Skateboarding

Not just for the anti-Establishment types, apparently. I like these photos. And I want to reconsider that decision I made back in 2003 when I gave up skateboarding for good. What's another broken arm, when you can be THIS cool?






Wasson. Nice Chapeux.

Adopted Obsessions

I'm DEEP into my dissertation work , so much so that I also spend a lot of time on the internet, (obviously) uselessly plotting away at... well, nothing. But then sometimes you find useful things. Useful can also mean, 'man, that's good news!' Such news comes in the form of a preview video of Julian Casablanca's solo project, 'Phrazes for the Young' (ps. delicious and appropriate use of the 'Z'. Something I've taken to recently, only to preserve my contrived hip-ness which fades oh so quickly after countless hours in archives with crusty old men,.. lolz). Casablanca's long awaited work comes at a key time in the music world... will it be in the top 2009 lists? No one even knows, but its hotly anticipated. WTF Jules? Where were you this whole time? (I'm only a psuedo fan, so I really don't know. For these wholeheartedly relevant facts I would have to go to my sister). Here his band-mates were (The Strokes) making great solo projects. My favourite is Little Joy. But check this puppy out:



As most of my friends will know, I develop obsessions easily. In fact, it can take a mere 45 minutes with a human being for me to fall madly in love... . (Of course, it's never real. It fades. When it doesn't, that's when I know he/she/it/that is a Lifer.) Casablancas is what I like to call an adopted obsession. Because credit has to be given where credit is due: Anna 'T. Pain' Wiesen. Little sis' was all over The Strokes at the tender age of 13, when I was convinced that big arena rock/hip hop acts were where it was At--- see Incubus, and/or Jay-Z. However, there's nothing that reminds me of my first love more than 'Between Love and Hate' from Room on Fire. All this nostalgia led me to google countless photos of the one and only Julian. Needless to say, my obsession has kicked into high gear. If I can't be with him, I'll just BE him.
So my tomboy side will come out for a little while. I will start walking/talking/drinking like a guy- or more specifically like Julian. Is this a relevant topic for all you people? Probably not. But maybe I'm not the only one. Maybe there are countless others out there who suffer from what I call 'permanent-obsession-disorder'.

Sometimes I worry about this. It's creepy, I know. (As always, my mind oscillates between worrying about Kazakhstan's use of child labour in the cotton industry, which is seriously troubling, and I'll be writing a post about it soon, and my own neuroses). It's just that I find all different types of human beings so deeply inspiring. It's the only thing that keeps a cynic like me going. Here are some key words that mark the obsessions I've had over the years: wood/south/poets/north/deathly thin/homey. Shit, son. These men and women have helped construct the person I am now. It's why I'm such a contradiction, but also never afraid to admit it. There's something really important about how syncretic personalities are. Though, I don't think there's anything so awesomely unique about anyone- attributes have come from SOMEWHERE. But the way it all comes together- like a kaleidoscope- ya. It's brilliant. But moreso, I need to leave the West. I enjoy transnational frames of mind that bind young people from Toronto to New York to London, Berlin and Stockholm. But I also know that Marcuse would shake his head at me. I know that the vacuousness of my surroundings are only accessible because someone else is suffering. It's a mind-fuck. Sorry...but it is. And I can't see. So I'll be peacing out to meet more interesting minds very soon. Once I make some money, and once I spend some time with loved ones. Once I shake off this Masters degree for a while. (Oh, right I haven't graduated yet.)

But still.... my obsessive personality will never change.
I know it's not fair or overly creative to pick someone who is already in the public eye, and decide, oh hey, they're really awesome, I want to know what the essence of their Being is all about. But people do it all the time. W.W.J.D.? W.W.O.D? (Obama). And now, in my case, W.W.Julian.D? He would make a new album!



Photo illustration by Williams and Hirakawa

Here He is! Mitch, the Bicycle.

Here's my new bike! My life has gotten about 49.7% more enjoyable since forking up the 40 quid for this little gem, that I have dubbed Mitch. (Mitch is not cool, Mitch is probably the nerdiest, shoddiest bike in all of London). However, not only can I get to Uni in under 20 minutes, but I can avoid the trauma-inducing tube. Why did I put this off all year? Must say, I was a bit fearful at first. I've historically been a complete reject on bicycles (see summer 2007, where riding my mountain bike like someone at my skill level should just didn't seem appealing enough to me). Needless to say, the horror stories of London cycling were enough to discourage me. But by the end of exams, I knew that warnings from my mother could no longer keep me from one of my deepest passions.


Here I am with my mountain bike that I miss dearly.

I've always had a thing for riding bikes. It's in so many ways a proletarian thing to do. But as anyone living in a big hip city knows, it's also become simply "the thing to do" as a young person. Fixed-gear madness abounds at Brick Lane, or College Street or Brooklyn for that matter. This idea that walking or taking public transportation (gasp!) is somehow less cool than riding a bike is one that seems odd. Rather, the bike has been appropriated from the world's peasantry. My friend from China believes that riding a bike in London is a petty bourgeois choice. (I disagree respectfully, of course, because riding a bike is carbon neutral, and any environmentalist is obligated to do so). Why would you want to ride a bike? He asks. Apparently he had to ride them so much as a kid, because there was no alternative, that he cant stand them anymore.
But I persist. In many ways the bicycle went from being something that was "just for kids", family picnic trips, and hardcore athletic types to being an active form of resistance to the monolith that is car culture in the West. See this dude's tattoo really captures the sentiment!

But now, and especially here in London, the anti-establishment symbolism of choosing a bike rather than a car has been undermined by the aggressive incursion of capitalist values of 'cool'. I find myself admiring other people's bikes all the time, and Mitchy becomes much less attractive. Why? It's just a bike! Just a way to get around! Does capitalism have that much power? Or am I just too weak to resist shallow cultural trends? Both of these questions of course lead to the more long-standing issue of what trends mean (a friend would point me to Bourdieu's 'Distinction') in a class-conscious framework. Not to delve too deeply into a regressive enumeration of how and why people identify with certain trends in a capitalist society, I think it's fair to say that bike-loving hipsterdom is a far cry from the kind of life-choice that is made by eco-socialists. The kind of choice that is made, perhaps, in solidarity with the world's poor who ride bikes as a basic necessity. We may pity that kind of situation, yes, but in fact, we shouldn't. We're the pathetic ones, polluting our air with inefficient SUV's that crawl through cities like bloated cows, farting out the non-biological equivalent of methane. The bike is the better way to get around. It's the fastest way. And its no longer only for the alternative types. This yuppie-friendly mode of transportation is indeed popular among all sorts of people, which as a walker-bus-tube person I didn't expect. At the end of the day, I'll know my world has changed when I see P. Diddy or Jay-Z rolling around on the two-wheeled gems of joy.

Ideological Confusion

I'm in muddy waters. My very own ideological quagmire. I spent the afternoon and evening at the Marxism Festival held at the University of London campus. What I thought would be a loose organization of left wing groups, concerned about how aspects of Marxism are still relevant today, about how we have to fight retrenchment, the alliance of corporations and government, and about how we can awaken people to the reality that unmanaged capitalism is a destructive force, turned out to be something very different. Most of what I heard appeared to be contrived table stomping. I know they would all slap me silly if I said Sweden was the ideal (which it really is, and I want to live there), but I didn't expect them to be SO dogmatic.

The socialist workers movement in the United Kingdom has been historically robust and militant when compared to the rest of Europe. But most former supporters of Labour in many ways feel betrayed by the party. Some will stay, out of habit, others (this shouldn't be exaggerated though) will join nationalist parties, like the BNP, and still others drift further to the left. The most mainstream party in the UK that represents this new group is the Socialist Worker's Party. They were the ones who organised the festival. They constantly receive heavy criticism from the other communist groups, for 'buying into the parliamentary game'. What I find troubling, is that the SWP seems way too concerned about this criticism, and they've taken to heavy posturing in the past few months. Individual members talk about the coming revolution, that now is the time to take the state in the name of the workers, and expel capitalism once and for all.

This is all well and good, and should technically be taken seriously, because the SWP has a significant support base. But it's not serious. The party has never done anything to embrace this so-called revolution beyond hosting anti-capitalist street parties at Canary Wharf, and large talking shops for left wing academics. (Who I am mostly fond of, I might add). However, as a free thinking individual, with anarchist leanings, I felt entirely offended that young dudes from the (also) sell-out organization patronised me, and shamed me for not joining the party. I thanked one guy for his work on the festival, (ironically, it wasn't well organized, considering they are communists) and gave a polite no thanks when he told me to join the SWP. I specifically remember the words, "If you really care, then join a revolutionary movement, join the SWP". Now THAT's insane. I wanted to ask him with all honesty, if he knew how to shoot a gun. My guess is he can't. And there certainly won't be a peaceful road to socialist revolution, because the democratic state just isn't going anywhere. Also, the left is divided on the matter of how to 'smash the state' as it is. So without violence, there really is NO revolution in the West. What the festival brought to light was just how diverse the left is! The Spartacist League, the Socialist Equality Party etc etc. They mainly try to deligitimise each other. It's a waste of time.

And here's my biggest quibble: the way 'comrades' went out of their way to point out that what was going on in Latin America wasn't really revolutionary. For example, there was criticism of Evo Morales' politics. Many believed he was 'negotiating with the fascists' in Santa Cruz. This just seems silly to me. In light of the complex societal dynamics there, and the historic and ongoing power of the military (see Chile '73, Honduras '09) what else was Morales to do? He isn't Chavez. He doesn't have the power to simply drive through reforms. (To their defense, it is from a marxist point of view analytically sound to critcise 'reforms' in and of themselves, because reformism can never be revolutionary). Call it what you like, but in my mind, reformism is just delivering more right now. What is going on in so many countries in Latin America is more revolutionary in actuality than anything that talk-shopping marxists in Europe could ever hope to do. They will remain irrelevant, while Latin American leftist leaders will struggle and achieve some successes in bringing equality to their people by avoiding bloodshed.

My main conclusion has been that the trouble with Western marxists today is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. From their high horses, and deeply informed marxist views, they asses every situation without taking account of nuances or limitations. In fact, they are betraying the entire movement by leaving BEHIND the dialectic analysis of the historical role of monopoly capitalism. Zizek's contributions to the debate were the most entertaining, and interesting. Where I think Marxists should play a role is in fact in criticism. Agitation. ETC. Keep building the kadres, keep an open mind, and embrace every comrade on the left, regardless of whether they are eco-socialists or feminists etc etc. If they fail to do that, then I'm afraid they will lose ALL relevance, and people will indeed find nationalist parties more appealing. I don't need to bring up THE example, but I think we all know what happens when the ranks remain divided in the face of an unprecedented economic crisis. Fascism will win, democracy will collapse, and the entire left will be thrown into camps. The proletariat will never benefit from a divided left. However, the route to overcoming this division is NOT imposing uniformity on the movement in a Leninist/Stalinist way, but rather to accept differences of opinion, and to continue to debate them in the open. In many ways that was the one positive thing about the Marxism festival. But I must say, the Anarchist Book fair back in November was much more enjoyable. If any communist accuses me of being afraid to join 'the revolution', I would ask them where the potential for revolution in the West lies? I would ask them to stop eating meat, and start TRULY living in solidarity with the world's poor, to embrace TRUE internationalism, which means NOT shopping at Tesco for cheap food. Solidarity means personal sacrifice. Too many members of the SWP are two-faced hypocrites. This is something I can't say I found under the anarchists. They lived their cause.

Here's Zizek's contribution, if you're interested. He's inspiring, and I loved his answer. I agree because its logical. Revolutionaries are those who want to overthrow capitalism and replace it with something new and modern. I don't think anyone on the left is brave enough to carry out his prescriptions, though:

Craving Canada

It's hot in London. All I can think about is how badly I would love to be in Canada right now. Living in a concrete jungle takes a toll on your soul. I guess it depends on what kind of person you are, but I for one can't deal with it. This picture made me crave a Northern morning and all that comes with it.

I'm not a Canadian citizen yet, but I should finally be able to get Dual this summer. I've always felt extremely Canadian, having grown up in a small town, with lakes and forests. A large portion of the kids that went to my school were aboriginal, and learning about the different tribes in our area was a big part of our education. Most of our parents were employed by the government. But it was still a very forgotten place. So when Michael Ignatieff talks about his Canadian-ness, I sometimes question the validity of his claims. Defining what is Canadian has got to be one of the most challenging and nebulous discussions of all time. But I know one thing for sure... he's a different kind of Canadian than me. Although I don't hold a passport, I understand the mindframe of rural folks in a way that I'm not sure he'll ever have access to. Does that make him a bad potential Prime Minister? No. Identity is best left to the Andersons of the world... as someone who believes most nationalisms are rubbish anyway, any discussion of Iggy's Canadian street cred seems useless to me. Can he govern in a way that delivers what MOST Canadians want, and not what HE thinks is best for Canada? That's the more important question. In effect, will his arrogance get in the way of his politics?

Hot, Hot Heat

There's plenty of things I should keep in mind: I'm the kind of person who absolutely cannot mix work and play. I had a pleasant idea: on Sunday I would get away from my dissertation work and head to Brighton to smell the fresh sea air. Good idea? Seemingly so. Except I didn't consider the fact that I was already feeling a bit sick on my way to the train station. As soon as the Paracetamol began to wear off the wooziness began. And it was only getting hotter. Seven hours later I finally made it home with heat exhaustion and a fever induced by my cold.



However, I had extremely pleasant dreams last night. I moved back to the small town I grew up in, and fell in love with a boy.

Provocative or tacky?

I was browsing my new favorite website the other day (www.englishrussia.com) and came across these vintage photos in LIFE magazine from around 30 years ago. The fashion label Christian Dior had organized a trip to the Soviet Union and shot some American models parading through the streets of Moscow in the newest RTW collection. In many ways this was genius. The impoverished Russian women appear to feel inadequate and envious of the 'lady in red.' Their simple dresses appear dull and worn, while their faces convey a mixture of longing and sadness. At the height of the Cold War, this seems like the ultimate ideological triumph. For a contemporary left wing observer to immediately declare this as cruel, essentially defeats the creed that is under attack in these images. Truly, to flaunt these fancy dresses in front of women who had to make do with what little they had, was a particularly obnoxious way to expose one of the many faults in the Soviet command economy. This picture seems to imply, 'Look at what capitalism gives us; see what the 'others' have been deprived of'. The fallacy lies in the further implication that in the United States, the land of 'plenty', everyone has the chance to acquire their very own Christian Dior suit worth thousands of dollars. However, as we know, it's not just a matter of choice. Most people won't ever be able to afford something like that. Thus, does not this very same exchange occur almost every day in the West as well? Why waste the money and time to go to Moscow to make your point when you could just go to inner city Detroit or some of the poorest areas of the United States? Places, where you could say, certain aspects of the capitalist system have also failed? Thus, both ideologies and economic systems make promises that they can't deliver.  To be sure, the Soviet system outright failed, and in avoiding that failure stripped human beings of common dignity. But it doesn't imply that there aren't similar developments in capitalist systems. I'm not defending anything here, just pointing out an intuition about this. So while initially this photograph may invite the beholder to criticize the Soviet system, upon further contemplation, it's quite obvious that something else is at work. Because an average single mom working two jobs to make ends meet would likely share the emotions embodied in these women's expressions. 

But is this not a genius piece of Western propaganda at the very least? It's sad that it has to be at the expense of these women, truly. 

1990. Progress. Plaid.

There's something unique about the 1990s. Pop culture in the west all of a sudden got moody. With the triumph of democracy, technically there should have been some sort of reaffirmation of the values that had been so carefully charted out in the mainstream since the 1950s. To be sure, there were many deviations (see Splendor in the Grass or Rebel Without A Cause, both films exploring the difficulties encountered during liminal periods in young people's adaption to the American Dream). But apart from some ridiculous exceptions (such as Clueless- exceptional film, I might add!) both film and music in post-Cold War America was defeatist if not borderline existentialist. Most of what was available to young people in the way of entertainment in the mid-1990s was dark, introspective and, (here's the kicker) relevant! Before P.Diddy, there was Public Enemy. Not all was so peachy in inner-city America- rappers made sure that was known. Before Chris Martin, there was Kurt Cobain. Not everyone looked on the bright side of the speed of sound. Now, this isn't some sort of great discovery on my behalf of course. But I've always appreciated and felt attached to these aspects of popular culture in the 90s.

One of my favourite films, REALITY BITES!

Reality Bites on Zuguide.com

She's the Chung

As noted below, I adore this personality. I don't watch much TV, but when I first moved to the UK, early mornings were accompanied by T4 Music's 'Freshly Squeezed' episodes. She's probably one of the most clever and annoying TV presenters out there. Alexa Chung's got 'fly' style and she makes me smile. An inspiration, really. But now she's moved to New York City to star in a new MTV daily show. Alas, I will have to resign myself to BBC Breakfast. I'm avoiding the headlines from now on since the expenses scandal has brought out 'the bitch' in one of the anchors: pretty much half-yelling at guests and MPs. Deserved, no doubt, (who charges taxpayers for moat-cleaning?) but it's not something that's particularly pleasant to listen to at 7 am. 

Anyways, here's Chung on Popworld, interviewing Gwen Stefani. This interview is so awkward and amazing. Chung's veiled sarcasm, and Stefani's idiotic answers are brilliant. The tension is vivid. It amplifies how ridiculous pop music really is. How it fuels excessive consumption, creates unrealistic ideals for women and men to adhere to, etc. etc. But engaging with it, and really taking the piss is in my mind the best way to live with it. Well done Alexa, never change. 

And finally, here she is, in her element, DJing with Nick 'Grimmy' Grimshaw. PS. I love the 90's post coming up soon! Exam stress induces shallow cultural observations.    yes.it's.fun. 

Rediscovery

I crave the frame of mind embodied by this song I used to love. My posts are going to be pretty short for the next little while, but there are plenty of things to come. 

The Russia I long to meet

photo from www.englishrussia.com 

"Ivan Ozolin stared at this crowd. Perhaps he'd known they'd come, eventually, that the life of Leo Tolstoy was as precious to the people of his country as the earth itself and that, if he was going to die, they would want some part in his dying. He could see straight away that many of the arrivals were newsmen with cameras and as they milled around on the platform- looking in vain for some grand Station Hotel or the presence of a commodious Telegraph Office- he felt himself surrender to them, to the grand circus that was accumulating at Astapovo. He wanted to embrace them, to say, 'You were right to come! Life is uneventful, my friends! Don't I know it! But here's an event: the dying Tolstoy, trying to keep his wife at bay! So come and get your bit of it and remember for ever whatever you think it teaches you'." -The Jester of Astapovo, Rose Tremain, featured in The Guardian, Saturday 24 May. 

The other Little Joy.

http://ping.fm/DjZ13

my favourite person: Alexa Chung. 

This is how I feel: Academic overload

REMEDY: MUST BAKE COOKIES. images from http://papertissue.tumblr.com/

Contradiction or Embrace?

While reviewing the items I've posted here, I can't help but notice how much of a classic picture they paint of my sensibilities. The picture below, of the romantic couple: beautiful, yes, but on a day where my anti-establishment side takes over, I shake my head in disgust at how bourgeois and meaningless something like that can be. But truly, it's not them, it's me. I'm a contradiction in so many terms, and I can't escape it. Solution? Embrace? 

What I really wanted to write about today is the ongoing discourse concerning German disunity in the middle of the twentieth century. What strikes me as absurd is the endless array of useless apologetics and rhetoric that couch this subject in the academic literature. What prompted this? Well, in my communications with various scholars about my dissertation, I'll often ask about opinions on certain sources. What I find nine times out of ten is that the history of the German Democratic Republic is still a sore spot for West Germans. For example, I'm reading a collection of essays by former East German officials titled, 'Flucht von der Junta'. The book details the East German assistance given to Chileans after Pinochet's coup in 1973. As someone who has some understanding of how history is written, I'm quite clearly privy to the fact that the book is coloured by a certain self-congratulatory tone on behalf of the authors, and as such can't be taken at face value. No shit, right? But it seems to me that this charge, (ie. East German sources are usually biased), is so often and so vehemently laid against any piece of literature published by former supporters of the GDR that it loses its credibility. The phrase: 'Why would you read that? It's an apology for the disgusting Honecker era,' needs to be assessed. I have to consider the nature of the criticism itself. 

To begin, this has to be approached from a broader view. Why have some West Germans not been able to accept their East German compatriots? And on the other hand, why do some, still, maintain that the division of the country was the most wretched and unnatural state of affairs? The fall of the Berlin Wall and the immediate grand welcome offered to Easterners has become a collective narrative in Germany that in some ways hides the dissatisfaction on both sides with the economic realities of the whole ordeal. That is not to diminish the immensity and importance of that moment for humanity, but it was a long time ago, and the attitude of Germans has changed quite a bit since then. 

What I want to get at is why there are so many conflicting stories told about West German acceptance of the partition in the late 40s? I asked a friend recently why she thought the Hallstein Doctrine (the Federal Republic's diplomatic policy which stipulated that they would not maintain relations with any state that recognized the GDR) remained in place for so long? After all, this lasted well into the period of Detente in the Cold War. She replied that to acknowledge the GDR as a separate state would be unthinkable for West Germany. "Germany must never be divided, and for any foreign country to acknowledge the GDR as separate would be to legitimate that division." Hmmm. Yes, of course, in hindsight West Germans can say, 'We never wanted this to happen, Stalin and his thugs tore you away from us'. But in light of the new documents, it's clear that Stalin repeatedly attempted to secure a democratic one-state solution for Germany, (not of course out of a sudden warm fuzzy feeling for parliamentary bourgeois democracy, but for purely strategic calculations. Out of plain fear of what a divided Germany would mean for the security of the other territories he had gobbled up). There are a number of reasons why the GDR was established, and I don't think anyone really wants/needs me to detail them here, but suffice it to say, the Americans and primarily the French were loth to continue bargaining with the Soviets about a post-war settlement in Germany. Trizonia was sufficient, and wrangling with Stalin's men over precisely how the zones of occupation would be merged was tiring and even unfavorable. Konrad Adenauer was eager to be the chief beneficiary of the Marshall Aid package. French economic recovery required an equivalent one in the industrial areas of West Germany, and that depended almost entirely on issuing a new currency. The Soviet Union could for strategic reasons never accept a separate currency in the allied zone because it would diminish their ability to exact reparations. Further, any suggestion that the German nation needs to be 'whole' again was most likely an unpopular one in both the East and West after the Second World War. That kind of nationalist sentiment didn't actually resurface until Willy Brandt's 'Ostpolitik', and then merely tenuously. So why the claims that Germans never wanted partition? I'm seriously interested, and want to do more investigation on the cultural side of this debate. 

To be sure, most Germans were saddened and oppressed by the division of their country. The crimes committed by the GDR against its own citizens are deplorable and bone-chilling. Families were separated, and travel through East Germany to reach West Berlin was never a pleasant journey. However, the constant categorization of the ordeal as a pitched battle between good and evil is never appropriate in my mind. What this tirade is all about is my ongoing frustration with the hostility among some historians concerning these issues. Not that this is avoidable, and not that I believe objectivity is possible (I for one, will never reach a neutral position on US foreign policy in Latin America). However, the little thing that irks me is that the actual position of West Germans in 1949 was much more nuanced than what they make it out to be today. Nor were all West Germans happy to foot the bill during re-unification. There's no solution for the historiography. At least not right now. But as a somewhat neutral third party, (too young to have witnessed what actually happened, enough of a humanist to abhor Ulbricht and Honecker's regimes, but also cynical regarding West German rhetoric during re-unification) I'll hopefully make a decent assessment of what former East Germans have to say. 

An important qualification: I do acknowledge, appreciate, and agree with the the emotional, passionate, and deep-seated criticisms leveled against the GDR's government. That's you, Mom and Dad.  

Slightly Ghostly

#97 Patrick Watson / Part 3 - A Take Away Show from La Blogotheque on Vimeo.

Vincent Moon's films are quite epic. His empire is expanding, truly. My recent hunger for Patrick Watson tunes was entirely satiated by this video. It's equally as amazing as Moon's Yeasayer piece.

My Life

LOVE-ly photography

check this out at: http://www.mulberry.com/

London-based photographer, Chris Craymer, has received the support of a pretty intense handbag company, Mulberry, to make something exquisite: a photo-essay of love! He's compiled his pieces in a new book, appropriately titled: 'Romance'. I really like this image. The couple has a total sense of liminality about them. It appears as though they are no longer simply 'dating', but at the same time probably not ready to admit that they are head-over heels in love with each other, either. It's that transition period between 'I'm in like with you' and 'I'm in love with you' that is just as sweet as anything else. Some would argue, the sweetest. 

Considering the fact that I've been dealing with the rather taxing 'History of Sexuality' all day, I'd like to leave Foucault behind before I go to bed, and restore my faith in human agency when it comes to 'falling in love'. Thanks Chris. I don't think I'll spend the 35 quid on it, though. When I can find it at a vintage shop 30 years from now... ya.... maybe then. 

I.Need.A.Bike.!!

Erin Wasson's Bike from theselby.com: Brilliant.

Nos-tal-gia

noun

a sentimental longing or wistful affection for the past, typically for a period or place with happy personal associations. 

Recently I've been experiencing extreme bouts of the above sensation. Memories are prompted by the most odd and random things. They'll linger for a mere second, and leave you so fast you can't even manage to capture consciously what the memory was. But I've been winning! Keeping record of them here, that is.

The jingling of the keys hooked to my bag- reminds me of the first hipster I ever truly loved: the tall gangly dark haired tattooed bartender at Sneaky Dee's that may very well be gay. 

Cigar I smelled on my way home from the tube- balmy summer dinners with my parents and friends in our screened in porch- sheltered from the buzz of the mosquitos in the woods. The evenings wind down after too many glasses of wine and long political discussions with my Dad. The conversations almost always end on 'the Ronald Reagan factor'.

Skinny Love by Bon Iver- summer on Borden Street accompanied by late night excursions to corner stores with friends that are boys. Talking about anarchism on sidewalks at 5 am avec une popsicle.

My multi-coloured beaded necklace sitting on my desk- the summer that I worked in the sun. 

More political and historical thoughts to come. I'm developing something interesting  right now, with respect to the left and what I reckon will continue to be a problem- namely: class war.  

Dissertation Inspiration.

I've become somewhat obsessed with vintage political party logos. My dissertation topic has pointed me in the direction of the Chilean left's designs. The MIR's (militant ultra-leftist revolutionary group in Chile from the late 1960s) logo is really interesting. 

Unidad Popular Logo, Chile, 1970. 

Luis Corvolan- long time Chilean Communist Party member, significant subject of my dissertation. 

The Visit

Alright. So I'm a terrible blogger. But this year will be better, I swear. 

Recently, my two former roommates came to visit me in London. What it has indeed confirmed is that I'm an atrocious tour guide. Instead of pointing them to the V&A Baroque exhibit or the White Cube gallery, I insisted we go to Rough Trade (for the non-Londoners: Empire Records-esque hipster haven). I love Rough Trade. What attracts me about it most is the atmosphere, and I know that makes me a terrible person- shallow, even. But the music counts too. I fell in love with El Guincho there. Also, a few months ago they facilitated my re-acquaintance with older folk music after my electro-hiatus this summer (Friendly Fires put a definitive end to that). I have to admit I was too flustered on Sunday to concentrate on finding the Belle & Sebastian record I wanted to get for my sister, so I almost left empty-handed. What I did have patience for was coaxing my lady friends into the giant photo-booth in the store. 

There's something romantic about capturing an image like this one. I can just imagine that years from now I'll look at it and I'll remember that rare sunny day on Brick Lane. How have they changed? I'm tempted to say, not at all. Of course that's not possible- if the science is right, our cells regenerate completely every seven years- making us entirely new people. I can't really speak to that. But it does owe something to my fascination with liminality. It wouldn't be possible without not only a physical but also mental renewal of sorts. As they embark on their travels through Europe, their detachment from who they once were will be profound, and indeed lead them to an entirely "new" set of world views.  I also wonder how young people negotiate between deeply conflicting questions- the kind prompted by Dawkins- and the strings that tie us to our past convictions. Perhaps it's a realization that 'the plan' will have to be let go, once and for all. "I don't want to get married. I don't want to have children". Or perhaps it's something even more significant than that: "I'm not really in charge here- what now?" This unstructured rambling will be consolidated at a later date. For now, I just have to ask, what brought this on? I think it's the hope that my friends find a little bit more of the 'selves' they will one day become on their trip. And when they look at this picture years from now, they will think.... we were so different then, but yet the same. 

And yes, people do find themselves. To believe you have the ability to create yourself is romantic, at best. Choice is, after all, limited.