Matching Grant Challenge
alexPureWhen I met Alexander Cockburn, one of his first questions to me was: “Is your hate pure?” It was the question he asked most of the young writers he mentored. These were Cockburn’s rules for how to write political polemics: write about what you care about, write with passion, go for the throat of your enemies and never back down. His admonitions remain the guiding stylesheet for our writers at CounterPunch. Please help keep the spirit of this kind of fierce journalism alive by taking advantage of  our matching grant challenge which will DOUBLE every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, CounterPunch will get a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate. –JSC (This photo of Alexander Cockburn and Jasper, on the couch that launched 1000 columns, was taken in Petrolia by Tao Ruspoli)
 Day 19

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

When the Songs Remain the Same

Craving Diversity

by LORENZO WOLFF

Last night I got home from a mini-tour of the southern Midwest. We managed to cover three thousand miles in five days, cramped up in a little red SUV sprinkled with a cross section of the insect population of the United States. In the fifty hour round trip we worked our iPods to the point of exhaustion, spinning first songs, then albums, then whole catalogs. After two hours of Chuck Berry tunes we got to talking about diversity from song to song, and from album to album.

It’s a pretty new phenomenon to want every song to sound different from the last. Before the early sixties albums were a luxury that most people couldn’t afford, folks bought singles or just listened to the radio. This meant that an artist’s new single could sound similar to the last one since they were less likely to be played back to back. Just buy a Greatest Hits from someone like Fats Domino or Little Richard, and even though they are incredible songs and performances you can hear that these songs were not designed to be played in rapid succession off of the stage.

Then around the time of the British Invasion full albums started being made more affordable and the newer rock crowd began amassing collections of LPs. This meant listening to the same voice for a longer period of time, and by necessity songs were forced to distinguish themselves from each other. In rock this meant more ballads. Because of the pressure of radio, the last generation had to put out mostly up-tempo singles, since you can only play so many slow songs on a pop station. The newer crowd, however, could afford to bring down the energy for a song or two, since people were listening to them for a longer period of time.

Nowadays the situation is a little more complicated. While full albums aren’t quite as popular as they used to be, music collections are growing. People tend to have large collections of songs by a single artist instead of collections of albums. So modern artists now not only have to worry about two songs sounding similar on a given album, they have to think about their whole anthology. Your average listener could build a playlist with a song from Darkness on the Edge of Town right next to a track from The Rising.

When you get down to the heart of the matter it’s a question of control. At first, artists could control what single they wanted their audience to hear at a certain moment of time. Later the LP meant control of a greater amount of time, but it came with certain limitations as far as the relation of the tracks to each other. Now you can listen to an entire discography in any order you see fit. This means you have an entire career to get your ideas across, but you have a much greater responsibility for how you do it. It’s like the Boss says:

Nothing is forgotten or forgiven,
When it’s your last time around,
I got stuff running around ‘round my head
That I just can’t live down

LORENZO WOLFF is a musician living in New York. He can be reached at: lorenzowolff@gmail.com