Sunday, May 17, 2009

Tell Me Friend, Can You Ask For Anything More?


__________________________________________________________________

I’ve seen Bruce Springsteen in concert more than a dozen times, 14 times to be exact. That’s not very many shows if you happen to be a big Springsteen fan, which I am. But because it’s a manageable number, each performance marks an event, a sort of ritual that hasn’t lost the power to delight and surprise and even, I dare say, replenish the soul. Since my first concert in 1984 I have averaged just over one Springsteen show every two years. It has been like growing up with a trusted friend and there are standout moments from each show that hold a special place in my memory.

There were several such moments last Monday night at Nassau Coliseum. One was the encore performance of “Jungleland”, surely the most majestic nine-minute rock-n-roll fable ever recorded. There was no reason to expect it. It’s a song he’ll play on occasion, but not every night. But then the lights went down and it happened. The opening notes on the piano and violin accompaniment sent chills down my spine. The realization that this sensation is still possible, even when you’re tired, when you’ve had a bad day, when you’re sure you’ve heard it all, when you’re forced to park on the grass embankment abutting Hempstead Turnpike because the idiot parking lot attendants let in too many cars...this sensation is one of the wonders of live performance, and the joys of being a fan.

The crowd was transfixed from the start, but they were not so stupefied that they didn’t remember who they were. Or where they were. A humorous moment came when the opening line “The Rangers had a homecoming…” was met with a chorus of boos. (No, they were not cries of “Bruuuuce.” They really were boos). This shitty concrete slab of an arena is still sacred hockey ground. You are in Islander country. Rangers are not welcome.

But there was something different in this version of “Jungleland", something more forceful and pronounced in Bruce’s vocal delivery and the way the band was locked in, some quality of purpose that cut through the distance and the pot smoke all the way to the last rows of Section 315 where we sat in the nose-bleeds. “From the Churches to the jails…” And the organ soars. Two lines later: “Down in Jun…gull…laaaand” and the entire audience sings along full-throated with him. The drums kick in and the energy shifts into the next gear. Little Steven, ever scowling, plays a killer guitar solo. After the bridge, the tempo downshifts and Clarence's long soothing saxophone notes over a slow steady beat are an incantation - a prayer washing over the audience.

The concert was sort of homecoming for me too. I rarely get back to Long Island, except to see my family. Before the concert, I drove to TGIF’s on Merrick Avenue to meet up with my old High School friend, his wife and my brother. These are “Springsteen friends” with whom I’ve attended several shows. They speak a language that non-fans don't truly understand. Driving along Old Country Road and Merrick Avenue and seeing familiar retail landmarks and then the Islander jerseys in the parking lot, brought me back to my teens and early 20s. In those years I lived with an uneasy sense that the place where I grew up wasn’t really my home. The last time I had seen Bruce in Nassau Coliseum was in November of 1992. Bruce had released “Human Touch” and “Lucky Town” and was touring without the E-Street Band, choices that disappointed many Springsteen fans. The dumping of the band (with the exception of the essential Roy Bittan) seemed especially unforgiving. But as much as I loved the signature sound of the E-Street Band, I didn’t really mind. For one thing, I was at a place in my life where I understood that growth means change. Out with the old? Why not? Who was I to question? I was going through some changes myself at the time. I was a college graduate with a professional degree, but had no job. I had no girlfriend. I lived at home with parents and Long Island, this place where I grew up felt static and stultifying. I wanted out. Springsteen’s earliest songs are about romance and escape. His more recent work was about going home and finding fulfillment in family and community. Both themes pulled at me.

But that show delivered. Some fans dismiss the 1992-93 tour as an aberration. His albums were probably the weakest of his career and the whole period is regarded by some as some sort of musical mid-life crisis. But even without the E-Street Band, there was amazing energy and no shortage of treats. An acoustic “Thunder Road,” a rollicking “Light of Day” and a guest appearance by Billy Joel, who was introduced by Bruce as “a local hero.” Joel was warmly received but he didn’t do very much. He mostly danced with Roy Bittan at the back of stage during “Glory Days” occasionally vamping on a keyboard. It was fun but I sort of felt bad for him, especially given the song they were playing. Even then, it seemed that the best of his musical output was squarely behind him. And it’s just a cruel fact of life that a guitar gives you rock and roll street cred in a way that a piano never can (unless you’re Jerry Lee Lewis). Still, there’s always been a connection in my mind between Springsteen and Billy Joel. They are the same age. They were signed by Columbia Records at about the same time. Both were assumed to be Jewish (partially true in the case of Billy Joel). Both married uptown girls, models, ending in divorce. Bruce is New Jersey and Billy is Long Island, both places defined by the highway, the Turnpike and the L.I.E. Both artists claim the voice of the underdog and wear their bridge-and-tunnel outsider status as a badge.

Springsteen is keenly aware of a cultural bond between New Jersey and Long Island. At Monday night’s show, he quipped about the land mass that connected these places millions of years ago and he gave a shout out to his “long lost brothers” from Long Island. This connection may explain why Nassau Coliseum has been home to so many great Springsteen shows. None are more famous than the legendary show he played New Year’s Eve in 1980. Bruce and the band played 38 songs that night, possibly the longest set he’s ever played. That was slightly before my time but these earlier concerts loom large in my imagination and, judging by quality of some of the bootleg recordings, for good reason. Part of being a fan is lamenting the great shows that you’ve missed. You envy those older fans who say “Yeah, I was at the Agora in ’78.” And every time you go to another Springsteen show, you secretly hope to experience something that no other fan has experienced before.

Another memorable moment came when Springsteen took requests from the crowd. This ritual originated during the last tour. Banners and signs with written song requests are produced by the crowd and passed up to the stage where Bruce makes a campy show of sifting through them, deliberating which ones to play. He typically selects three songs – one cover song, one older gem and one of his more obscure tracks For his cover, he played a fantastic version of the Philly soul classic “Expressway to Your Heart” (a tribute to Long Island’s most enduring feature - the L.I.E.) followed by a passionate “For You” and a punchy “Rendezvous.” For good measure he played “Night” putting us back on the highway with some hope of escape. There’s always a catch though. You’re just a prisoner of your dreams.

Springsteen is a political artist. Ever since 1978’s “Darkness on the Edge of Town” he’s revealed a social consciousness in songs about the plight of the working man and more generally, the American Dream. Monday night was no exception. He kicked off the show with the “Badlands” the opening track on “Darkness on the Edge of Town.” The song is a fan favorite, a sing-along, fist-pumping anthem. It belongs in any Springsteen concert but he didn't let anyone forget the struggle at its core. About 20 minutes into the show, he played “Working on a Dream” the title track of his most recent album followed by three songs that grimly explore what happens when that dream goes south and the highway goes nowhere. In “Seeds” “Johnny 99” and “Ghost of Tom Joad” there is poverty, despair and darkness but no resignation, certainly not in the music. “Johnny 99” pulsed, almost joyfully in a full rockabilly arrangement. The ordinarily spare “Tom Joad” was also given the full band treatment highlighted by Nils Lofgren’s blazing guitar solo that seared with desperation and release.

The encores included a multi-part harmony version of “Hard Times” a Stephen Foster folk song about, well, you know. When it comes to politics and social justice, Springsteen is not above getting on the soap box and saying his piece. But other than delivering a short plug for a worthwhile charity, the Harry Chapin Food Bank, he let the music do the talking. I was glad for that. It’s not that Springsteen isn’t thoughtful on matters of politics, but like most serious artists, he’s at his best when he lets the songs tell the story. A few years back, on the “Devils and Dust” tour, he criticized the Bush administration and spoke to the audience about the need for a humane immigration policy. It felt out of place, not because I didn’t agree, but because it felt clumsy and forced. What can he possibly tell us about immigration that isn’t more powerfully expressed in “Matamoros Banks?” I’m quibbling now, but quibbling is also what fans like to do. Even as we get older and more jaded, we get impossibly demanding. This makes it all the more remarkable that Springsteen the performer so rarely disappoints.

One highlight for me was his performance of the “The Wrestler.” Not exactly a rocker – it’s one of his quieter and sadder songs, but it’s on just those songs, when the crowd isn’t shouting along, that Springsteen is at his most expressive. The same gift of empathy that permits him to sing credibly about factory workers and outlaws on the run, has allowed him to successfully pen songs for movies. Most notable of these is “Streets of Philadelphia,” which poignantly captures the plight of a man with AIDS, as well as the overall feel of the movie. For my money “The Wrestler” is even better. Hearing Springsteen sing it live, the song took on a different meaning. Suddenly, the song is no longer about a bloated Mickey Rourke playing a washed-up wrestler. Now it is about Springsteen himself, a prisoner of his trade - the lonely gladiator who leaves it all on the stage.

The ultimate pleasure of fan is this: Just when you think the performer has given everything, he gives you a little bit more. Springsteen closed the show with a raucous “Rosalita” just as he did the first time I saw him in concert, 25 years ago. My first glimpse of a Springsteen live performance was a video of “Rosalita” airing on MTV in 1984. (Back then, before YouTube and before the Internet, MTV was only three years old and it actually showed music videos). I had just turned 16 and though I was an enthusiastic listener of rock radio (1st choice, WNEW, 2nd choice, WBAB), I had never seen or heard anything quite like it – the sheer energy, the playful yet powerful expression of desire and the joyful abandon of the live performance. The video offered a window into a rock & roll experience that I never knew existed. And when I saw my first Springsteen concert a few months later, my fate was sealed.

In some ways, growing up is harder when you become a fan, when you realize that music, art and live performance can reach you and move you in ways that even the reality of your life does not. There are moments of doubt when you feel you are clinging to something self-indulgent, unreal or childish because stuff that isn’t supposed to matter really does matter just as much now as it did when you were 16. But try as you may, you can’t fake it. You really are a prisoner of your dreams. But you also realize – especially after seeing a show like the one I saw – that you wouldn’t have it any other way. The music you love isn’t some alternative to reality. It’s part of reality and part of you. This is what I was thinking about when my brother and I left the arena after the show. I felt lucky. We walked through puddles in the parking lot and found the car on the grass embankment. Then I merged into the chaos of traffic, each car jockeying for position, trying to escape the Coliseum parking lot and drive off into the night.

_________________________________________________________

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Chelsea Dagger


_______________________________________________________________

My first soccer post.

I'm a fan of the "beautiful game" even when it gets ugly. And, let's face it, it often does. I caught the second half of the second leg between Chelsea and Barcelona in the European Champions League Semifinal. My affinity for Barcelona comes in part for my love of the Catalan city but there's also something about the club's democratic soccer culture, history, passion and cosmopolitanism, that make Barcelona an appealing bandwagon option for the curious American soccer fan in search of a European club. (The New Republic's Franklin Foer examines this phenomenon in his interesting "How Soccer Explains the World." ). It also helps that they play an attractive, attacking brand of soccer.

Chelsea, on the other hand, play a more cynical defensive-minded game though it might be said that against a fast, free-wheeling team like Barcelona they have little choice. But Chelsea also represents the noveau riche and their money is changing the face of the game. Their owner, Roman Abramovich, is one of the Russian oligarchs and he has thrown a lot of money around trying to buy a championship for the West London club. They've won a couple of English titles, but have yet to conquer Europe.

I'll skip the full recap of the game. You can find that here. But the finish was one of the most exciting I've ever seen. Barcelona was down a goal and down a man and looking desperate. Three minutes into extra time, they found a miracle goal that seemed to come from nowhere. Bedlam! Because of the tiebreaker rules of these two legged matches (peculiar to Americans) a 1-1 tie was good enough for Barcelona to win the series. They'll meet Manchester United in the finals on May 27th.

In the time honored tradition of soccer, the losing team claimed they were robbed. Chelsea players and fans insisted that the ref blew four calls, any one of which would have resulted in a penalty kick (and surely a Chelsea win). One of the outraged players looked right into the TV camera and called the ref a "fucking disgrace" The ref had to be smuggled out of England for his own safety and will probably receive death threats for the rest of his life. Sports blogs are aflame with apopletic Chelsea fans. What's great about soccer is the passion. But is this pathetic display of whining and poor sportsmanship the inevitable other side of the same coin?

A brief response to those Chelsea fans who say they were robbed:

You don't "deserve" to win just because you claim the greater number of penalty appeals.

Only one of those appeals (Pique's handball) was clear cut, the rest were borderline at best and none of those non-calls was more outrageous than the absurd sending off of Abidal, who didn't seem to even touch Anelka. Actually, Anelka could easily have been carded for diving (the same is true for Drogba several times over).

As a result of that sending off, Chelsea had a man advatage for over 25 minutes but they couldn't manage to score a goal in open play. Over two games, Chelsea scored a single goal (albeit a spectacular one) and didn't dominate the play in either game.

We get it. Losing a close one hurts, especially when calls go against you. But this ugly Chelsea whine is a bit much. Here's hoping that when Barcelona plays Manchester United on May 27th, we get to see the beautiful side of the beautiful game.
_____________________________

Saturday, March 14, 2009

The 100 Greatest Yankees of All Time

____________________________________________________________________




Mr. Yankee?








Baseball season is just around the corner. So let's get started on some lists and the delightfully inane debates that such lists generate.

First, here are the usual disclaimers:

· There are no Jamesian mathematical formulas here – this is a purely subjective exercise.

· I have indulged in the absurdity of comparing players from different eras.

· Baseball is a game of numbers. Statistics do count for a lot, but they are not everything.

· Service to the club counts for something. This is not a list of the 100 greatest players. It's the 100 greatest Yankees.

· A player’s standing is helped by contributing to World Championships – this is the Yankees after all. Championships are their currency.

· Standing is hurt by cheating (A-Rod, Petite, Giambi, Hal Chase, etc.)

· Standing is helped by legendary accomplishments and heroic post-season moments (Don Larsen, Reggie Jackson, Bucky Dent, etc.)

· The purpose of list is to generate discussion, argument and appreciation for great and memorable players, not to establish a hierarchy or pantheon.

Finally, although this list is subjective and arbitrary it is not burdened by sentiment. After all, I don’t like the Yankees. But let's face it - this is the most successful American sports team of all time. At least they were last century.

Here are the 100 Greatest Yankees of all time:

1. Babe Ruth
2. Lou Gehrig
3. Joe DiMaggio
4. Mickey Mantle
5. Yogi Berra
6. Mariano Rivera
7. Whitey Ford
8. Derek Jeter
9. Bill Dickey
10. Bernie Williams
11. Roger Maris
12. Reggie Jackson
13. Don Mattingly
14. Red Ruffing
15. Tony Lazzeri
16. Lefty Gomez
17. Phil Rizzuto
18. Jorge Posada
19. Joe Gordon
20. Ron Guidry
21. Elston Howard
22. Earl Combs
23. Allie Reynolds
24. Thurman Munson
25. Bobby Richardson
26. Graig Nettles
27. Paul O’Neil
28. Goose Gossage
29. Bobby Murcer
30. Bob Meusel
31. Sparky Lyle
32. Mel Stottlemyre
33. Andy Petite
34. Willie Randolph
35. Dave Winfield
36. Tino Martinez
37. Billy Martin
38. Bill Skowron
39. Waite Hoyt
40. Dave Righetti
41. Alex Rodriguez
42. Tommy Heinrich
43. Herb Pennock
44. Eddie Lopat
45. Bob Turley
46. Red Rolfe
47. Tommy John
48. Roy White
49. Hank Bauer
50. Spud Chandler
51. John Wettland
52. Charlie Keller
53. Catfish Hunter
54. Vic Raschi
55. Joe Girardi
56. Bob Shawkey
57. Roger Clemens
58. Chris Chambliss
59. Jack Chesbro
60. Luis Arroyo
61. Don Larsen
62. Wally Pip
63. Wade Boggs
64. Joe Pepitone
65. Mickey Rivers
66. Mike Mussina
67. Lou Pinella
68. David Wells
69. Gil McDougald
70. Hal Chase
71. Tony Kubek
72. Orlando Hernandez
73. Ben Chapman
74. Ricky Henderson
75. Bucky Dent
76. Johnny Murphy
77. David Cone
78. Hideki Matsui
79. Jim Leyritz
80. Roger Peckinpaugh
81. Joe Page
82. Jason Giambi
83. Frank Crosetti
84. George Selkirk
85. Scott Brosius
86. Snuffy Stirnweiss
87. Jimmy Key
88. Tom Tresh
89. Mark Koenig
90. Jeff Nelson
91. Chuck Knoblauch
92. Ralph Terry
93. Ed Figueroa
94. Clete Boyer
95. Gene Woodling
96. Fritz Peterson
97. Joe Dugan
98. Jim Bouton
99. Mike Stanton
100. Horace Clark

_________________________________________________________________________

Friday, January 30, 2009

Super Bowl Prediction

__________________________________________

When it comes to the Super Bowl, you can pretty much bet on anything.

For example, you can get odds on the color of the gatorade that will dumped on the winning coach (I like orange at 7 to 1) or you can bet the over/under on the length of Jennifer Hudson's rendition of the National Anthem (The current line is 1 minute, 54 seconds).

And you can also bet on the set list for Sprinsteen's half-time show - or at least you could until earlier today.

Here's my prediction:

1. Radio Nowhere
2. Glory Days
3. My Lucky Day
4. Born to Run

But I'll be more specific. When he sings "Glory Days," he will substitute football lyrics for the baseball ones. To wit:

I had a friend was a big football player
back in high school
He could throw that pigskin by you
Make you look like a fool boy...

Now can I get odds on that?

_____________________________________

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Confessions of an Antisocial Apostate or "Why I Skip the Super Bowl"


________________________________________________

I rarely watch the Super Bowl.

I watched last year and I watched Super Bowl XXXV in 2001 but that was only because, my team, the New York Football Giants, was playing. And I caught the last few minutes in 2004 when Adam Vinatieri’s field goal sealed the win for the Patriots. But the last time I actually sat down to watch a non-Giant Super Bowl, John Elway was playing. It has been more than a decade.

Blowing off the Super Bowl feels like apostasy. Well actually, double apostasy. Not only am I a red-blooded American male, but I work in advertising.

The strange thing is, I like football. OK, I happen to like baseball more. And maybe I don’t relish watching football the way I did when I was a kid, but that seems normal enough with age. There is still plenty about the game that I enjoy - the anticipation of those Autumn Sundays, the gladiator-like theater of the arena, the athleticism of a great run or catch, the pain and glory of rooting for a team, the smash-mouth pleasure of it all, and the Monday-Morning quarterbacking and arguments at the water cooler. Still, I can’t bring myself to watch the Super Bowl.

Here is my problem. Super Bowl Sunday is a national day of observance, bearing all of the ritualistic trappings and social obligations of a religious holiday. But it isn’t enough to worship, that is, to watch the game before the altar of some giant screen. You have to do something for the occasion. Like Christmas or New Year’s Eve, it is an event that calls for parties and plans and hanging out with people you wouldn’t hang out with otherwise. I hate Super Bowl parties. For me, watching television rarely works as a communal activity. Yes I suppose there is something to having a shared experience – the conversations, the cheering and the chicken wings. But Super Bowl parties have always struck me as a way to spend time with people without really spending time with them. (“Oh don’t mind him, he’s watching the game.”)

It sounds terribly antisocial of me. But watching the game by myself doesn’t really appeal to me either. There is still this overriding sense of pressure, this sense that you MUST watch this game and swallow all of the hype and the ads and spectacle for the masses. And then there’s the time commitment. Between the pre-game coverage, the extended television time-outs, the halftime show, and post-game wrap-up, we are talking about anywhere from five to 10 hours.

As acts of rebellion go, mine is rather modest. But here is my strategy. On Super Bowl Sunday, I like to pretend that the rest of the world is frozen in time in front of their giant screens. While they are trapped in their own dimension, eating nachos and pizza, drinking beer, thinking they are having a good time, here is the chance to seize the day and do something special with the time before you. Read a book, clean your closet, paint a picture, write a letter, call a friend (who is not a football fan), re-arrange your sock drawer or make that list of resolutions you thought about making on New Year’s Eve. Make it yours. It’s an opportunity to strike a blow against social convention and orthodoxy and take back the day.

Oh, but don’t forget to watch Springsteen at half-time. You really must.

_______________________________________________

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Happy Inauguration Day

_____________________________________________________

Some random observations and thoughts on this historic day:


As exciting and inspiring as the day was, I'm sure glad I wasn't in DC. You couldn't pay me. Crowded, cold, jacked up prices and one port-o-john per 1,000 people? No thank you. That's what television is for.


Rick Warren's invocation was dreadful, truly an awful embarrassment. Sure, I can appreciate the rationale and the politics behind the choice, but Obama should never have invited this self-aggrandizing, sectarian crackpot.

So in administering the oath, Chief Justice Roberts and Obama fumbled the exchange. Is this disconnect between the President and the Chief Justice a sign of things to come?

On to the speech. It was good speech and Obama did an excellent job. But for all of the eloquence and inspiration, the substance of his address wasn't all that remarkable or memorable. What will be remembered by history is the occasion, not the actual speech.

I still think my favorite line of his speech was: "We will restore science to its rightful place." Refreshing.

One other interesting touch was Obama's inclusion of "non-believers." I'm trying to remember an occasion when a U.S. President even acknowledged atheists or agnostics as valued citizens. That's pretty amazing when you consider that atheists and agnostics comprise somewhere between 15 and 20% of the population.

(And to be fair, we can argue that it's not accurate to refer to atheists as "non-believers." Atheists believe...they believe in reason and explanations of the world based on evidence).

I liked the classical music - I thought it sounded great.

But did we really need the poet?

It was interesting that the one historical figure that Obama quoted at length was George Washington. An unsual choice, especially for a liberal politician. You'd expect maybe Jefferson, FDR, Lincoln, Kennedy or MLK. Why Washington? Because Washington strived to appear above partisanship and to put love of country, and the greater good, first. He wasn't really above partisanship - he was both human and a politician, but that was the ideal that he stood for. Obama was clever to tap into that.

Monday, January 19, 2009

United We Stand




_______________________________________


But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists.
-- Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address 1801

We have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America
-- Barack Obama, November 4, 2008.

For all that is new and different about Barack Obama, the message of unity he extends is a time-honored tradition. Since Jefferson took office in 1801, the incoming President has always sought to heal political divisions and make a show of unity. Whether the effort is seen as cynical or sincere depends on your own view of politics, but it's certainly the case that any incoming President has an interest in winning over his doubters and detractors, boosting his popularity and building consensus.

In Obama's case, communicating a message of unity goes to his strengths as politician - a political style that is conciliatory and pragmatic and, of course, his skills as an orator. It will be interesting to see how he goes about delivering his message of unity at the inaugural address today.

Two observations though:

1). For all of the rancor and partisanship in American politics, our country is not nearly as divided as members of the media make it seem. Sure, Obama has his work cut out for him, but "unity" isn't really a problem. We are far more unified than we were in the 1960s, not to mention the 1860s. Or for that matter 1801, when Jefferson took office.

2) Whether it's a Democrat or Republican who takes the oath of office, there's something truly inspiring about the peaceful transition of power - it is an occasion that is still so rare in many parts of the globe. We tend to focus on the many things that are wrong with our government, but seeing the orderly transition of power is a reminder that the fundamentals of our Constitution really do work.