Bob, Plate Tectonics and Occupy

I just want to be the tipping point of the number of bloggers to venture an opinion on the Occupy movement.  I’m hoping that a flashing window will appear before I finish this saying “ You are a winner!  You are the 1 billionth person who thinks that people care what you think about the Occupy Movement!”

Seriously, though, being 50 years old gives me the opportunity to remember (albeit from a 10-15 year old’s perspective) what was being said about other attempts to change the social contract in North America in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.  I don’t recall that there was a central message to that movement except dissatisfaction of the status quo, though the American participation in the war in Viet Nam certainly had a polarizing effect.  Easy access to drugs, the popularity of first folk music (thanks Bob) and then rock and roll (thanks Who) had a role to play, often giving a sound-track to the social upheaval (since appropriated by every movie set in that era, this means you Oliver Stone).

After watching the UC Davis police officer pepper spray the protesters and watch police officers march into tent cities in numerous cities in North America, it brought back memories of similar instances between military/police and protesters being broadcast during the late 60’s and early 70’s.  I’m pleased that so far it hasn’t resulted in a Kent State-like incident (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings)  but the possibility was certainly there.  I haven’t noticed a musical background to the Occupy Movement but I concede that this may also be because I’m 50.  I’m thankful that something like the Viet Nam war has not presented itself as a polarizer for this movement but it could use something.

I thought about this the other night.  It is really important that a society has a peaceful way to release social pressures and dissatisfaction with the way things are and have the belief that they will be heard.  It is like the tectonic plates on the earth.  The shifting plates of the earth provide a release for the pressure building beneath the earth’s core.  If the mantle is solid and resistant, the resulting earthquake and volcanic activity causes a lot of damage when that pressure is released.  If the pressure is released in small consistent ways, the violence is mitigated and the damage is smaller.  I hope that the Occupy movement is part of an on-going release of social pressure and that our society can continue to actively look for ways to improve the lives of the next generations.

What?? Not a winner?  Hmm… back to occupy my life.  

Unearned But Always Appreciated

I live on the west coast of Canada in a small town.  I live on a short, dead-end road with family and friends around me, a blackberry patch across the street and view of the gulf islands.  This summer we travelled with my neighbour's family to a golf resort at the base of Mount Hood in Oregon where we had a lot of laughs, golf, shopping and playing.  Both of my children got to meet up and spend time with friends in Portland and Seattle.  We then travelled to Barkerville in central BC where we camped with my wife's family, all 18 of us, and had a great family reunion with again, lots of laughs, memories and quality time with each other.  We even saw a moose cow with her calf on our way home.
In the midst of all this summer travelling, I've gone fishing (11 spring salmon and 12 coho this year), golfing (still lousy but enjoy the game), picking blackberries to fill the freezer and generally enjoying living in a place where the land can nourish both your body and your soul.  I have been lucky enough to travel fairly extensively to some beautiful places in the world.  Hawaii, Jamaica, Melbourne, Geneva, Florida, California.

I have enjoyed every one of these locales but I can't say that any one of them is more beautiful than where I live.  In no way have I earned any of this and every day I appreciate the fact that it is only through a combination of luck and the decisions of others that have resulted in me ending up in this part of the world.  My great thanks to all those, both family. friends, and others who have worked together to make this happen.  Keep up the good work.

This Is Not Canada's Team

In the local media over the past month I've heard the question being asked, "With the Vancouver Canucks being the last Canadian based team in the Stanley Cup playoffs, can they be called Canada's Team?".  The answer is "no".  This is not Canada's team. It is my team.  It is our team.  It is the team of all of us who have followed it since we were old enough to care about it.  I mean really care about it.  Those of us who are still pissed off at Mike Keenan and Mark Messier and how Trevor was treated.  Those of us who still like the Griffiths family even though they no longer own the club and Arthur lives in London, just for bringing us the team.  Those of us who still cheered through the 70's when we knew we had no chance at anything, just because they were our Canucks.  Where the hell was Canada then?  Where was Canada through all those years of porous defence and characters/cast offs from other NHL teams?  Where was Canada when our goalies were Dunc Wilson or Suitcase Smith?  That's right, Canada was cheering for the Canadiens or the Leafs or the Oilers.  Did any of you notice Canada cheering along side us when we were waving a white towel out the car window and cheering at the top of our lungs in 1982?  Did you turn to Canada while sitting on the couch and watching Trevor push a mediocre team to the brink of the Cup in 1994 and say, "Hand me another beer, buddy.  This one is going into overtime!"  No.  Canada was wondering what club to use on the dogleg left and thinking about how the Leafs would most likely challenge for the cup next year with all the new free agents they'd pick up.   So, screw you Canada.  Get your own team.  This one is ours, just like all the other ones that have come before it.  And when we win the Cup this year, you'll have to stay on the outside and dream about next year, just like we have for the past 40.   GCG!

Changes in Attitude by Lee Cadwallader

This special edition is by Guest Blogger, Lee Cadwallader.  Thanks, Lee!


In the '60s and '70s, there was the rock music of the '60s and '70s. And then there was the '80s in which the '60s weren't quite retro (and who cared about retro when you had legwarmers and Nintendo) and the music acts of the '70s were still sort of around anyway. The '90s seemed to pass over the '70s because, I can only assume, that their popular rock music was still reasonably great (Seattle grunge). That brings us to the 2000s, which brought on what I call a '60s/'70s rock revival in teenagers as an alternative to hip-hop, which was taking its place in popular music. Being a teenager in the 2000s, who could be more of a reliable source on this subject than myself?

Interest was revitalized in many older artists and acts. Such groups (just to name a few) revisited by youth included The Doors, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Pink Floyd, Jimi Hendrix and Cream. My Grade 12 English teacher was glad to see that she could use Bob Dylan in her poetry unit and finally not seem lame to her students. Long hair and rock tees came back in, everyone wanted to be in a garage band and play a guitar. Influence of this movement can even be heard in some bands of the 2000s era.

I'm going to single out the Australian '70s rock n' roll throwback group Wolfmother (debut album released in 2005), who were cooler than cool to the children of the rock revolution. They sound pretty retro. Mike Patton once asked and interviewer, after hearing Wolfmother playing in the background, "are you hearing this [expletive removed]? What YEAR is this". That was actually a defamatory comment in context, but still. They have a song titled Joker & the Thief: a clear reference to All Along the Watchtower. Their lyrics are comparably mystical and all that jazz.

Wolfmother was in their early twenties when they were formed, and I believe they were aspiring to be Zeppelinesque. So I thought: "wouldn't it be funny if there were a group of twenty-somethings writing throwback music that was influenced by Jimmy Buffett, who also made a name for himself in the '70s"?  

This is a young person's conundrum, but Jimmy Buffett, like Neil Young, is someone I can't even IMAGINE under the age of, like, 50. This may be because they've been that age my entire life, but also because both of their lyrics seem to be written and sung from the perspective of a wise (let's throw quotation marks on that for Buffett), experienced man. I don't know where I'm-a-gonna go when the Volcano blow, but really who cares? That's life, ain't it? As long as I don't get radiation poisoning or arrested for possession or landlocked. I'm pretty happy with where I'm at, let's go get a burger and a beer.

Imagine a trio of kids, barely out of high school or Berkeley or whatever, earnestly singing "The Great Filling Station Holdup". There are plenty of songs on the radio about drinking right now, but there aren't nearly enough of them about doing it out of a coconut shell. How about instead of Travis McCoy "want[ing] to be a billionaire, so frickin' bad", he just wishes he had a Pencil Thin Moustache? Less Sexy Bitches, more sunny beaches. You get my drift (draught).

Let's make it happen, talented musicians!

The Best One Can Hope For

With the Canadian federal election campaign under way, it seems like a good time to have a look at the best possible outcome for the nation and for you, reader,  and what better place to bring some clarity to the topic than here at Random Access.  It serves no real purpose to look at the platforms, when rarely presented, by any of the main political parties or even the wannabe parties (yes, that mean you Green Party) because the platforms really aren't relevant to the best possible outcome.  Neither are the leaders or the candidates relevant.  So, you say, what is relevant to a best possible outcome?
First, let's take a quick etymological look at "politics" and see what we can learn.  From Greek, "of, for and relating to citizens".  Seems that there is a tenuous connection between the definition and the actions of most Canadian political parties.  As with much of the English language, the definition seems to have evolved over time to "of, for and relating to politicians".  When was the last time that a constituency elected a person who represented them rather than one who has successfully convinced them that the political party's ideas were also the ideas of the citizens?  So with the new definition in mind, let's jump back to the best possible outcome of the next election and, most likely, any future election in this country.
In Canada we will end up with a political party in power, elected on the basis of whoever portrays the other party's leader as most incompetent, evil, corrupt or (insert any negative adjective here).  There will be no debate on the issues or the proposed solutions to the issues.  When the party is in power, they will be able to implement very little since the parliamentary system prevents any dramatic systemic change whatsoever.  For a clear example,  look at the efforts to implement a national childcare program in Canada.  A good idea becomes a reason to ridicule the other political party because they proposed the idea before you could.  It evolves into a political (see new definition above) "debate" and nothing gets implemented.
This will be the same in Canada after the election.  There will be no radical or dramatic change in policy or programs and sometimes this is a good thing.  Dramatic change often leads to dramatic pain and unexpected ripple effects.  People don't like this and respond poorly and sometimes violently (North Africa).  This topic is another blog post, though, so we won't explore it now.  Suffice to say that when the election is over there will be a hamstrung party in place with a leader who will not be able to do too much damage or good for the course of their time at the wheel.  And that is the best that one can hope for in Canadian politics.  There will be corruption and scandal and incompetence.  However, the best YOU can hope for is that it will not be so bad as to impact you.  Sad, but true.
That being said, get out and vote.  Don't be cynical and believe that your contribution means nothing.  If you don't participate, it becomes a slippery slope and we could end up with a political nightmare like we see in so many countries around us today where truly evil, corrupt and incompetent people end up at the wheel and really are able to impact your daily life, and never in a good way.  It may be messy and frustrating, but it's ours and we should look after it.  Vote.

Power, Control and What Matters More

Wow.  That was fast.   One week and we have an agreement reached by the UN for a no-fly zone over Libya and troops on the ground to save the Libyan people from a "rogue dictator".  It seems incredible to me that a decision on that scale can be made that fast with the wide variety of agendas at play at that level.  Now let's compare that to the time it took for UN delegates to come to an agreement, sort of, on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.  It was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007 but the idea for the Declaration began in 1982 and so, in total, was 22 years in the making.  It then took 3 more years before the four dissenting countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States) signed on, with Canada's statement of support containing qualifiers and clarifications to prevent any idea that there may be a commitment contained in the document.
So, to sum up, it was 22 years for the UN to agree on the wording of a non-binding declaration that Indigenous people have rights and 7 days to agree that military action was required to intervene in a civil war in a country that coincidentally contains the largest proven oil reserves in all of Africa.  22 years versus 7 days.  It speaks clearly to the values held by those in power and I guess I shouldn't be surprised.  Power, control and access to energy (petroleum in this instance) have always trumped humanity.  Perhaps that's because the primary energy sources we rely upon are not renewable resources and, up to this point, human beings are.  

Schneiderman, Schneiderman

So as I watched Corey Schneider play goal for the Canucks against the San Jose Sharks last week, it occurred to me that this young rookie could use a cool nickname to have on his mask.  I mean cool, not the usual lame "er" added to the last name, which he already has built-in (Schneid...er) or a shortened version with "ie" or "s" added.  You've seen them on other masks and you say to yourself, "Where has the imagination gone in hockey?"  (Kipper, Giggie, Wardo??)
The old timers didn't have a mask on which to paint their nickname and assorted logos.   They did, however, have some interesting, if not cool, nicknames.  The Chicoutimi Cucumber (George Vezina),  "Gump" Worsley, Emil "The Cat" Francis, ".  Even when masks came into fashion there was little room to paint your personality onto the front for all to see (except for Cheevers).  Eventually we got to see some very cool masks, like CuJo's dog and Van Biesbruck's panther.
But back to Schnieder's new nickname and accompanying mask.  I am proposing Schniederman.  The mask will look great, the headlines are too easy and the potential for spin-offs (and maybe lawsuits) is without boundaries.  Come on, let's get on board.  It will finally give the Canuck fans something besides "Go, Canucks, Go" and "Leafs Suck" to chant during a game.  "Schneiderman, Schneiderman, does whatever a Schneider can"?