Ever since Indie 103.1 went off the FM airwaves on January 16, 2009, there has been chatter about what will happen to the online-only radio station.
I have a few things to say about it. First of all, Indie 1031.com is still great--it is not a shadow of its former airwave radio self. Moreover, Indie 103.1.com is better by far than any other Independent/Alternative radio station. This includes another favorite of this blog, Morning Becomes Eclectic, now hosted by Jason Bentley. It's good, but not as good. Too much, well, eclecticism. I don't always want to listen to some weird, breathy woman from Brazil trying to be ethereal, if you know what I mean.
As for the few pseudo-news (i.e. blog posts) that lament that Indie 103.1.com is a shadow of its former self now that Jonesy's Jukebox is no more, I disagree. I appreciate Steve Jones and all but I am not one who laments the passing of his show. I mean, one can only listen to so much 70's music, which often comprised the majority of his two hour show. Ugh. It is sad that Henry Rollins's show, Harmony in My Head is moving to KCRW, but Indie still rules.
And for the many who want Indie to live on beyond the internet, there was one person who was evidently petitioning Entravision, the owners of the station who are still evidently willing to support it online. I remain unconvinced how effective that was.
And while it is great that Henry Rollins will be moving to KCRW for a new forum for his show, Harmony in My Head, I still think that Indie 103.1 is by far the best radio around. I will be sticking with it!
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Being Western Isn't Enough of a Credential Anymore
The days when being a Westerner, especially one form Western Europe (read: Britain) or from the U.S., in order to be instantly credible, experienced and desirable, are over. In what context? In the East Asia context.
Americans and Western Europeans who travel to India still experience some cache, as do those same people who also travel to other countries in South Asia. They've been colonized enough to be "used to" Westerners who treat a trip to India, for example, as a spiritual pilgrimage. Usually these same people don't subscribe to a "conventional religion" but they sure don't mind using an entire country to activate their "spirituality."
But more and more, partly because much of East Asia was not colonized by these same Western countries, Americans, Brits, French, they aren't instantaneously viewed as more capable, more skilled, more intelligent, or otherwise more informed, than the indigenous peoples. Travel to any of the major cities in China, for example, and one will find more sophistication in the young people than anything Americans might offer. More ambition, better gadgets, and for those born in the city, better educated.
It must be so disappointing for travelers who assume that just because they are less than stellar in their own country, either sexually or professionally, they can still establish their cultural hegemony over there. Well, they can no longer.
Being Euro-American just isn't enough of a credential anymore. Wherever one goes in East Asia, one will find that not only can they do things just as well, they can often do it better, with better technology. It can be done more quicker, and their adoption of newer, more sustainable and efficient technologies is far more rapid and agile than the slow process made in Euro-American countries. Except perhaps those in North-western Europe, where many of these technologies originate.
Nevertheless, the idea of the BRIC economy is more than merely the latest wave of strong, developing economies. It is of cultures that are rapidly gaining on those of the West, building upon both their developments and their mistakes. Americans in particular should take note and stop being so arrogant.
Americans and Western Europeans who travel to India still experience some cache, as do those same people who also travel to other countries in South Asia. They've been colonized enough to be "used to" Westerners who treat a trip to India, for example, as a spiritual pilgrimage. Usually these same people don't subscribe to a "conventional religion" but they sure don't mind using an entire country to activate their "spirituality."
But more and more, partly because much of East Asia was not colonized by these same Western countries, Americans, Brits, French, they aren't instantaneously viewed as more capable, more skilled, more intelligent, or otherwise more informed, than the indigenous peoples. Travel to any of the major cities in China, for example, and one will find more sophistication in the young people than anything Americans might offer. More ambition, better gadgets, and for those born in the city, better educated.
It must be so disappointing for travelers who assume that just because they are less than stellar in their own country, either sexually or professionally, they can still establish their cultural hegemony over there. Well, they can no longer.
Being Euro-American just isn't enough of a credential anymore. Wherever one goes in East Asia, one will find that not only can they do things just as well, they can often do it better, with better technology. It can be done more quicker, and their adoption of newer, more sustainable and efficient technologies is far more rapid and agile than the slow process made in Euro-American countries. Except perhaps those in North-western Europe, where many of these technologies originate.
Nevertheless, the idea of the BRIC economy is more than merely the latest wave of strong, developing economies. It is of cultures that are rapidly gaining on those of the West, building upon both their developments and their mistakes. Americans in particular should take note and stop being so arrogant.
Monday, February 9, 2009
"I don't like Chinese food" Often Equals Racism
It does sound like a leap, but bear with this reasoning.
In an article the other day, an actor who was filming in Hong Kong over the summer vehemently declared he "hated Chinese food." He was there for three months, had nothing to say about traveling, the culture, different as it is from China since it was a colony for 150 years and is inexorably changed, and nothing to say about the experience. Just that he hated Chinese food.
Hmm. What happened to all the other aspects of Hong Kong that are interesting? I know, for the sanitized white tourist, it's far too difficult to embrace.
Imagine that same white tourist, this one from Boston where the actor was from, in, say, India. Suddenly things change, don't they? Because India was a colony for over 300 years, white people who find it far too intimidating to travel to China or even Hong Kong will travel to India. Why? Because int he popular imaginary, there is nothing threatening about India. The people, most obviously, have been subdued for centuries. That they finaly threw off the shackles of colonialism happened only in the recent past. Look how long it's been trying to overcome the long-lasting effects of centuries of slavery and you'll understand that fifty years means nothing compared to hundreds of years. India was a colony for over 300.
So people know that the Indians will speak English. They feel that they ar a non-threatening peole. They aren't violent. They've adopted an originally British Indianized dish of Chicken Tiki Masala, just for the Western palate, even. And theydon't do violent things. They are, in short, nonthreatening.
Imagine China, now. People do't speak the language. The government has never been touched by a Western hand. And the Communism? It wasn't as Marx envisioned. It was never an economic system in China, just another form of imperial control, under a different name. The peole have never been cowed. They do things so differently. There isn't a lot of history about China that has not aready been sanitized by hundreds of years of Western scholars. There are, in short, unknown. Hence threatening. And the likelihood that a Westerner traveling to China knows the language? Right.
So when someone says, I don't like Chinese food, what they are saying is Chinese food is a proxy for a culture and a people they find different, threatening, scary and unable to e cowed. By Western values of "democracy" or "humanity"--yes, that's why we criminalize same-sex marriage, here, homosexuality, colored people, single mothers--yes, we are humane, here, incarcerating old men over fifty years in the South because once, a black man sold some pot. Gee. And what happens to Robert Downey, Jr.? A few months? Hmm. But we are humane. Yes, we are. We value human rights. We don't incarcerate, criminalkize or otherwise discriminate. Unless somehow those groups deserve it.
And imagine if someone said, I hate hot dogs and baseball. What would be the reaction? You mean you hate America?
In an article the other day, an actor who was filming in Hong Kong over the summer vehemently declared he "hated Chinese food." He was there for three months, had nothing to say about traveling, the culture, different as it is from China since it was a colony for 150 years and is inexorably changed, and nothing to say about the experience. Just that he hated Chinese food.
Hmm. What happened to all the other aspects of Hong Kong that are interesting? I know, for the sanitized white tourist, it's far too difficult to embrace.
Imagine that same white tourist, this one from Boston where the actor was from, in, say, India. Suddenly things change, don't they? Because India was a colony for over 300 years, white people who find it far too intimidating to travel to China or even Hong Kong will travel to India. Why? Because int he popular imaginary, there is nothing threatening about India. The people, most obviously, have been subdued for centuries. That they finaly threw off the shackles of colonialism happened only in the recent past. Look how long it's been trying to overcome the long-lasting effects of centuries of slavery and you'll understand that fifty years means nothing compared to hundreds of years. India was a colony for over 300.
So people know that the Indians will speak English. They feel that they ar a non-threatening peole. They aren't violent. They've adopted an originally British Indianized dish of Chicken Tiki Masala, just for the Western palate, even. And theydon't do violent things. They are, in short, nonthreatening.
Imagine China, now. People do't speak the language. The government has never been touched by a Western hand. And the Communism? It wasn't as Marx envisioned. It was never an economic system in China, just another form of imperial control, under a different name. The peole have never been cowed. They do things so differently. There isn't a lot of history about China that has not aready been sanitized by hundreds of years of Western scholars. There are, in short, unknown. Hence threatening. And the likelihood that a Westerner traveling to China knows the language? Right.
So when someone says, I don't like Chinese food, what they are saying is Chinese food is a proxy for a culture and a people they find different, threatening, scary and unable to e cowed. By Western values of "democracy" or "humanity"--yes, that's why we criminalize same-sex marriage, here, homosexuality, colored people, single mothers--yes, we are humane, here, incarcerating old men over fifty years in the South because once, a black man sold some pot. Gee. And what happens to Robert Downey, Jr.? A few months? Hmm. But we are humane. Yes, we are. We value human rights. We don't incarcerate, criminalkize or otherwise discriminate. Unless somehow those groups deserve it.
And imagine if someone said, I hate hot dogs and baseball. What would be the reaction? You mean you hate America?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
park
wing #1