― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:41 (nineteen years ago)
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:44 (nineteen years ago)
― mts (theoreticalgirl), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:48 (nineteen years ago)
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 4 May 2006 15:58 (nineteen years ago)
― QuantumNoise (Justin Farrar), Thursday, 4 May 2006 16:54 (nineteen years ago)
― eedd, Thursday, 4 May 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)
― The Good Dr. Bill (The Good Dr. Bill), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:13 (nineteen years ago)
― mcd (mcd), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:31 (nineteen years ago)
― mcd (mcd), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)
― Period period period (Period period period), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:38 (nineteen years ago)
When your album is number one, and you sell your music to the military, and you put a frickin' helicopter shooting missles at the audience at the beginning of your show, I think you deserve someone calling you out on your mealy-mouthed BS. Way to go, Jay.
Every single "liberal" artist who dares to criticize Bush or the military ends up on the front page of the Drudge Report, and called a traitor, etc. This is just a little payback, and it's way overdue.
― schwantz (schwantz), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:42 (nineteen years ago)
― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:45 (nineteen years ago)
Does it "CHANGE THINGS, MAN"? No, it just helps round up the Godsmack fans all over the internet in support of the band, and gets the Godsmack haters all over the internet to discover what Arthur is, albeit through something atypical for them.
Both sides get publicity. Both sides win. Kids still dying in Iraq. Everyone's happy!
Every single "liberal" artist of the few that are doing very well today and current media gives a shit about who dares to criticize Bush or the military ends up on the front page of the Drudge Report, and called a traitor, etc. This is just a little payback, and it's way overdue.
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:46 (nineteen years ago)
If i was interviewing the guy, i would not be so baldly hostile. I would try to recognize that many of the people to whom Erna speaks to go into the armed forces because they do not have the same opportunities that your average Arthur reader has (most likely)—regardless of whether they are sent off to die for the worst foreign policy directive of my lifetime.
Which is to say— i wish I felt that babcock's interview demeanor was animated more by the stated anti-war conviction than contempt for a working class rock star on a major label who has never heard of Jandek or Islands or whoevah…
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:52 (nineteen years ago)
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 17:59 (nineteen years ago)
I wasn't asking for a banal NPR style debate or anything, but something that wasn't so fucking condescending would have been a vast improvement.
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:04 (nineteen years ago)
― jeremiah q. fuckface, Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:05 (nineteen years ago)
― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:06 (nineteen years ago)
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:07 (nineteen years ago)
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:13 (nineteen years ago)
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:16 (nineteen years ago)
― Washable School Paste (sexyDancer), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:21 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)
Go Arthur!
― Dr. Gene Scott (shinybeast), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:25 (nineteen years ago)
― Stixx, Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:26 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:27 (nineteen years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:27 (nineteen years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:27 (nineteen years ago)
Well, NOW it's obvious. I don't think it was that obvious until this interview, although certainly suspect.
Hahaha I can't believe people's sensibilities are offended by this. Poor Godsmack guy! Shilling for war is something no artist should get away with, "Southie" or otherwise.
Just speaking for myself, my "sensibilities" are just extremely disappointed in the manner in which the Godsmack guy got smacked, essentially.. as it really does nothing but polarize, and -- if anything -- helps the band even more.. as I hypothesized above.
― DOQQUN (donut), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:29 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:30 (nineteen years ago)
― everything, Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:31 (nineteen years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:31 (nineteen years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:31 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)
Lemmy's probably written more antiwar songs than any other metal act, and Motorhead had a bomber hovering over them onstage for years.
― pdf (Phil Freeman), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)
― Cee Bee (Cee Bee), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)
im not doubting the relevancy of such a piece because i do feel people should be questioned about this but... taking godsmack to task for their pro-militaristic tendencies is like shooting a fish in a barrel. i dont see arthur getting on cocorosie's case for throwing around n-bombs in their songs or asking random indie rockers about their trust funds, but i guess that would be really striking a nerve if they -- god forbid -- exposed the oft-hypocritical stance of underground/alternative/independent music. i bet they'd lose a slew of ad revenue then.
― owch!, Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:41 (nineteen years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:43 (nineteen years ago)
― mcd (mcd), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:46 (nineteen years ago)
― timmy tannin (pompous), Thursday, 4 May 2006 18:51 (nineteen years ago)
that sounds suspiciously like "the godsmack guy, being a 'southie', is therefore too stupid to defend his views/actions." sounds like yer taking down a "southie" there.
(not that babcock isn't an uppermiddleclass hipster -- but the interview isn't a class bash)
― Lawrence the Looter (Lawrence the Looter), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)
― schwantz (schwantz), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:40 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:44 (nineteen years ago)
It's hard for me to feel sorry for a guy who pulled down at LEAST a few hundred thousand dollars from the military, and even "re-upped" (in his words) the contract, even though he seems uncomfortable with the Iraq war. In a way, it would even be different if the Godsmack fellow actually supported the war, but it seems like he doesn't, and is willing to take big bucks anyway (but not from Maybelline). If the worst thing he has to endure is Jay asking him some angry questions, I think he'll be ok.
― schwantz (schwantz), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:45 (nineteen years ago)
The stuff i said afterwards indicates that at least I'd try to explore other implications of SE and his relationship to his audience, and not be completely hostile from the get-go. as an interviewer, your cards should be on the table.
again, Erna has never struck me as a very bright guy, and I agree that it doesn't seem too much to ask for artists to be present professionally and be able to defend how their music is used. and it may be that JB does not reflexively dismiss mainstream rock guys. but a lot of writers do, and i think that disliking their music and the corporate means by which the music is distributed is often intermixed with "this is the kind of guy that called me a fag in high school" or "this guy may be millionaire, but i went to grad school" or suchlike…
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:45 (nineteen years ago)
what I mean by this is that the interview situation should be a level playing field—not that yr agenda should be transparent, in which case JB's cards were on the table.
also: Godsmack's publicist was foolish in allowing this interview to take place.
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 4 May 2006 19:58 (nineteen years ago)
i don't think he was being completely hostile; he just asked se to explain the band's relationship to the military. se couldn't back up, much less explain in basic terms, his own actions and statements.
― Lawrence the Looter (Lawrence the Looter), Thursday, 4 May 2006 20:00 (nineteen years ago)
Yeah, you caught a working-class guy from Lawrence, MA who happened to get lucky in a logical snare. Congrats, champ.
― Sean Braudis (Sean Braudis), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 01:28 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 01:31 (nineteen years ago)
― Sean Braudis (Sean Braudis), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 01:34 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 01:38 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 01:59 (nineteen years ago)
1) A fair number of people who question your technique to some degree.
2) A ton of lefty high-fiving ("Wow you kicked the singer from Godsmack's ass in an argument").
3) Lotsa "Godsmack sucks."
What I don't see much of is meaningful discussion of US Military recruitment tactics with a wider scope. I assume that's what you wanted to get at, instead I read people calling the singer from Godsmack an "uneducated fuck." Frankly, this kind of stuff makes me want to slay.
I have to ask you, what were you EXPECTING the dude to say? Is he under some sort of obligation to answer with the level of education or informedness of, I dunno, a 25-year-old law student on the east coast, or whoeverthefuck reads the blogs that are reporting this story? Was his failure in any way satisfying to you? 'Cause it was to a lot of other people.
What I actually see going on is a lot of bitterness on the part of the readership out there. People don't want to believe that an "uneducated fuck" in a shitty band has attained a level of wealth, power, and influence, while they sit around and type comments into the internet (yes I'm aware of the irony here). It hits a little close to home for me because where I'm from isn't far from where they're from, and I remember hearing on the radio in like '98 about how they were all working construction and whatnot before their first album broke.
You want to target someone? How about the PR/Advertising people that work for the military? I just don't see how the singer from Godsmack is an appropriate scapegoat, given his belief (however uninformed in your eyes) that the military is an OK institution. The guys in Godsmack were probably not too far from being recruits themselves, once.
Naturally, I'm also disappointed with the level of discussion on the internet and have my doubts that blogging can enact meaningful change on ANY topic. But that's another arugment.
Finally, I'm not really holding this against you, personally. Your passion is obvious and I agree with your position, I just think you might have shot the messenger here. The smug, self-congratualtory reactions I've been reading are far more troublesome.
Late PS: Howie Klein loses me when he acts like they're supposed to be liberal 'cause they're from Boston. First of all, they're not, they're from the Merrimack Valley and things are different there. And second, that's just a really moronic statement.
― Sean Braudis (Sean Braudis), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 02:25 (nineteen years ago)
Sean, we've already done that. And we're continuing to do that. Sheesh, bro.
"Naturally, I'm also disappointed with the level of discussion on the internet and have my doubts that blogging can enact meaningful change on ANY topic. But that's another arugment."
Maybe you should've said that upthread...?
Man this is getting into a tarbaby thing around here. See ya later.
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 02:37 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 02:47 (nineteen years ago)
― Sean Braudis (Sean Braudis), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 03:01 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 03:03 (nineteen years ago)
― DOQQUN (donut), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 03:21 (nineteen years ago)
― DOQQUN (donut), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 03:23 (nineteen years ago)
― cdwill (cdwill), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 17:57 (nineteen years ago)
― Confounded (Confounded), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 19:52 (nineteen years ago)
― gear (gear), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 19:57 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 02:04 (nineteen years ago)
― twix: now with more dead seals!, Wednesday, 10 May 2006 02:22 (nineteen years ago)
What I don't see much of is meaningful discussion of US Military recruitment tactics with a wider scope. I assume that's what you wanted to get at, instead I read people calling the singer from Godsmack an "uneducated fuck." Frankly, this kind of stuff makes me want to slay."
Yeah, well, how about this— You don't have to convert everyone with every fucking article in a small music magazine. It can be enough to occassionally just have some lefty high-fiving, and the more people saying "Godsmack sucks" the better. Plimpton's dead. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you whining ILM complaint-bots.
― js (honestengine), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 02:47 (nineteen years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 03:35 (nineteen years ago)
What does this even mean? And my point is that no one seems to be capable of treating this as "an article in a small music magazine." Go read blogs, a lot of people give the interview a nonsensical David vs. Goliath interpretation.
― Sean Braudis (Sean Braudis), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 05:25 (nineteen years ago)
Like the Douglas Rushkoff column in the May issue (which I just snagged last night) about ignoring Iraq because it's "their war" and there's no way to get at the truth anyway (guess dude's never heard of blogs) and it all just fux with his nice day?
― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Friday, 12 May 2006 00:15 (nineteen years ago)
― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Friday, 12 May 2006 08:38 (nineteen years ago)
― maria and whiney's gif parade, Saturday, 13 May 2006 16:53 (nineteen years ago)
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Saturday, 13 May 2006 16:57 (nineteen years ago)
― js (honestengine), Saturday, 13 May 2006 18:26 (nineteen years ago)
― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Saturday, 13 May 2006 18:40 (nineteen years ago)
Originally published on May 10, 2006 - New York Daily News
Daily Dish & Gossip by Rush & Molloy
Godsmack takes flak after Navy ads enlist band's songs
Godsmack let the Navy use its music for recruiting commercials because, well, um, er ... why not?
The rocker with the country's No. 1 album just got ambushed over selling his songs to the military.
Sully Erna, lead singer and lyricist of Godsmack, whose CD "IV" tops the Billboard charts this week, got defensive when confronted by editor Jay Babcock in the current issue of Arthur magazine. Babcock asked about the use of "Awake" and "Sick of Life" for U.S. Navy recruiting commercials.
"You're proud of recruiting your fans into the military?" Babcock asked, to which Erna replied, "Well, no. I actually sympathize with a lot of the soldiers, and the military in general, that are trained to go out and protect us." But he added, "I don't tell people to go join the military."
Babcock pressed, "You don't think using ... the power of your music has an effect on people?"
Erna, a native of working-class Lawrence, Mass., who practices the Wicca religion, countered: "Oh man, are you like one of those guys that agrees with some kid that tied a noose around his neck because Judas Priest lyrics told him to?
"It's energetic music. People feel that they get an adrenaline rush out of it. But I doubt very seriously that a kid is going to join the Marines or the U.S. Navy because he heard Godsmack in the commercial.
"They're gonna go and join the Navy because they want to jump out of helicopters and f—– shoot people! Or protect the country or whatever it is, and look at the cool infrared goggles."
Neither a Universal Records spokesman nor the Navy recruiting spokesman could tell us how much Godsmack made for the licensing of the songs.
Erna concluded: "An opportunity came up, they wanted to use some music for a recruit commercial. What are we gonna say — no?"
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Sunday, 14 May 2006 20:08 (nineteen years ago)
CNN HEADLINE NEWS - SHOWBIZ TONIGHT
["Showbiz Tonight" is the only daily one-hour entertainment news show on TV. "Showbiz Tonight" takes on the day's biggest and most provocative issues in the entertainment industry with engaging, and often heated, in-depth segments. "Showbiz Tonight" airs on Headline News at 11 p.m. ET.]
"Godsmack" for the Navy?
Aired May 11, 2006 - 23:00:00 ET
HAMMER: Well, here we go again. Another rock group embroiled in controversy over their music and the war in Iraq. But this time, it`s not exactly what you`d expect. The band "Godsmack" is actually catching flak over the use of their music in the U.S. Navy`s recruitment ads.
The group`s songs "Awake" and "Sick of Life" have been running in television commercials for the Navy, which has some critics saying that the band`s young audience will now be influenced to join the military because of the popular tunes.
Joining me from Boston, Sully Erna, who`s the lead singer of "Godsmack." I appreciate you taking some time with us, Sully.
SULLY ERNA, LEAD SINGER, "GODSMACK": Thanks for having me.
HAMMER: You`re welcome.
Well, you and the band are catching this heat, as I said, because your music is being used by the Navy in the recruitment ad, so it`s been suggested by some that the use of that music is going to make young men and women just run off and join the military and go off to war. And it`s been suggested that the band supports the war because you lent your music. And I know you`re here on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT to set the record straight on this.
ERNA: Well, yes, what I can say is that, you know, by no means has this band ever supported any war for any country or that we support government decisions or why we`re sticking our nose in other people`s business at times. What we support is our troops. And the women and men that go over there -- or anywhere -- to fight for our country and our lives and protect our freedom and I feel that, you know, we should support those causes. Whether it`s them just aiding with food and medical supplies and water for the tsunamis or Katrina or, you know, anything that we do. And I can`t imagine any American citizen that wouldn`t want to support that.
HAMMER: Yes, for a long time people have been confusing the idea that you can support our troops without necessarily supporting the war. I want to take a moment now to play a bit of the ad in question here. Let`s take a look at this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If someone wrote a book about your life, would anyone want to read it? The stories of tomorrow are being written today in the U.S. Navy. If you`re ready. Check out the life accelerator at Navy.com. Navy, accelerate your life. Now, get up to a $20,000 enlistment bonus...
HAMMER: I don`t know, I`ve got to tell you, Sully, I`m hearing that music in the ad. I want to get up out of my chair and join up and join the military.
Seriously, no doubt ads have influence over people, but do you think it`s ridiculous that, you know, people are actually suggesting somebody`s going to go off and join the military because of that music? Not even the vocals. Just the music is in that commercial.
ERNA: Well, I`ll tell you this. For one, I challenge anybody in this country, or any country, to pick up any of our records that we`ve ever recorded and find one political or government lyrical content in anything. I mean, our music has always been written about me and my life situations that I`ve went through, whether it was past relationships or just a boy growing into a man and overcoming life`s obstacles and the emotions that I processed going through that time in my life. So, I challenge anybody to try to find anything that has to do with supporting war or political issues in general. We`re not that kind of band. We`re just a good old rock `n` roll band, I guess. And how insulting is that to the men and women that join the armed forces that they`re that shallow and naive to just join the military because they heard a rock `n` roll song?
I think they should be apologizing to them because that makes them look pretty shallow. I don`t believe that`s the reason why they joined at all.
HAMMER: Well, I would like to get your take on the idea that, you know, you`ve said that you and your band do support our troops. Would you be willing to say whether or not you do support our president with this war in Iraq?
ERNA: I can`t say that I support that because I, personally, am not a big fan about Bush. I`ll tell you that right out in the open. I don`t -- but again, I`m not that educated enough to talk about the politics of the government, and obviously the people who write -- or the person, I should say, that wrote about this specific article, obviously is, well, a lot more educated than we are in government issues or politics or the military, whatever it is. And if he knows something that we don`t know, then maybe you should talk to us about it so we can be a little bit more educated.
HAMMER: Well, thank you for clearing it all up tonight, Sully, and really setting the record straight and making that clear divide between what you guys are standing for and not. And I appreciate you coming on SHOWBIZ TONIGHT.
ERNA: Yes, we`re just musicians.
HAMMER: All right. Sully Erna, the lead singer of "Godsmack." Appreciate you being with us. And you can pick up "Godsmack`s" latest album. It`s called "Four," and its in stores now.
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Sunday, 14 May 2006 20:10 (nineteen years ago)
"So 105.3 [http://www.buzzatlanta.com/main.html] plays the Arthur Magazine interview with Sully from Godsmack this morning on the radio. For all of you that have not heard it go to http://www.arthurmag.com/magpie/?p=1244..."Although the interview was most unfair. Sully was not as educated on the subject as this Babcock fellow, which to me only shows that the interview was done out of poor taste. The interview was done mainly for it's shock jock value, to raise sales for their magazine, then it was for journalistic purposes.
"So after the interview was over 105.3 the buzz plays Rage Aginst the Machine, Killing in the Name of. What was that about? Were they supporting this interviewer? Don't get me wrong I am a huge fan of Rage but to play that song after that interview kinda made me have mixed feelings."
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Sunday, 14 May 2006 20:12 (nineteen years ago)
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Sunday, 14 May 2006 20:19 (nineteen years ago)
Sully Holds His Own! [ 5/7/2006 ]
Jay Babcock of Arthur magazine conducted an interview with GODSMACK frontman Sully Erna on Monday, May 1. What follows is a transcript of the conversation, as posted on the Arthur web site...
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Sunday, 14 May 2006 20:53 (nineteen years ago)
That's what my friend thought (see my last post here above).
― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Sunday, 14 May 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)
― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Sunday, 14 May 2006 23:54 (nineteen years ago)
― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Monday, 15 May 2006 08:02 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Monday, 15 May 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 15 May 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)
I mean, that was the idea under consideration but at the end of the piece Rushkoff largely rejects it. I think you're misrepresenting the column.
― Renard (Renard), Monday, 15 May 2006 19:13 (nineteen years ago)
I mean, all those words just to reach the point that he thinks it's good to be nice to people . . .
― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Monday, 15 May 2006 22:21 (nineteen years ago)
making the participants feel good has value, I think. Maybe not direct political impact-style value, but value nonetheless.
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 15 May 2006 22:28 (nineteen years ago)
I read the Rushkoff column today because I was curious about what you dudes were talking about. I think what he's saying is that, yes, he understands what his bud Morrison is saying: to engage in the day-to-day political world (even if you are anti-war) is to adopt and accept "their" reality. And if you are Morrison then being apolitical is fine because Morrison is engaged in his own personal battle with reality and attempting to create his own reality (via magick, drugs, art, etc.) But on the other hand, if to be apolitical means nothing more than drowning the world's problems out with yer iPod then that's not cool. So even though he knows it's "their war," he's still going to sign petitions, read up on politics, and basically stay active. Basically, he seems to be saying that even to be a liberal fighting the system is to be complicit in the creation of a certain reality (and that just might be the bigger problem). Robert Anton Wilson dealt with this same issue in the Illuminatus Trilogy: protest through apolitical magical reality vs. hard-nosed activist political reality. I'm not the most intelligble writer, but that's my take.
I do take issue with Morrison's (and Rushkoff's) phrase "their war". Call me a silly Buddhist type, but I don't think it's as simple as us. vs. them. I believe we are all to blame for the current state of affairs whether through action or non-action. It's all our war.
― QuantumNoise (Justin Farrar), Monday, 15 May 2006 22:48 (nineteen years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:00 (nineteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Wednesday, 31 May 2006 21:17 (eighteen years ago)
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Wednesday, 31 May 2006 21:22 (eighteen years ago)
― Johnny Fever (johnny fever), Thursday, 1 June 2006 14:28 (eighteen years ago)
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Thursday, 1 June 2006 23:26 (eighteen years ago)
ARTHUR MAGAZINE LAUNCHES NEW ALBUM, CURATED BY JOSEPHINE FOSTER, TO BENEFIT COUNTER-MILITARY RECRUITING CAMPAIGNS AND PROGRAMS
"So Much Fire to Roast Human Flesh"
With wars raging across the Middle East and prospects for peace dimming, the youth of America have wised up and are starting to stay away from military recruiters in droves. Said recruiters have retaliated with aggressive--and often criminal--tactics.
An eye-opening study issued this August by the Government Accountability Office reported that "allegations and service-identified incidents of recruiter wrongdoing" increased almost 50 percent between 2004 and 2005. Criminal violations more than doubled over the same period of time. Increasingly common tactics used by the nation's 20,000 military recruiters range from lying about the financial benefits of service to threatening high school students with arrest if they back out of an enlistment process already underway. Military recruiters have also been assisting recruits in the falsification of documents to cover up conditions like autism, mental illness and serious drug problems that would bar them from service if reported. [See Endnotes below for more information.]
Musician Josephine Foster is joining forces with Bastet, our publishing imprint, to help give America's kids and parents the tools they need to protect them from the depredations of the nation's many unscrupulous military recruiters.
On August 29, we released So Much Fire to Roast Human Flesh, an 18-track, multi-artist compilation CD curated by Foster featuring exclusive contributions from some of the more outspoken members of the nation's burgeoning psychedelic folk scene, including Devendra Banhart, Feathers, David Pajo and members of Espers and Spires That in the Sunset Rise. Musicians from earlier generations of the underground, such as Michael Hurley, Kath Bloom and Angels of Light, are also present.
All profits from sales of So Much Fire... will be distributed to specific counter-military recruitment and pacifist organizations and programs who effectively advise high school students and other Americans at risk of being taken advantage of by the military's recruiters and omnipresent big-budget marketing campaigns.
"All of the musicians represented on So Much Fire... are American citizens," said Josephine Foster. "Our voices join with many others across this land that freely question and openly oppose war. Hopefully we will raise a good sum of money to help fund the educational pacifist tasks these organizations do. They are dedicated to creating a positive counter to the rising tides of the war being waged. We hope to assist them in their efforts promoting peace and non-militarism in the United States."
"I am deeply grateful to everyone involved in this gesture; from every musician, to Fred Tomaselli for use of his incredible painting as the cover art, to Jay Babcock and Laris Kreslins at Arthur Magazine who so enthusiastically took up this idea and worked to realize it. In the end, all of the labor was donated, including the manufacturing."
The album's title is taken from a line by the poet Apollinaire, who died from wounds he sustained while serving in World War I.
So Much Fire... is available for order from Arthurmag.com and from record stores across North America.
Track listing:
THE CHERRY BLOSSOMS - "Dragonfly" (live)FEATHERS - "Dust"MICHAEL HURLEY - "A Little Bit of Love for You"MEG BAIRD - "Western Red Lily (Nunavut Diamond Dream)"ANDREW BAR - "Don't Trust That Man"GOATGIRL - "President Combed His Hair"DEVENDRA BANHART - "I Know Some Souls" (demo)KATH BLOOM - "Baby Let It Come Down On Me"CHARLIE NOTHING - "Fuck You and Your Stupid Wars"DIANE CLUCK - "A Phoenix and Doves"JOHN ALLINGHAM & ANN TILEY - "Big War"JOSEPHINE FOSTER - "Would You Pave the Road?"ANGELS OF LIGHT - "Destroyer"RACHEL MASON - "The War Clerk's Lament"PAJO - "War Is Dead"MVEE - "Powderfinger"KATHLEEN BAIRD - "Prayer for Silence"LAY ALL OVER IT - "A Place"
Cover artwork by Fred Tomaselli
Available now. $12US/14Can/17World postpaid.
ENDNOTESRead the GAO report, "Military Recruiting: DOD and Services Need Better Data to Enhance Visibility over Recruiter Irregularities" here:http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/summary.php?rptno=GAO-06-846&accno=A58199
High school students, their parents and friends can learn more about their rights when confronted by recruiters athttp://afsc.org/youthmil/militarism-in-schools/High-school-students-rights.htm
― JayBabcock (jabbercocky), Tuesday, 5 September 2006 20:08 (eighteen years ago)
― everything (everything), Tuesday, 5 September 2006 20:44 (eighteen years ago)
― jaybabcock, Thursday, 19 April 2007 00:16 (eighteen years ago)
― marmotwolof, Thursday, 19 April 2007 00:22 (eighteen years ago)
― latebloomer, Thursday, 19 April 2007 00:32 (eighteen years ago)