich can afford private education. With a lack of emphasis on public education, our country has slipped into an appalling abyss of egocentric complacency. No wonder there is no talent on television or in the arts. No wonder we are slipping behind as a super power. No wonder SAT scores are lower than ever before. If we don't provide free education to our populace, then our future as a country is doomed. There is no one with enough wisdom or education to solve the complex problems that confront our very existence. I ask in all earnestness for the Baby Boomers to step aside. I ask that old money move over and make room for the existence the youthful population of this country deserves. I am still waiting. I watch as veterans earn pensions, geriatrics earn retirement pay and social security, and historical patriotic holidays fail because we as a country are not supporting the new generation. We have not nurtured a populace that is going to take over this country. Doe eyed youths look empty headedly into space as veterans wave flags about World War ll. We have not had a war that meant something to US. This country really has not given us anything. Education is neglected. Social Security is tapped. Constitutional priviledges of privacy and pursuits of happiness have been eroded. There is no doubt a Totalitarian movement exists that has short changed the core of this country. Luckily it is beginning to fail. I am going to ask what my country can do for me. It's about time.

Totalitarianism

Common to all definitions is the attempt to mobilize entire populations in support of the state and a political or religious ideology. Seems that is what we are headed for. Let's look at "reality" TV. There is nothing real about it. No one in the US is ever going to fly on the own accord to a desert island and eat grubs. That just isn't real. Real is trying to get a job. No one is going to rent a crane and hang upside down trying to do something. Real is trying to get your car to pass the OBDll inspection. No one is going to voluntarily join a coalition to sell Donald Trump products, then asked to be fired on national television. That is not real. Real is trying to feed your children. The only way such a misinterpretation of "reality" could occur would be because, those involved are smoking crystal meth or crack, or because they have too much money and have lost sight of the needs of the true American. I guess most TV producers are mommy's boys or are on drugs. For example, all our late night hosts. It used to be back in the days of pre-GE NBC, David Letterman was on the cutting edge. He was pre-baby, aggressive, and funny. Now he is Ed Sullivan. Craig Kilborne had a nice show, but they got rid of him . Now we have this happy immigrant that must be drunk each and every show. He's just too happy. I can't stand to watch it. Nobody can be that happy. Carson Daily. Frat boy. Throw away. Jimmy Kimmel. Fat guy. What the fuck has happened? Oh, Totalitarianism, an attempt to mobilize an entire population in support of the state and political or religious ideology. The Christian Coalition? Let's examine that hypocritical institution. Let's say we support and represent Christianity, then let's distort that view for political gain. Red flags should be going up all over the place.

Carolina Eye Totalitarians

Recently I began having trouble seeing out of my left eye. Having had cornea transplants in both my eyes from keratoconus, I have had much experience in deteriorating eye sight. It is not fun. Each radical kerataplasty took about 8 months of my life. For that length of time the eye was basically unusable to me. Through each operation I continued the best I could trying to complete a Doctor of Music Arts in Composition at Ohio State University. In an article in the British Journal of Ophthalmology dated 2004, they studied a group of patients that had had corneal grafts for about ten years. The results were this. There was rapid and severe onset of astigmatism in most of the patients. After exhausting the possibilities of treatment, it was determined compressive resuturing was the best choice. LASIK and other invasive procedures would weaken an all ready thinning cornea. The amount of astigmatism almost doubled making the eye unusable. Well my friends. I would say 20/200 vision and the inability to read or drive with glasses is pretty severe. I went to Carolina Eye Associates in Pinehurst, North Carolina. I did not feel good about the visit, and this is why. Vocational Rehabilitation for the Blind paid for both my eye surgeries. I was in school and making no money, so I qualified. When I went to see them again recently, a counselor approved me immediately saying they would support ANY treatment the doctor recommended. I heard this TWICE after a slew of questions about qualification. "We will support ANY treatment the doctor recommends." A few days later I got a letter from Vocational Rehabilitation for the Blind canceling my case. Seems a contact lens doesn't meet the criteria. In early kerataconus, a hard contact lens is often prescribed to act as a new cornea. The shape of the cornea for some reason moves to the shape of a cone, forcing the person to try to see through the apex of the cone. A hard lens placed over that cone can act as a new cornea giving adequate vision. I wore hard PMMA lenses for over ten years. They saved my life and my vision. Now I am supposed to go through that process again, and yet the diagnosis of the fitting of a contact lens in this case merited a loss of funding. For some reason now my ailing eyesight is not as significant as it was before. Is that because Vocational Rehab does not understand that process? Do they consider a contact lens cosmetic? Is is something you use because you don't like wearing glasses? The answer is unequivocally "No!" Fitting of a contact lens is only one step in a suggestion of treatment that circumvents surgery "of some kind." Well my cornea specialist didn't seem to know what that surgery was. He looked at all those expensive test results, the cornea topography and the thickness of the cornea and said, "You have almost twice the astigmatism you had before." Tell me something I don't know. He also said, "You are likely not going to be able to tolerate a glasses prescription because there is so much difference between the two eyes. Therefore, let's try a contact lens." How would this recommendation somehow not qualify as "any course of treatment the doctor recommends?" Beats me. When I left the clinic, they made me sign a waiver that said I would be financially responsible for the visit if Vocational Rehab decided not to pay. What part of this visit would suddenly violate, "any course of treatment the doctor recommends?" Foiled again. I was not happy with the way the cornea specialist responded to my needs. I went to Carolina Eye Associates because they are supposed to be experts in eye care. The told me this doctor was one of the top two cornea surgeons in the US, yet he downplayed my condition, made a flip assessment of the severity of my condition, and made a diagnosis that left my financial funding in the lurch. He made his money for the visit, screwed me and my vision needs, and left me empty handed when I had all ready been approved for financial coverage for "any course of treatment the doctor recommends." Seems it is time to hire a lawyer. Welcome to the United States health care system. Money for the rich, shit for the poor.