PAINT'S WEBLOG

And the Granny goes to....

2012-02-13T15:29:00.000-08:00

I don't think I've actually watched the Grammys since this speech blew my mind as a young boy:

"I don't know what this means. I don't think it means anything. That's just how I feel," is what Eddie Vedder said in 1996. Perhaps I had the luxury of growing up when MTV was unsuspectingly infiltrated by music that surprised everyone, even the industry, by going to the top of the charts; breaking the dentist-office-and-supermarket-musak tradition of the mainstream. Now it's back to more familiar territory in the post-Beatles, Stones, and Zeppelin age: great music is out there, but it's not on the radio or TV. You find it on the ground, through friends, through the community. Which is perfectly fine.

Last night, as families gathered around their televisions for some wholesome Granny time (no, that isn't a typo), my social media was flooded with praises of Dave Grohl's speech, which always kinda bores me because I've never found Grohl's post-Nirvana work to be worth writing home about, aside from the Foo Fighters' self-titled debut. So I checked it out:

With all due respect to Kurt Cobain's drummer (a role that Grohl has never been able to top), the romanticized illusion Grohl has created with Wasting Light, the latest installment in the Foo Fighters' ongoing saga of post-self-titled-debut unimaginative and conservative rock that suburban parents can listen to with their children, is rather suspect in creating false hopes for bands starting out today. Recorded in the "garage" of Grohl's million-dollar home with Butch Vig, one of the industry's most expensive producers, to analog tape, which is significantly more costly than digital recording in 2012, Wasting Light is hardly a Black Flag record in style, spirit, production value, and, ultimately, budget. It's another case of long-established group of music professionals telling you anything is possible when they emerged at a time when they could fund tours with album sales supported by major-label apparatus and be the subject of grassroots, tape-trading fervor from audiences who were physically present and participated in the consumption of physical products.

It's sad that a band that plays its own instruments is becoming a novelty, and that somehow makes them more "punk" than they would have been in decades past just because of today's fickle landscape. I'll lend Grohl some credence for the spirit in which his speech was delivered, so as not to participate in any divide-and-conquer rituals. It is indeed, as Grohl said, what goes on in our hearts and minds that makes music truly work. But "we couldn't have done it without the greatest (read: and one of the most pricey) producer in the world," is where the ultimate truth -- and catch -- of Grohl's sentiments lie.

His world is not yours, or mine. But maybe it's the thought that counts.

So, they say we should blog more....

2012-02-12T00:28:00.000-08:00

It's a fine line between self-indulgence and maintaining and audience's interest when it comes to blogging. One can't help but wonder in the age of an over-saturated online market if blogging has simply become a means of perpetuating a delusional and self-aggrandizing vanity, or if the so-called "information age" is indeed aptly named. Freedom of expression and equal opportunity? Or simply the illusion of a level playing field meant to pacify a restless mass of consumers yearning to be contributors?

I, for one, and completely baffled, intrigued, frustrated, cynical, inspired, and hopeful, all at the same time.

Pete Townshend, great prophet that he is, surely must have known the term "Quadrophenic" would have applicability far beyond its 1973 inception. Nothing exemplifies amplified schizophrenia more than the 140-character soundbyte-porn culture. Is the medium truly the message, as McLuhan has long since warned us? The "message" so to speak seems almost irrelevant; we have the attention span of mosquitoes. Where is the poetry, the beauty, the focus, the community? Click "like" if this resonates... Or see you in your town. An open slate for the grassroots. Cryptic messages from behind a keyboard.

What next?

A Small Victory

2011-11-29T15:37:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, myself and Tim Broughton, one of the managers of Toronto's C'est What? venue, stood in court to challenge two anti-graffiti fines that were issued against C'est What? for posters promoting a residency of Paint shows from February 2011.

We argued against the prosecution on two grounds: 1) Tim put forth the factual argument that the band operated independently of C'est What? in putting up posters according to what they believed to be the venue's guidelines and limitations on postering; thus charging the venue was a misapplication of law; and 2) I presented a three-fold constitutional argument that blanket bans on postering are in fact an infringement of s.2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms pertaining to freedom of expression.

The case law was entirely on our side. Ramsden v. Peterborough was the landmark decision, in which the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously agreed that prohibiting postering on public property violated s.2(b) of the Charter. As postering is protected by the Charter, then any bylaws limiting this right must provide only "reasonable limits" that are minimally restrictive. Postering on public property, regardless of its content, constitutes "expression," and no persuasive distinction exists between using public space for leaflet distribution and using public property for the display of posters.

A subsequent case against the organizers of the Evolve Festival in Halifax laid 18 charges of postering on grounds that the city had created "information kiosks" for posters to be displayed. However, it was argued not only on constitutional grounds (as in Ramsden) but also that such kiosks were in fact an unreasonable limitation on freedom of expression because of their inconvenient locations and small numbers. The Halifax Regional Municipality dropped the charges on the grounds that there was "no reasonable prospect of conviction on the charges before the court."

A similar case in Montreal saw Jaggi Singh, as well as organizers of the Pop Montreal festival, charged with postering on "surface(s) (not) designated for such purposes." The Quebec Court of Appeal, in July 2010, declared the anti-littering bylaw (under which posters fell) to be "invalid" and "unconstitutional," on the grounds that bylaw, as in Ramsden, violates s.2(b) of the Charter.

The City of Toronto, under Rob Ford, is claiming that they also have similar provisions on "kiosks" and designated spaces that do allow for postering legally. However, as in the case in Halifax, such limitations are not "minimally restrictive," and I am of the opinion that Toronto is in violation of the Charter just as Peterborough, Halifax, and Montreal were, and as the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed.

Taking all of this into consideration, the City dropped both postering charges against C'est What? after myself as a representative of the band refused to take the fine in their place on constitutional grounds. The condition of the dismissal was that C'est What? present the City with their revised terms of performance to clearly state that postering is only allowed where legally deemed appropriate -- which, sadly, no one is entirely clear where those spots are, nor is it all that different from the provisions C'est What? already had in place.

The bottom line is that our charges were dismissed and it is worth celebrating (which is what the show on Dec. 8 at C'est What? is meant to acknowledge). However, it is still unclear where bands, promoters, and businesses are and are not allowed to poster without risking a fine.

Bans on postering represent an attack on the arts, especially in times of political conservatism when arts can be seen as subversive. 85% of the 413 infractions stemming from anti-postering in Montreal in 2009 were against the cultural industries. Posters are an accessible and affordable form of advertising for locally-targeted events in an oversaturated internet market. By-laws against postering are simply creating barriers for artists of a certain income demographic to get their messages out. Unless one has the resources to advertise in mainstream media, which is often controlled by certain interests, or own property and put up a big billboard, ideas and expressions are limited. The concept of “public space” contains the assumption that people freely express themselves as permitted under s.2(b) of the Charter.

In Toronto's case, shy of banding together to file a constitutional challenge (which I would say isn't entirely outside the realm of possibility) the onus sadly is placed on the backs of artists to stand up for their rights. Poster and promote as you would, and if fines are issued, do not pay them. Go to court. Use the above case law to argue your points. And drop me a line, I'd be happy to help.

Your in solidarity,
Robb Johannes

In Honour of Jack Layton

2011-08-22T07:00:00.002-07:00

This morning our nation lost of its brightest stars and true patriots. Today we mourn the passing of federal NDP leader and Toronto-Danforth MP Jack Layton to cancer. Mr. Layton's death is a tremendous loss for Canada and Robb and Andre's local community in Toronto. Mr. Layton was a passionate and genuine man deeply committed to his country and its people. A rare bird and shining spark of hope in an ominous landscape.

A friend said something to the effect of "In all my pessimism about politics, Jack Layton was someone I actually believed in," and many others have expressed similar sentiments. This is what made Jack Layton so rare and unique. He did what politicians are supposed to do but very few can ever achieve: he lead by example and inspired his constituents to contribute to their communities and countries, one brick at a time. He gave us hope for the future and the tools to make it possible. He was more than a politician, he was a model citizen and an example that hope can grow from the most cynical dirt in the most apathetic political climates. He was a Kennedy, a Malcolm X, and a Beatle :)

While men and women do not live forever, ideas do. It's up to all of us to carry forth the legacy and vision that Mr. Layton helped develop and articulated so well. We are all stronger by virtue of his efforts, and while it is certainly a sad day for Canada, it is not the end of a social movement led by Mr. Layton's NDP that looks after the interests of everyday working people, compassion, and true democratic values. Jack Layton gave so many Canadian the most powerful gift of all: optimism.

Condolences to Olivia Chow and the rest of Mr. Layton's family.

A Small Cost to Posting Bills

2011-08-10T22:25:00.002-07:00

"I know it's only rock 'n' roll but I like it."
- The Rolling Stones

"It wouldn't be rock 'n' roll if it didn't have at least some element of crime."
- Robb Johannes

Pardon the use of a self-constructed quote but I couldn't find the perfect Stanley Cohen-esque nugget on moral panics. Allow me to explain:

Back in February, Paint played a month-long residency at C'est What? in St. Lawrence Market. The venue has been a staunch supporter of the arts in Toronto, and kindly allows bands an outlet to workshop and develop new material -- at least that was the case for us, as we were stage-testing songs before we entered the studio to record our forthcoming album, Where We Are Today. As any hard-working and business-minded band would, we employed street-level marketing tactics to promote the residency to the local community by getting permission to display leaflets in surrounding shops, and adhering to C'est What?'s policy on postering only on surfaces not deemed off-limits by the City of Toronto. We began the residency playing to a modest-sized audience and closed the final installment with a room over capacity. For us it was an artistically-rewarding process, and we became a family of sorts with the staff at C'est What? along the way.

Months went by, we toured more, went into the studio to make the record, mixed it, mastered it, pressed it, and a month before its release we found ourselves going to C'est What? to catch some friends play a show. It was at this time, we were pulled aside and told that under Mayor Rob Ford's new "anti-graffiti" mission, the City of Toronto issued a fine to C'est What? for posters that were put up sometime in January or February promoting Paint's residency. Now, having developed a forward-thinking graffiti diversion program called RestART in conjunction with the City of Vancouver, I'd like to think I have a smidgen of knowledge about graffiti, defined as "Writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other surface in a public place," essentially paint or ink applied to an unsanctioned public surface. In this case, Paint was applied (in pun only) but not as "graffiti" per se.

Beyond semantic technicalities there is a plethora of concerns that the City's sanctions raise, and neither C'est What? nor Paint are willing to let Ford's neo-conservative ethos steamroll anything pertaining to the arts and local business in Toronto. C'est What?'s management is taking a stand premised on "This is like you steal a car and I charge your mother for it!" The venue is going to continue to encourage bands to promote their shows in every legal manner available, as it raises the profile of Toronto's vibrant arts community and stimulates business for local establishments. This kind of out-of-touch "crackdown" by Ford and his almost exclusively suburban support base would not fly on Queen Street or in Kensington Market due to the sheer volume of venues and postering activity (a lot of which is commissioned by the City -- who is, in a way, looking after their own on this issue). The fact that this "graffiti" occurrence was around St. Lawrence Market, a relatively upscale quadrant, surely raises issues of class and cultural clash in a city as diverse as Toronto -- which is in many ways what Ford's election was about.

C'est What? will not stand for this fine (as they shouldn't), and I will be joining them in court on Monday, August 15th at 1:00 p.m. to observe the hearing. I would like to extend an open invite any musician or artist in Toronto who may find themselves available to join me in attendance.

As a testament to their continued endorsement of the arts, as well as their sardonic sense of humour, C'est What? is committed continue to fight every single one of these fines in court if and when they emerge (with Paint being the first of such cases). If it so declared that C'est What? is to pay the fine, the venue will host a benefit concert for the band in question, and money raised from the door will go to pay the fine. And of course, in the event of a fine-benefit show, bands may be encouraged to put up posters with an old-western "WANTED" motif.

Thanks Rob Ford, your governance of a city you can hardly say you actually live in continues to manifest itself in ridiculous ways. The frivolousness of this particular one kind of smells like, well, gravy.

"The Artist Looked at the Producer...."

2011-07-05T22:08:00.001-07:00

I saw Spirits play at Canadian Music Week last year and it was one of the most inspiring things I'd seen on stage in a long time. I became a major fan immediately and we ended up opening for them a few months later, which was when I found out that in addition to being a brilliant performer, Ian Smith is also an accomplished songwriter and producer.

We started planning to go into the studio with him right away.

Ian has been on all sides of the equation in the recording process, and because of that he really knew how to create an environment that was comfortable, welcoming, and creative; we could all just be ourselves and focus on the task at hand. I've never been able to sing so freely and openly.

As well, I could bring out the most obscure musical reference to describe the tone or mood we were trying to achieve for a song or a specific part, and not only would Ian be familiar with the record I was referring to, he would know what microphones, amps, instruments, and effects they used to capture sounds. Whether it was Suede, Ryan Adams, Kraftwerk, Editors, Pearl Jam, The Smiths, Joy Division, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Idlewild, U2, Neil Young, or a slew of bands no one but Ian and I seemed to have ever heard of, we were always on the same page with where we were heading.

I honestly believe that by the end Ian and I had melded into one brain. We were clearly in the hands of a fan of music and someone so technically wise that we left all technical discussions aside and just dove into focusing on the spirit of the songs, the subject matter, and what we were trying to communicate musically with this record.

The results are, well, Where We Are Today.

At Last We Have a Left Wing: A Canadian Election Reflection

2011-05-06T18:18:00.000-07:00

"Power is not an institution, and not a structure; neither is it a certain strength we are endowed with; it is the name that one attributes to a complex strategical situation in a particular society."

- Michel Foucault

On May 2, 2011, after three consecutive minority governments in seven years of attempting to gain power through failed and wasteful elections, Stephen Harper alas wore Canadians down and his Conservative Party took majority control of the nation's government. Similar to the bigoted Rob Ford's recent mayoral victory in Canada's largest city of Toronto (albeit without any support from the "city" of Toronto and entirely relying on the suburban areas outside the city recently classified as the "Greater Toronto Area"), the equally-removed Albertan Harper's Conservative Party was found in contempt of Parliament -- which is what sparked the election in the first place. The irony that they now hold majority office is surely lost on no one.

Never mind that Harper wants to Americanize Canada by implementing mandatory minimum sentences for petty drug offences and building American-style "super-jails" while reducing personal income taxes (ultimately leading to the privatization of government services -- a practice which even American prison officials have begun to abandon due to its complete and utter failure). Never mind that Harper wants to purchase fighter jets from Lockheed Martin and pump $39 billion into military ship-building. Never mind that Harper is acting on behalf of the Evangelist Christian right in dismantling abortion rights. Or cut corporate taxes. Or allow increased individual donations to political parties (with the reward of tax breaks). Or continue to abandon evidence-based policymaking with the removal of mandatory long-form census. All of these platform items are presently abstract bits of political and electioneering rhetoric which Harper may or may not turn into reality.

But what is tangible is the power we all have as citizens, which includes the potential to affect meaningful change and powerful resistance to an out-of-touch government.

The thing that is irking me about left-leaning Canadians who wonderfully got out to vote this time is the "sore loser" effect by saying things like "What was the point of voting at all cos the Conservatives won anyways," or "I'm going to move to America" (America?!?! Seriously? Are you fu*%ing kidding me?!?!?), or something equally sour and retreatist. Canada's lack of activist spirit sometimes gives me ulcers but often propels most of the activist-based work I have done throughout my entire adult life.

First of all, you didn't lose! You helped the New Democratic Party win 102 of 308 seats, 65 more than they held in 2008, and give the left a much-needed and much-welcomed presence on Parliament Hill. Jack Layton and the NDP are the official opposition for f&%k's sake, which is a tremendous step in Canadian political history and affords the left the opportunity to be more powerful than it ever has been under any otherwise right or centre-leaning Liberal/Conservative regime, particularly with a lame-duck post-Chretien Liberal Party acting as opposition. That means your votes actually accomplished something: they gave you representation in Ottawa!

Second, you're acting as though it's some kind of travesty that the Conservative Party won when the reality is Canada is a nation that has a long and well-documented history of conservatism, bigotry, colonialism, violence, genocide, and organized and institutional racism. I mean, come on -- "explorers" and "settlers" murdered thousands of Native Canadians, annihilated their cultural, social, and medical lives, and sent generation after generation to residential schools where they were raped by priests and told they were worthless pieces of sh*t unless they embraced Christianity, the English language, and rid themselves of every bit of their ancestry -- and once they did that, they would still be plagued with alcoholism and mass imprisonment.

And the Opium Act of 1908? Building the entire Canadian Pacific Railroad on the backs of underpaid Chinese immigrants and when they were done, creating laws against opium use (which was primarily done as a post-work leisure activity amongst Chinese labourers) and saying "Thanks for building our railroads, now f*&k off and go to prison where you belong"?!?! I don't know where this delusion that Canada is somehow a liberal mecca emerged; our nation's history is chock full of violence and oppression, and this history has directly affected the present. Stephen Harper is hardly un-Canadian -- he is carrying forth a legacy of conservatism that has plagued Canada since its inception (of course this path hasn't been linear, and we do have many progressive-thinking leaders like Pierre Trudeau to thank for bringing civil rights into Canada's collective thought).

Third, it's this sort of, "Well I'm just gonna pack up and move," fickle patriotism that gives Canadians the reputation around the world of being bland, polite, non-offensive, pushovers. Seriously: in 2005 Ian Bush gets shot in the back of the fu*%ing head under police custody in Houston, BC for no apparent reason and when the officers stand trial and are acquitted, Canadians shrug their shoulders and go "Oh well, can't win 'em all." But when the Vancouver Canucks lose the Stanley Cup to the New York Rangers in 1994, thousands upon thousands descend into downtown Vancouver to riot and loot Robson Street.... Something tells me Canadians' priorities are completely out of order -- one thing I will always give Americans credit for is their ability to get angry for the right reasons; the response to the Rodney King beating (and subsequent police officer acquittal), and the Civil Rights riots indicate that one thing we can learn from our southern neighbours is how to get pissed off about things that actually matter.

So before you write off your own country, Canadians, keep in mind that your power and responsibilities as citizens aren't limited to going to a poll every couple years and writing and "X" on a ballot. We can all be much more effective as citizens if we saw complaining simply as a means of venting and strategizing, and used our frustration as a springboard to action; to get out and actively do something to help our country. Stand up for what you believe in. Take a pay cut and go and get a job with a non-profit. Volunteer to support someone who's on parole, or working to get clean. Help out at a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter. I've had the great fortune of working closely with people who are, or have been, activists or politically-involved, and damn near everyone is ecstatic that youth got out and voted this time, that Canada now has a strong opposition party, and have recognized that Stephen Harper may have a majority now but he is still only as powerful as we let him be. Remember that we elect people to represent us, and when they don't, the last thing we should do is allow it to continue. Never mind "winning" an election; if we sit idly by, that is when Stephen Harper has truly won.

Without our compliance, he is powerless.

How Many Deaths...

2011-05-05T21:17:00.000-07:00

"I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is not my place to comment on whether Osama bin Laden was indeed behind the tragic attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York City on September 11, 2001; nor to argue whether or not weapons of mass destruction indeed existed as justification for the subsequent American attacks on Iraq. There are plenty of articles, books, and "intelligence" on such matters, and anyone with a library card and an internet connection can draw their own conclusions. However, there are certain elements in recent developments of the West's culture of violence that elicit some of the most primal and ultimately disturbing images of lack of human compassion and de-sensitization to violence.

On April 30, 2011, Canadians flocked in hordes to television sets, sports bars, and the Rogers Centre in Toronto (with a sellout crowd of 55,000) to observe the Ultimate Fighting Championship. The following evening, May 1, 2011, their American counterparts descended by the thousand on their nation's capital and other significant sites of historical and cultural significance across the United States to rejoice in the murder of Osama bin Laden. Observation without context of giant crowds cheering "USA! USA!" may as well have implied that the World Cup or Olympic gold medals had been won. But in many ways, response to the slaying of bin Laden, America's 21st century Antichrist, is just another manifestation of the good, old-fashioned American past-time of turning violence into sport. The "score" was settled when news broke that bin Laden had been killed -- never mind that the bloodshed of 9/11 and the resulting war in Iraq can never, ever be resolved by the murder of one man (or murder period).

Three-thousand Americans died in the 9/11 attacks. In response to 9/11, the George W. Bush-led war in Iraq has resulted in the loss of over 100,000 Iraqi citizens' lives. Did Americans cheer about that? Well, sort of. However, can we hold Osama bin Laden morally and singularly responsible for all of these deaths combined? Especially in light of so much ambiguity, confusion, and dubious American connections around bin Laden, al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, Iraq, Afghanistan, the opium trade, the Cold War, the Soviet Union, and the Taliban? Or even for how the American administration responded militarily to 9/11? In legal terms, a reasonable doubt can be shed on bin Laden's guilt for the totality of 9/11 and the Iraq war with which he has been seemingly held solely responsible. However, right-leaning Western media is presenting the death of bin Laden as some kind of Biblical affirmation; as though the death of 3,000 Americans and 100,000 Iraqis (not including soldiers who have lost their lives since 2003) have all somehow been vindicated and equalized in the face of the death of one solitary -- and lest we forget, Muslim -- man who had been elevated to demonic status through the course of a decade of mystery?

Herein lies the paradox of America's Judeo-Christian revenge philosophy: bin Laden's death will not bring 3,000 Americans back to life. Similarly, George W. Bush's decision to attack Iraq in response to 9/11 and have 100,000 Iraqi citizens die would not be somehow vindicated for Iraqis if Bush were to meet a similar fate. Anger and revenge are simply stagnant emotions; they produce nothing but more violence, hate, fear, and intolerance. Nothing productive. Nothing forward-thinking. Nothing progressive. And no resolutions. The son whose father died at the World Trade Centre still doesn't have a father. And Osama bin Laden's death would not bring an ounce of "justice" if the execution of Saddam Hussein and 100,000 innocent Iraqis already hadn't. The propensity for revenge through violent measures (on the macro and micro levels) is a self-perpetuating cycle that permeates the Western cultural narrative in an age when societies are too multi-faceted (or at least enhanced in their awareness of geography) for such simplistic polarizations as good/evil, sinner/saint, Christian/Muslim, us/them, "eye for an eye," and so forth. Many Westerners ascribe to an archaic and reductionist Old-Testament ethos of revenge and binaries that is not adept to deal with 21st century diplomacy and multiculturalism. There is no black and white, only shades of grey.

Regardless of who Osama bin Laden was, or was characterized to be, it seems deplorable to celebrate the fact that someone is dead -- and not just dead, murdered. Seeing placard-carrying mobs hording the streets in major urban centres to host spontaneous festivities in honour of the murder of another person is nothing more than a sad reflection on a culture embedded into a military-industrial complex and its accompanying simplifications and anachronisms around so-called enemies who become nothing more than "the other team" in a sporting event. America kicked Iraq's ass 100,000-3,000 but that wasn't enough; they had to take out the big guy, or else all of those other murders weren't worth anything. Especially disturbing is the propensity to place such significance upon the death of someone who was essentially a figurehead; a manufactured image of Islamophobia; a scapegoat and displacement of misdirected American anger. Terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda, whom American well-to-dos have vowed to exterminate (and in many cases, also helped to create), still exist, and have continued to do so whether Osama bin Laden died in 2001 or 2025 -- remember, he has essentially been powerless and in obscurity for nearly a decade. All we are left to ask in the end is: now that bin Laden is dead, can the West move beyond 9/11 and into more peaceful avenues at global relations, or was bin Laden simply another pawn-like casualty in a much larger war that would be moving forward with or without him?

"Catchy" like the Clap?

2011-02-14T16:38:00.001-08:00

"It's now obvious that pop music has become the sole preserve of 12-year-old girls who spend their pocket money (or children's allowance, it's so hard to tell these days) buying ringtones by their favourite band."

- Ian O'Doherty, "The Irish Independent"

"I've never intended to be controversial but it's very easy to be controversial in pop music because nobody ever is."

- Morrissey

The other day a friend said he just wished someone would hurry up and shoot Justin Bieber in the back of the head and get him over with. While I agreed in practice, I had to bring up the principle of the matter: if someone killed Bieber, he and his estate would be rewarded with a lifetime of "tragic hero" tales, post-humous album releases of garbage that was never supposed to be released (i.e. Michael Jackson -- not that any of Bieber's actual releases could count as anything more), and an air of mystery, like "Oh, if Bieber had only lived to turn 13, he had so much potential to be the next Bob Dylan...." I was of the opinion that all we can hope for is he'll get too many zits and his voice will sink so low once he hits puberty that his baffling appeal will diminish and he'll fade into obscurity, only to reappear 20 years down the line on episodes of Celebrity Rehab, or better yet, not at all. The best way to rid the world of the Biebers is to simply ignore them -- which is sadly, not what this blog posting is doing.

I long ago recognized that crafty advertisers have been taking advantage of unsuspecting and vulnerable children with throwaway pop music for decades, forever leaving their taste in music disabled. It is a cruel, cruel act to manipulate children. One of my constant frustrations is hearing grown adults continuing to justify the existence of awful pop music on the "But it's catchy" factor; "BY MENEN" is probably as "catchy" (and less annoying) than a Justin Bieber song (which I admittedly would not be able to identify), but that does not mean I am going to be duped into going out and buying it or repeating it in front of people at parties. Why? Because I have a brain and free will to decide when I am being insulted by advertisers (which is all the machinery of the pop singer really is). Free will is what separates humans from species that operate on classical conditioning, though Pavolv did prove that humans can be dumb and manipulable mammals when it comes down to it.

Furthermore, there is a significant difference between commercial jingles (i.e. boy bands and Biebers) and music that has artistic and cultural relevance. And of course, just because something is "popular" does not mean it has to water down its literary or artistic merit and sophistication; music is art after all. The only person who has ever been able to successfully marry art and commercial advertising was Andy Warhol (RIP), but he did so with a conscious eye for social satire and an unmatched ability to turn the lens of society back on itself.

In a world overflowing with beautiful art amongst a species blessed with the wonderful gift of creating and appreciating it at their own volition and free will, I encourage you to exercise that will, kids. Pop music is bad for you. And bands: give your audience the credit they deserve for the intelligence they have. They will only appreciate you all the more because of it.

So who are all those people on your album cover anyway?

2010-11-07T09:19:00.000-08:00

"The Speaker's Corner From Hell" is what I dubbed the album cover for Can You Hear Me? The album's title track is a conversation between the parent of someone whose child has been killed and the person who committed the act. It is ultimately a tale of forgiveness and reconciliation. The cover art is thus premised on "alternative" or fringe voices throughout history, many we have integrated into our cultural ethos, others we are still not hearing as much as we should be, or at all (and of course with members of the band tossed in there just for kicks)... I've often been asked who everyone on the album cover is. Many people have identified several of the characters, but none have nailed 100%. So I thought I'd do that here.

1. Emily Carr (artist)

2. Matt Laforest (drummer / writer)

3. Andy Kaufman (song and dance man)

4. Nancy Spungen (dancer)

5. Sid Vicious (bassist / Sex Pistol)
6. Sue Johanson (sexologist)

7. Jean-Michel Basquiat (artist)

8. Jhoon Goo Rhee (father of American Taekwondo)

9. Bruce Lee (philosopher / martial artist)

10. Karl Marx (philosopher / writer)

11. Margaret Trudeau (First Lady of Canada)

12. Langston Hughes (poet / revolutionary)*

13. Henry Miller (writer)

14. Virgina Woolf (writer)

15. Mumia Abu-Jamal (journalist / activist / wrongly-convicted death row resident)

16. William S. Burroughs (reader and writer)

17. Rachel LaGroix (manager, the angel on Satan's shoulder)

18. Satan (cultural icon)

19. Hunter S. Thompson (gonzo journalist)

20. Isadora Duncan (dance's original badass)

21. Johnny Cash (The Man in Black)

22. Marilyn Monroe (the beginning and end of beauty)

23. Carter G. Woodson (writer / The Mis-education of the Negro)

24. Salvador Dali (artist / genius)

25. Raffaelo (artist whose painting "School of Athens" is the backdrop of this album cover)

26. James Dean (the beginning and end of beauty, the male version)

27. Aldous Huxley (writer / prophet)

28. Betty Paige (hot damn)

29. Kurt Cobain (musician / poet)

30. Robb Johannes (musician / activist)

31. Jeff Logan (musician / rehab doll)

32. Ian Curtis (singer / poet / genius)

33. Luke Lombardini (musician)

34. Marcus Warren (musician)

35. Paula McGlynn (guitarist / writer / voice of an angel)

36. Charles Darwin (unveiler of truth)

37. Malcolm X (a Black Prince)

38. James Baldwin (writer)

39. Michel Foucault (philosopher / experimenter)

40. Oscar Wilde (writer / critic / artist)

41. Damien Echols (writer / wrongly convicted death row resident)

42. Leonard Peltier (Elder / wrongly convicted prisoner)

43. Truman Capote (in whose cold blood?)

44. Shannon Hoon (singer / poet / young soul)

45. Pixie (Robb Johannes' estranged cat)

46. Andy Warhol (artist / philosopher / icon)

47. Emma Goldman (philosopher / revolutionary)

48. Noam Chomsky (modern day prophet)

49. Bill Hicks (philosopher / comic / genius)

50. Edie Sedgwick (tragic heroine)

51. Frida Kahlo (artist)

52. Hariet Tubman (freedom fighter)

* The fellows beside Langston Hughes are still unidentified.

-Robb

Good Riddance Gordo: a political story worth celebrating

2010-11-04T06:44:00.000-07:00

In 2001, British Columbians, in a predictable sense of "collective" disillusion with the reigning provincial NDP government, voted in Gordon Campbell and the BC "Liberals" by a landslide 77-2 seats (I use the term "Liberal" in quotes as any British Columbian knows the Party title is a misnomer; Campbell's politics and practices have always been nothing but conservative through and through). A primary factor in his victory, aside from groupthink, was reducing personal income tax and the provincial sales tax (PST) -- which of course resulted in a reduction in welfare rolls and social services.

Campbell's victory proved that reactionary voting never seems to yield the desired results: immediately following his throning, he mailed out a biased, racist, and self-serving referendum aimed at stripping BC's First Nations communities further of their land and rights (in what Angus Reid, co-founder of Ipsos-Reid called "one of the most amateurish, one-sided attempts to gauge the public will that I have seen in my professional career"); removed a six-year tuition freeze that had made BC Canada's most affordable and desired destination for post-secondary education; allowed new entrants into the workforce to be paid $6/hour (25% below minimum wage); and to top it all off, in January 2003, Campbell was arrested and pled no contest for driving under the influence while on vacation in Hawaii. His blood-alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit. Campbell's mug shot is worth a thousand words: a red-faced politician known for corporate elitism and neglecting the disadvantaged, holding up a slate -- the symbolic value far beyond the charge itself.

After a highly-publicized and celebrated victory and a steam-rolling right-wing beginning to his tenure as Premier with a 97.4% majority in seats, Gordo was seemingly freely pass any bill he desired in a near-totalitarian regime. But Post-Hawaii, and perhaps as an act of self-preservation, his public profile seemed to disappear entirely. A nearly-reclusive Premier Campbell was re-elected in 2005 and 2009, with 46-33 and 49-36 spreads of seats respectively, predictably closing the almost comical gap of 2001, and making a Campbell overthrow a plausible if not inevitable eventuality.

But, on November 3, 2010, with an approval rating of 9%, Campbell pulled the trigger himself and resigned -- seven years after Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and several community-based organizations called for him to do just that. So why now?

Well....

In July 2009 Campbell joined suit with Ontario and moved BC towards a Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), which would combine the federal GST (5%), and provincial PST (7%). As someone who doesn't mind paying taxes myself (because I like universal health care, education, social services, public transit, and paved roads), I have always struggled to put together the puzzle of the conservative ethos in Canada: "We have the best health care coverage in the world but we constantly vote for people on the single premise that they want to cut the taxes that pay for the health care we are so proud of...." Campbell found a powerful support base amongst the catch-22 of conservative tax-haters and corporate elites, and in an ironic twist of poetic justice, the moment he turned his back on them and attempted to funnel tax dollars back into the gaping holes he created in his province's social services, his dwindling public support came under harsh public attack by the hands that fed him all along -- at a time when he needed those hands the most.

The man who capitalized on short-sighted cuts to taxation and reactionary mood swings amongst BC conservatives became the victim of his own game. And so Gordo was left with nothing to do but drive off drunkenly into the sunset. As a former long-time British Columbian, all I can think to say is: "Happy fu*%ing birthday, asshole."

Sometimes political stories are worth celebrating.

Left Behind: what happens when the left is too cool to vote

2010-10-26T07:21:00.000-07:00

"If you are not doing needles and you are not gay, you wouldn’t get AIDS probably, that’s bottom line. These are the facts."

"Every year we have dozens of people who get hit by cars or trucks. My heart bleeds when someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day."

- some nuggets of wisdom from Toronto's newly-elected mayor, Rob Ford

I would never normally ascribe to biological determinism, but there must be something in my DNA that forbids conservatism. I've tried so hard, at least intellectually, to understand what drives the conservative being, and all I could ever conclude was that it's simply the product of fear, shelter, and a legacy of colonialism in the Western world. Nothing that a little education, exposure, and life experience outside the wealthy or rural bubbles couldn't solve.

There is just a certain something about the right that frightens me (of course nothing I would ever back down from though). As a recent observation by a dear friend goes: "I'm not scared of the far left. What's the worst they can do? Make me work less and still have a roof over my head, learn how to paint, talk about my feelings, and be self-actualized? I'm not afraid of that... But history has shown that the far right will wipe you out completely if you aren't on board with their ideals."

However, I realized yesterday with Rob Ford's 12-point victory to become mayor of the formerly liberal capital of Canada (Toronto), that the left is capable of far more harm than myself and my friend would like to believe: through their own arrogance, apathy, and "I'm too cool and intelligent to vote because I'm above the process" sentiments, by not voting, the left is capable of electing governments that threaten the environment, health, diversity, tolerance, immigration, and the basic social safety net that protects us from being left behind in our most difficult struggles for survival. Yes, these are ideals and not necessarily realities, but if the ideals are removed from the platform they are no longer integrated as strategic goals to be achieved.

Here we are in the "information age" and the left, rather than mobilizing and strengthening its potential for increased awareness, wisdom, and action, has really just become a helpless post-modern wasteland of spoiled, cynical, apathetic, libertarian brats who would rather talk and judge from afar than take any direct action. Frankly, many on the left make the rest of us look really, really bad.

In spite of my misgivings of the right, one thing I have always admired them for is their belief in the democratic process (however naive some self-proclaimed "pundits" on the left would say that faith is -- but down with them, because criticism of that sort doesn't translate into votes, only lack thereof). The right shows up to the polls and votes. And yesterday in Toronto, they did just that. And won.

We can use Ford's victory as another affirmation of the classic rural/urban divide in Canada, heartland of the 50-plus wealthy homeowner versus the young city-dweller split that seems to come up every time there is a civic, provincial, or federal election. Yawn. Or we can use it to examine the arrogance and apathy of the left and recognize that inaction is as dangerous as the outcome the lazy left is criticizing.

Not all hope is lost though. First of all the mayor is really only a figurehead; a single vote on a council of many. But also, in the same way that Steven Malkmus said frustration and anger with Ronald Reagan's America inspired him to pick up a guitar and form Pavement (one of countless examples of political discontent manifesting into powerful artistic and cultural movements), Ford's election in Toronto may just kickstart a dormant social awareness in Canada's most diverse city, and spark helping hands that would otherwise have remained idle. We could be witness to an increase in community volunteering, career changes, politically-based leisure-time activities, and bringing politics into the centre of discussions and life decisions. The problem with periods of complacency (which apparently Toronto was in) is that the risk of sudden swings to the right against an unsuspecting public demonstrate just how delicate the political process can be. But let it be a reminder that we can all keep our "leaders" in check by getting out of our heads and beds and showing a bit of leadership ourselves.

So go forth and lend a hand to someone who needs it. Chances are under Rob Ford, they will need it even more.

Canada Wakes Up and Recognizes Unconstitutionality of Prostitution Laws

2010-09-28T14:47:00.000-07:00

Today, Ontario Superior Court Justice Susan Himel struck down three sections of the Criminal Code pertaining to adult prostitution as unconstitutional. These sections are:

S. 210(1) Every one who

(a) is an inmate of a common bawdy-house

(b) is found, without lawful excuse in a common bawdy-house, or as owner, landlord, lessor, tenant, occupier, agent or otherwise having charge or control of any place, knowingly permits the place or any part thereof to be let or used for the purposes of a common bawdy-house is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction

S. 212(1)(j) Everyone who lives wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

S. 213(1) Every person who is in a public place or in any place open to public view, stops or attempts to stop any person or in any manner communicates or attempts to communicate with any person for the purpose of engaging in prostitution or of obtaining the sexual services of a prostitute is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

To put this into plain English:

The communicating law under s.213 emerged in 1986 as a response to conservative cries of "not in my backyard" with respect to the visibility of on-street sex work. The communicating law made it illegal to communicate for the purposes of prostitution, which inversely resulted in the retreat and displacement of street-level sex workers having to retreat to poorly-lit back alleys where they could be picked up by the likes of Robert Pickton and murdered... from zero sex workers reported missing or killed before 1986 and s.213 to at least 60 missing in Vancouver alone (many more nation-wide) post s.213 after I think it's safe to say the government dropped the big one when they passed this law.

Sadly it's taken almost 25 years to change, and a lot of people close to me (including my wife!, the Pivot Legal Society, and the wonderful ladies and gentlemen involved with FIRST), have worked around the clock for years to strike that section down and provide safer conditions for people working in the sex industry, meaning off the street and into indoor settings (regardless of one's moral stance on selling sex). So, this is a strong preventative measure, I'd say, and a progressive step in a country not generally regarded as a leader in practices of safe sex work.

Soundbytes and Bird Feed: "News" in the 21st Century

2010-02-21T16:31:00.002-08:00

Define irony: Samantha spends 3 hours a day logging onto Perez Hilton for the latest celebrity smut, criticizing so-called "entertainer" and their demands for privacy, then gets noticeably disturbed and disgusted when her preferences in footwear are openly criticized, mocked, and related to her upbringing by her friends on Facebook.

On the afternoon of February 18th, 2010, Canadian singer/songwriter Gordon Lightfoot was driving to a dentist appointment when the radio station informed him that he had died. Twenty-two minutes later, CanWest Media pulled the story, indicating that he was in fact alive and well and their information sources were unreliable; and uncertainties exist as to whether the "source" had in fact been a Twitter post... in those 22 minutes, however, a cascade of Facebook and Twitter updates across the country lamenting the loss of a national folk icon percolated the virtual universe. People were sad and entire country turned their heads, only then to stumble over their previous sentimentality with anger towards CanWest Media -- as though they themselves had somehow been victim to a media panic, like Stanley Cohen's "moral panic" on steroids, which just as quickly was rectified in the social networking community as it had originally emerged.

It's fascinating how we acquire knowledge in the fast pace of 21st century Western life. Rather than reading books or multiple-perspectives from archives of news articles, the 140-character soundbyte has become the end-all of information and communications. One could have presented this evolution as a "media porn fantasy" in the 1980s; that ultimately it really never is the story, the facts, the point of view or even the truth (whatever that may be) that needs to be considered but the shock and awe of a concisely worded soundbyte. Surely few cultural critics would have predicted that "knowledge-as-slogan" would actually come to be reality at all, let alone to manifest in the form of non-threatening baby blue cartoon birds on computer screens.

Information sharing in mass media has moved beyond the facade of reputable journalism to the point of grassroots information sharing becoming contagious gossip -- which may be all that so-called "news" ever was in the first place. Major publications have now turned to using daily Twitter feeds as "fact finding" for entire news columns. Whereas once journalists had to hit the pavement to find real-life sources and inside scoops, they know live in an insular bubble where they never have to leave their computer chair let alone speak to another human being to produce a story. Whilst admirably news "from the people" holds a long-standing value amongst critical oral and traditional historians, and the value of non-corporate media outlets is firmly entrenched amongst those seeking multiple perspectives (though coverage of the anti-Olympic efforts in Vancouver may suggest otherwise), the question emerges: have we reached a place where we are no longer relying on trustworthy sources to screen information? Michelangelo once said, "I didn't create David, I only took away what was not David." The role of the publisher was historically one of filtering out the noise to present what consumers felt was the best possible product. Of course, many vested interests affect what come to be excluded from popular consciousness, which is a dangerous and disgusting process, but I can't help but feel that our tendency for gossip has truly morphed any reputable quality of journalism into nothing but the high school cafeteria.

So what is true anymore? Maybe Tweeted news is not a media porn fantasy so much as a post-modern orgasm. It's most certainly shattered our traditional notion of celebrity, which I for one think is a wonderful sigh of relief -- it illustrates how absurd the concept is; one needn't do anything extraordinary to have their benign activities be deemed newsworthy. All they need is an email address and a Facebook account and everyone they know can snicker at them. Our vicarious sensibilities have been displaced onto everyone and everything rather than just those individuals that corporate media deem publicly fair game for ridicule. Although I still wonder when we're just going to give it all up and start living our own lives.

Though the Gordon Lightfoot incident does ruin my plan to Tweet "Robb Johannes is dead" as a publicity stunt. What would The Boy Who Cried Wolf say to all of this?

"Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story." - Bob Whitaker

Since When is Not Eating Meat an Act of Defiance?

2010-02-04T06:52:00.000-08:00

Rebellion is only tolerated to the degree which it will not challenge established thought patterns and ways of life. Thus, not making it "rebellion" at all.

****

I'm vegan. A vegan is someone who does not eat meat and/or animal products. Prior to recently becoming vegan, I was vegetarian for 10 years. A vegetarian is someone who does not eat meat. And yes, "meat" includes fish. I have no idea where that delusion comes from. A pescetarian is someone who still eats fish. I used to prefer to use the term "hypocrite," but these days I don't think that's entirely fair.

Living in Vancouver for a long time, I found a very veggie-friendly community, covering the broad spectrum of vegan, vegetarian, pescetarian, and tourist. A "tourist" is someone who most of us know, or who at least in the context of speaking to a vegetarian, will say, "Yeah, I was vegetarian for 2 years, I couldn't keep it up" (as though every person alive will ultimately fail as they did). Tourists usually are doing it to follow the latest health fad they read about in Shape magazine, or feel that cutting meat out of their diet will help them to lose weight. Well, it will, but if you don't research your decision and learn more about your own biology as a human being, you will develop the stereotypical "vegan" look: rail thin, gaunt, and pasty, or "heroin chic" as it's been sometimes called.

I became vegetarian 10 years ago at a time when it wasn't as "popular" amongst celebrities and, henceforth, non-famous people. It was a struggle because at the time there wasn't quite the same range of vegetarian options in the supermarket (in those pre-Yves days), but because I was doing it for political, cultural, and social (though ultimately personal/ethical) reasons, I held my ground and through learning about daily vitamin and mineral requirements, protein, digit-by-digit alternatives, and just the general and basic requirements to maintaining a healthy body, I was able to successfully transition and have never looked back.

I am surprised and amused that still, after all these years, upon revealing that I am vegan, I am faced with genuinely concerned looks or morcels of fear and/or confusion (as though fear is somehow not entirely of that which we do not yet understand). Of course, the responses are always incidental to being in a dining situation. I'm not one to wear a "Meat is Murder" t-shirt; I keep my dietary choices to myself and don't claim that meat-eaters are morally bankrupt, nor do I need to be lumped in with so-called "activists" who blow up meat factories -- vegetarians like that give the rest of us (vegetarians and activists) a bad name. Vegetarianism is a proclamation of passivity and non-violence. Why would I firebomb your restaurant if I found out the sweet potato fries are cooked in animal fat? Though I must admit, instilling a healthy fear amongst restaurant waitstaff when I drop the "V"-bomb is rather amusing but at least it ensures vegan-friendly dishes and cooking methods. But naturally then comes the classic line: "So... what do you eat then? How do you survive?" Well, for one, I'm honouring a cultural history in India of vegetarianism, where my family has existed for centuries and centuries. Go to certain parts of India, order beef, and get mad or call them "hippies" when they tell you beef's not on the menu. Do it now, I dare you! The assumption that meat is "essential" to a human diet not only discounts an entire nation's history and is, frankly, severely ill-informed and borderline racist, it also dismisses the millions of years that humans lived prior to agriculture and mass production, during which time meat was not a primary source of protein or nutrients in a human diet. Furthermore, if a life had to be taken for consumption, very strict procedures were followed around ritualistic sacrifice, use of the animal, and acknowledging its place in the cycle of life, never seeing it as a means to an end or a pawn in a game of human domination of the planet. Genesis 1:28 isn't necessarily a directive to destroy and exploit all non-human life in the interests of human expansion -- in spite of what some archaic Biblical "scholars" may try to impose.

The thing that throws people for a loop is that they expect me to look like a starving Ethiopian baby because I am vegan and, surprise surprise, I don't. I have muscles, broad shoulders, and a strong cardiovascular system, and do not fit into the preconceived formulas of what people think a vegan looks like, and the over-dependence we have on animals and animal products in our day-to-day diet. I eat very well, have developed an even greater appreciation of diverse ethnic foods in light of not being able to rely on simple meat and potatoes. More so, pretty much everyone I know absolutely loves coming over for a home-cooked vegetarian meal, meat-eaters or not, usually saying, "Wow, if I ate like you guys (meaning my wife and I), I could totally be vegetarian." Thus we face the reluctance to become vegetarian on the ground of, "I like the taste of meat too much." My response, always: "Give me an hour and your favourite recipe and I'll make a vegetarian version that will satisfy you equally, if not more, especially in the long-term. It's not the actual meat itself that you like the taste of, it's the spices, the seasonings, and the treatments -- you can make anything taste the way you want it to if you cook it properly. And your B-12s, proteins, and irons can be easily supplemented without having to pop a million pills."

Whilst I normally try to explain the massive range of wonderful food options I have available to me as a vegan, I am often received with glazed eyes and judgment (and frankly, I get kind of bored of answering the same three questions over and over again -- and do you really care why I stopped eating meat when you live under a worldview that treats anyone who does not as a malcontent and only tolerates "rebellion" until it actually forces you to introspect and examine your own patterns of thought and way(s) of life?)... so, I'm pondering just stopping the sugar-coating, cutting to the chase, and saying: "A vegan is someone who does not eat meat or animal products. Humans, on the other hand, don't fit into that category because modern science, philosophy, and religion have taught us that we are in a class above animals. So, as a vegan, I get my protein from a freezer full of unsuspecting murdered Catholic school boys. But I'll call it 'soy' if that's more PC."

Though I suspect that would probably alienate people (and vegetarians/vegans are already marginalized enough socially). Keeping the open invitation to dialogue open is, as it always has been, the way to go. Such as asking the question to meat eaters: "What is it about my vegetarianism that offends you so much? Why does it mean so much to you to eat meat that you feel the need to ostracize me, or try and pick apart every so-called 'inconsistency' in my point of view or way of life?" Do I come up to you and say, "If you're not gonna eat human flesh, you may as well not bother eating meat at all"? No, I don't, because I'd be a jackass if I did and you'd never hold a conversation with me at a party. Yet, it's perfectly fine coming from the other side, and you wonder why I may walk away after a few minutes (and then it's me who's the asshole?). Frankly, eating meat is just as much of an ethical standpoint as not eating meat; it's just not seen as such because meat-eating is the "conventional" practice in this culture. Lest we begin a discussion of rebellion, counter-culture, necessity and deviance, and other concepts too grand to comprehend in a 140 character Tweet.

So come chat with me next time you see me. I promise I won't bite (like a good vegan). I may nibble though.

"Don't criticize what you can't understand." - Bob Dylan

"Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." - Winston Churchill

** Please note that the point of view expressed here is that of one vegan in a band of 3/4 meat eaters.

Robb's Favourite Albums of the Decade (2000-2009)

2009-12-23T15:28:00.000-08:00

So I've started to realize that the decade has ended, and it feels like a relative non-event (seriously now, without the scare of Y2K, what could possibly be a more amusing follow-up rollover?)... Given my lack of religion, the holiday season is generally what I call my R&R time and I've taken a few moments to put together a list of 25 of my favourite albums that were released in the first 10 years of the new century:

1. Air Traffic - Fractured Life
2. Bright Eyes - Lifted (Or the Story is in the Soil, Keep Your Ear to the Ground)
3. The Cure - Bloodflowers
4. The Dandy Warhols - 13 Tales From Urban Bohemia
5. Dawntreader - Santa Fe Stalker
6. Editors - The Back Room
7. Elbow - Leaders of the Free World
8. The Februarys - Brighter Side of Things
9. The Feminists - She Could Be
10. Ben Folds - Song for Silverman
11. Green Day - American Idiot
12. David Gray - Lost Songs 95-98
13. Idlewild - The Remote Part
14. Idlewild - Make Another World
15. In Medias Res - Of What Was
16. Jet - Shine On
17. The Killers - Sam's Town
18. Michael Franti & Spearhead - Stay Human
19. Modest Mouse - Good News For People Who Love Bad News
20. Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - Nocturama
22. Oasis - Don't Believe the Truth
22. Pearl Jam - Pearl Jam
23. Sleater-Kinney - The Woods
24. Wilco - Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
25. Hawksley Workman - Lover/Fighter

...of course I'm surely missing several but that's what a first scan of the record shelf has brought me. Perhaps best concert experiences should be another list to consider. But for now, that's all she wrote.

Love and rockets,
Robb

Video Kills?

2009-11-30T06:45:00.000-08:00

Well hello, my cheeky wee monkeys (credit due to Craig Ferguson)... yesterday we shot the video for "Don't Blow Me Away" at a circus school in Toronto. We all have hidden talents we never knew of, most notably Marcus' ability to hula-hoop like Shakira. And of course, bets were on the table as to how quickly I'd have to be taken to Toronto East General Hospital for climbing and swinging from trapeze equipment in breath-holding capacities. Sadly for those with money on the table (but happily for me and my flesh and bones), no one was injured. Even when I belted Mandy with a Swiss ball as she attempted curtain acrobatics. Even Chris got up from behind the drumkit and took a few stage dives. I know, it's only rock 'n' roll....

It's an interesting time in the midst of the YouTube generation; whereas previously bands needed major label support and, consequently, wads of cash, just to produce a video -- let alone have it played on network television, or seen at all. Now, anyone with a video camera can upload a video to a YouTube or Vimeo channel, and potentially get a million plays. And why not? It's not as if MTV or MuchMusic actually play music videos anymore. At the same time, it increases the amount of noise to be filtered through (as do sites like MySpace), which can be overwhelming and translate into apathy. But for those so inclined, it's all part of the fun digging up some gold nuggets -- like hitting up a used record store and not realizing that what you find may change your life.

We have out last two shows of 2009 this week. it's been the busiest and thus far most rewarding year in Paint's life, and I attribute it almost entirely to Mandy, Marcus, and Chris for making it feel, perhaps for the first time, like a band, with every synergistic piece in place... if the world doesn't explode in 2010, I'd say it only goes straight up from here.

Best to you and yours,
Robb

"Shut Up and Scream"

2009-08-17T10:41:00.019-07:00

When the CBC interviews a passing Hamilton steelworker on the sidewalk on their opinions of same-sex marriage, do viewers say "Shut up and go to the plant"? When CNN visits a Carolina housewife to ask her what her views on Roe v. Wade are, do viewers tell her to "Shut up and tend the house"? Generally not -- because the steelworker and the housewife are citizens of the democratic nations in which they live, just like everyone else; they account for part of the populous. In a system of democracy, politicians do not have a monopoly on the right to speak on political issues (though they've tried to drill that into citizens' heads for generations). Rather, their purpose is to voice what the constituents they represent feel is important to them.

So why is it that when a musician takes a political stance that so many onlookers so quickly say "Shut up and sing" as though somehow an artist is less of a citizen than the plumber or the doctor? Seemingly the days of Leonardo and Michelangelo, the great artists and philosophers (who were also commercially-viable entities) have long been erased, or romanticized, in Western consciousness as relics of an age passed when art was far from commodity, and artists themselves were often the first to comment and observe cultural and political dynamics; their cultural criticism was held in high regard for its unconventional wisdom and insight.

Admittedly I'm the first to cringe when anyone speaks publicly on sensitive political issues, musician or otherwise, because of the stakes involved in advancing the position amidst generalized public perception. However, I can't help but wonder what it is about musicians specifically that warrants "Shut up" calls from onlookers with so much more frequency. Rush Limbaugh and Michael Stipe are both in the business of entertainment, so why should one's political stance be elevated over the other's due to their so-called "legitimate" claim to speak on political issues. One wears a tie, the other has a mic stand -- they're both still citizens.

Historically speaking, art (and music in particular) has been intricately connected to political resistance and counter-revolution, from the days of slaves passing esoteric messages of liberty through song, to Bob Dylan delivering messages of change through folk songs, to Public Enemy warning us to "Fight the powers that be." Artistic revolution is almost inherently politically subversive; it becomes a catalyst, or a subsidiary of cultural change which does not bode well for those invested in, or standing to benefit from, the maintenance of the status quo. Fittingly, any artist, like any other citizen, would be demonized for challenging the dominant political position -- it is merely the relationship between art and powerful cultural revolution that inspires a more heightened opposition to their voice.

I highlight that an artist who challenges convention, for the right-leaning Arnold Schwarzeneggers and Ronald Reagans of the world are rarely instructed to "Shut up and act." Yet, the left is constantly at war with its public image and the legitimacy of its position when art and artists go political.*

Few words have ever rung more true than Joe Strummer's adage: "You have the right to free speech, unless you're dumb enough to actually try it!"

Bigger cages, longer chains?

Should artists "Shut up and sing," or "Stop whispering, start shouting" -- as any citizen in a democratic system is entitled to, whether we agree with their position or not?

Be well,
Robb

* An obvious exception to this would be Peter Garrett of Midnight Oil, who is now Australia's Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts -- but Australia has proven again and again to be the progressive black sheep of so-called "Westernized" nations.

A Distant History....

2009-07-30T10:28:00.011-07:00

Well, I must say it's been quite the journey seeing all of our photo archives up on Flickr. To think that Paint as we know it is the product of so much refinement over years of, at best, sporadic communion and the slow process of trimming and narrowing the vision... it feels like the 2009 lineup here in Toronto has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the first one of 2001 in Vancouver. I know the one thing that's probably changed the most is me from the humble beginnings of Paint as a folk-based political entity when I was 18, to the introduction (cheered along by Matt Laforest) of vintage tube amps, distortion pedals, screaming electric guitars, and a general "wall of sound" more true to my inner noise... Maybe it's not such a bafflement after all when I take the journey Paint has gone through in tandem with my own personal journey into adulthood: the band in its various incarnations represents different stages in my young life, like choosing awful outfits and hairstyles; attempting to tease out existential questions like, "What's it's all about?"; seeing the inside of some of North America's harshest and most violent prisons and urban settings as a social activist; and, ultimately, stumbling through most of it with the assistance (or crutch) of whatever easy cure I could get my hands on -- and now through the lens of clear eyes and commitment to my wife and what is, in the inner circle, referred to as "Paint Toronto."

Can You Hear Me? is a loud record, yes, but so basic in its melody and structure. I doubt there are more than 6 chords on the entire album. As much as I wish this sound and vision had been discovered right off the bat, I hardly doubt I would appreciate it as much, or feel that I earned it, had I not gone to hell and back to see it become what it is now... Enjoy the photos!

All my relations,
Robb Johannes

A few Inches....

2009-06-25T12:57:00.002-07:00

Not referring to the size of Luke's penis (although admittedly we did have to sit him on a booster seat and put him right up front in our recent press photos to make him look like a regular-sized human). The new record, Can You Hear Me?, was shipped off yesterday to the pressing plant for hard copy CDs, and the day before for mythical digital distribution... We're very excited. Although I've not slept in nearly a month now, pouring hours into the album artwork, layout, and overseeing the last few inches... It'll be worth the wait. I assure you.

In the meantime, we await for the end of the garbage strike in Toronto -- never is a statement more clear of how badly citizens need a service than having to smell uncollected waste melting in the humidity of the first days of summer. Part of me hopes it goes on forever to remind everyone just how significant such workers are, but at the same time my lungs are probably telling me to quarantine myself.

Garbage and a new record. We wait for them all....

Our new record will make you deaf

2009-04-19T16:21:00.003-07:00

Well, hello.... so, it's been quite a process making this new record (which is likely to be called Can You Hear Me?). It was initially something that began as a demo which I was going to take with me to Toronto to shop around to labels and have something to pass along to musicians to form a Toronto chapter of the band while Matt, Paula, and I kept writing songs together. After playing back the dailies of the first couple days at Maximus Sound, however, there was a sonic character to first couple bed tracks (I believe it was "A Gentle Art" and "An Evening to Myself" but I could be wrong on the latter) which captured the energy we had been pouring into the songs as we wrote and performed them in and around Vancouver... So, the nucleus of a new record was born and we approached the remainder of the sessions with that general mindset.

We tracked and tracked for about two months, during which time I got married(!) and started to get things organized to move to Toronto. I think two days after I laid down my final vocal, I was on a one-way plane out of Vancouver with no furniture, no money, no set plans -- just a beautiful wife, a bunch of guitars and records, and a safety in knowing that if the plane went down, my last vocal tracks were on Claude Laforest's hard drive!

After the New Year, we shipped the tracks to EchoPlant Sound, where Ryan Worsley finished a few vocal tracks with Paula and went straight into mixing.

Mixing long-distance is strange; every record I'd played on up to this point usually involved everyone in the band sitting in the studio with the engineer for days and weeks hammering it out. This time, Ryan would mix a song in Vancouver, email it to me in Toronto, I'd make notes, pass the notes and songs along to Matt and Paula in Vancouver, they'd add their two bits, we'd send it all to Ryan, and he'd go back and work on the songs again. Every song has been fully mixed three times now, a couple (like "After") have had a couple extra passes.

As we're now in April, it seems like all the songs, shy of a few small tweaks, are done. All I can say is, "Wow," and "Holy freaking f*ck, these songs are LOUD!"

Of course, it's easy to lose perspective on things when you're totally hoiled up alone listening to mixes -- so the songs have been let loose on a few close colleagues to make sure that everything sounds as great as we think it does, and affirm that we're not losing our minds.... THEN, and only then, will mixing be complete.

But that doesn't mean it's over then by any stretch; there's still artwork, mastering, packaging, etc., etc., and the new lineup in Toronto has to get out and start rocking the faces off audiences.

Though you might like to know all this in the meantime.

Love,
Robb

What a drummer SHOULD look like....

2009-01-18T17:31:00.005-08:00

Alas, Matt Laforest has reverted back to his original Homo Habilis state now that I'm not around to class him up every few days.... Please send him sympathy, pretty soon he'll be receiving government benefits. The definition below says it all: "Handy Man."

Homo habilis (pronounced /ˈhoʊmoʊ ˈhæbəlɪs/) ("handy man", "skillful person") is a species of the genus Homo, which lived from approximately 2.5 million to at least 1.6 million years ago at the beginning of the Pleistocene.^[1] The definition of this species is credited to both Mary and Louis Leakey, who found fossils in Tanzania, East Africa, between 1962 and 1964. Homo habilis is arguably the first species of the Homo genus to appear. In its appearance and morphology, H. habilis was the least similar to modern humans of all species to be placed in the genus Homo (except possibly Homo rudolfensis). Homo habilis was short and had disproportionately long arms compared to modern humans; however, it had a reduction in the protrusion in the face. It is thought to have descended from a species of australopithecine hominid. Its immediate ancestor may have been the more massive and ape-like Homo rudolfensis. Homo habilis had a cranial capacity slightly less than half of the size of modern humans. Despite the ape-like morphology of the bodies, H. habilis remains are often accompanied by primitive stone tools (e.g. Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania and Lake Turkana, Kenya).

Homo habilis has often been thought to be the ancestor of the lankier and more sophisticated Homo ergaster, which in turn gave rise to the more human-appearing species, Homo erectus. Debates continue over whether H. habilis is a direct human ancestor, and whether all of the known fossils are properly attributed to the species. However, in 2007, new findings suggest that the two species coexisted and may be separate lineages from a common ancestor instead of H. erectus being descended from H. habilis.

Studio Studio Studio!

2008-11-19T18:19:00.003-08:00

You're probably wondering why you haven't heard a peep from us in a month. Well, we've been in the studio! Of course, this wasn't an easy task given that Matt and Paula both couldn't stop comparing penis sizes and whipping each other with their respective members... But it's all good now -- we didn't even have to bring in Phil Towle -- and we're tracking 8 songs at Maximus Sound. I've posted a photo album at our myspace if you're interested (see the links to the right).

Proud to be a Canadian?

2008-10-14T21:52:00.003-07:00

Today, the minority Conservative government proved that political opportunism in the attempt to gain a majority government did nothing but waste $300 million of Canadians' money. After all is said and done, we are left with another minority Conservative government, hardly a scratch beyond what Stephen Harper and his cronies did in 2006 -- shamefully after criticizing the Liberal Party for frivolously calling more elections than necessary without fixed election dates and lobbying the change Canada's Elections Act to have fixed 4-year election dates. Hardly 2 years from their last "victory" of a minority government, Harper called the 4th Canadian election in the last 6 years -- a time lapse which would normally have been witness to just ONE election. Beyond that, voter turnout was 57% this year, which is all-time low, surpassing 60.4% in 2004. Granted, I tend to share Matt's sentiments that not voting at all is completely irresponsible, however, I can't help but feel that Canadians have been made to feel like voting in an election is a waste of time -- I disagree with that, but the results of this election prove that this particular effort was indeed a waste of time, and most importantly (sorry if I'm spouting out this number again) $300 MILLION FUCKING DOLLARS which could have easily been used for housing, food, shelter, drug treatment, health care, and other basic necessities which Harper and his government have proven time and time again that they do not care about. The only consultation for me in this election is that they are once again a minority, and do not have free reign to tun Canada into an elitist empire. And for that, we can only be grateful. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and put my head in the toilet.

Rock The Vote

2008-10-03T00:25:00.002-07:00

On October 14th, Canadian readers have the opportunity, if not an obligation, to vote in our Federal election. If you're eligible, vote. Plain and simple. Not voting is both a disservice to you, but also to your country (as cliched as that sounds).

I, myself am voting later today in the advance vote due to the fact that I will be travelling on election day.

The core of this blog "rant" is that there is an increasing amount of apathy among first time or young voters. In short, educate yourself on the issues and ask questions. If I hear one more person say to me "Voting doesn't accomplish anything" or "I don't know anything about the election, therefore there's no reason to vote", I am going to fucking hurt someone. If you choose not to vote, please spare me the bitching and moaning about high tuition, your environmental issue du jour, the Olympics and the price of gas (to name but a few).

I myself am torn as to who to vote for. You might think that not voting is your big fucking political statement. To you I say...grow the fuck up! There are choices you can make at the polls that will reflect your distaste for the political landscape. Those choices will make a difference.

Not voting is suffocating your own voice. P. Diddy had it right when he said "Vote or die". So get out an vote.

You sexist pigs

2008-09-29T23:04:00.002-07:00

Obviously Matt and Robb are picking on me because they're just jealous that my penis is bigger than both of theirs, and that the only people i've shown it to are the bass players that don't work out. I know they want to see it, but the most they'll get is that bulge down by the bottom hem of my jeans.

Little Book of Scottish Folklore

2008-09-29T19:00:00.017-07:00

So, apparently Matt feels that I unfairly made him come across as anti-Scottish when I said on stage that he referred to Scotland as a "colony of retards." I will admit that this was unfair on my part, mostly because I did not give the context under which that statement was made. Matt claims that he wasn't saying he hated Scottish people; rather, he was saying that he hated Paula. So let me give you the entire dialogue as best as I remember it, and let you be the judge:

Paula: There's this documentary out, I don't remember the name, but it's about this isolated colony in the Northern UK that's inhabited by, and entirely run by, handicapped people.

Matt: I heard about that too.

Paula: Oh yeah?

Matt: Yeah, it's called Scotland.

...so, as you can see, Matt was clearly taking a shot at Paula and the one-fifth or so of her that is Scottish, and not at Scottish people in general (insert sarcasm here). Needless to say, it still won us a bunch of British fans.

Feel better, Laforest?

On a semi-related note, we have been auditioning bass players lately. In the meantime, our fill-in approach has been working wonderfully. The problem that we have with keeping bass players full-time, however, is that either Matt keeps subjecting them to his "Eau De Wrath" or Paula keeps sleeping with them. So we've decided to audition bassists who my gay-dar tells me aren't into women -- which means we only have to worry about Matt throwing drum sticks and other random bits of machinery at them in rehearsal (oh, and me trying to sleep with them if it's a Sunday).

But seriously though, Matt and I were at a party to launch Ryan Worsley's EchoPlant Studios over the weekend, where Colin Bales, the bassist in Dawntreader, remarked that he thought Paula was, "like a rock groupie who got lucky and actually joined the band." Although I had just finished asking Dawntreader how much longer they were going to replace Matthew Thomas with a male vocalist, Matt (Laforest) and I didn't much appreciate someone in another "band" talking ill of our bandmate. Remember, we can say all we want about one another, but if some outsider cuts us down, well, that's grounds for a monster beating.

So Matt and I dragged Colin's sorry ass down the hill and curbstomped him in front of his wife.

Canadians: remember to vote on October 14.

My turn!

2008-09-02T18:34:00.002-07:00

Okay, hello my pretties! ...so, as Matt so kindly alluded to, I have been moving lately. Downsizing a little as well; I left with my record collection, guitars, laptop, and alcohol collection. I've been collecting bits of furniture, but nothing significant aside from a mattress and a blanket. I'm going for a very minimalist zen thing these days -- although I certainly make up for it with my diva selection of hair products! Was it not Al Pacino playing Satan in The Devil's Advocate who said, "Vanity: my favourite sin!"... regardless, I spent the long weekend doing a lot of writing! (this in response to Matt's previous post -- wait till we start going Gallagher bros.) -- some song titles in progress so far are:

After
We Are Not What They Are Wanting to Hear
Go to Sleep
Madonna

Yes, "Madonna" is an old, old Paint song for the faithful among you, but it's been completely re-written into a much more refined song -- kudos to Matt and Paula for their new energy and musical insight into all things Paint!

...more are being written still, and to reiterate what Matt wrote, they will all be debuted at the September 19th gig -- and don't forget about the radio spots earlier that week, where you can also get previews of the new tunes on radio or "internet podcast land" as Ben Lai at CiTR would say.

Ai'ite.

Bring The Noise

2008-08-12T16:25:00.003-07:00

Alright Paint fans. Buckle up. We're getting noisy. We've been busy writing (well, the music anyways. Robb is too busy moving to write lyrics) and rehearsing. We have 5 new songs and they sound quite nice. I'd love to let you in on song titles, but that too falls into Robb's category. Let's just call them "Untitled 1 through 5". We'll be debuting these songs and hopefully more new ones at our gig on September 19th. Bring your earplugs!

Oh...and I guess I better educated Paula about good music. Sublime and the term good music have never been in the same sentence together (with the exception of this one). Sublime = talentless whining drug addict.

Don't remind me...

2008-07-27T15:51:00.001-07:00

So I was thinking to myself if we do concerts for our families in school singing and playing their classic songs from their day and age, will our children be singing and playing Brittney Spears and 50 Cent for us someday? I hope not. I will swear an oath right now to educate my future children on good music. I will tell them about The Kinks, Sex Pistols, Cream, Pink Floyd, Sublime, AC/DC etc... I grow old to forget about the shit pop culture we have right now. I don't want my kids reminding me of it at the annual Christmas concert singing Jessica Simpson carols.

"But he loves you...."

2008-06-23T00:42:00.002-07:00

We lost a shining star today. George Carlin passed away at the ripe age of 71 today. Nothing could be said about him more than the genius he exudes in this clip:

"Religion is Bullshit" by George Carlin.

The sun is on you, my friend.

Our Nation of Hypocritical Ritalin-Pushers

2008-05-29T20:00:00.003-07:00

This is an interesting little bit of transcript from the Canadian Parliament proceedings this week between Libby Davies, New Democratic Member of Parliament for Vancouver East, and Tony Clement, Conservative Health Minister...

Davies: Mr. Speaker, yesterday B.C.'s Supreme Court decision makes it abundantly clear that Insite, the supervised injection facility in east Vancouver, is a health facility. The ruling also makes it clear that closing Insite would be "inconsistent with the state's interest in fostering individual and community health and preventing death and disease". Can the Minister of Health assure the House today that his Conservative government will abide by the court's decision and not appeal this important case.

Clement: Mr. Speaker, I am not in charge of appeals. That is the Minister of Justice. But I can say to the House that on this side of the House at least we are disappointed with the judgment. We disagree with the judgment. We are, of course, examining our options and I would say to the House that we on this side of the House care about treating drug addicts who need our help. We care about preventing people, especially our young people, from becoming drug addicts in the first place. That is our way to reduce harm in our society and we are proud of taking that message to the people of Canada.

Davies: Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Health claims that he cares about people who use drugs and the issues they face, then he will respect the decision of the court. The medical, scientific and now legal conclusions just could not be any clearer. Insite is a life-saving facility and harm reduction is an essential component of Canada's drug strategy. When will the minister put aside his personal ideological position, respect the court's decision and get to work on changing Canada's drug laws to allow access to health facilities such as Insite? When is he going to do that? He is taking too long.

Clement: Mr. Speaker, it is a bit rich for the member from the New Democratic Party to start lecturing us on ideological positions. That is its bread and butter over there, but we on this side of the House are here for public policy. We are here to help our kids, prevent them from getting on drugs in the first place. We are here to help addicts.

...it is amusing to hear Mr. Clement talk about keeping kids off of drugs for the obvious reason, that being the always cheap political tactic to use fear-based emotional strategies aimed at paternalism towards helpless children. The other, more significant point of amusement is that until 2006, Mr. Clement held a 25% stake in Prudential Chemical Inc., a pharmaceutical company.

This is ironic because pharmaceutical companies can be the most oppressive drug pushers in the world, who particularly prey on vulnerable children. For example, over three million people in America are currently being prescribed Methylphenidate (Ritalin). This coincides with massive diagnoses of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), which can be mis-diagnosed on children who exhibit regular behaviours for their age group. Propaganda campaigns claiming that 20-30% of children in America have ADHD are simply a means of spreading fear amongst parents and teachers, and subsequently, selling more Ritalin.

Richard DeGrandpre, author of Ritalin Nation, says that "Ritalin is little more than coke for kids." Furthermore, Nora Volkow and colleagues at Brookhaven National Laboratory, in the Archives of General Psychiatry in 1995, found that "Cocaine has pharmacological actions that are very similar to those of methylphenidate [Ritalin], which is the most commonly prescribed psycho-tropic medication for children in the United States."

We find ourselves in Canada talking about a "war on drugs," and taking an abolitionist standpoint on illicit drugs that are used by people suffering some socio-economic poverty -- meanwhile, the same Health Minister who has this ill-informed view while fully supporting pharmaceuticals, which prey on the fear of parents but do appeal to a more affluent, upper-class demographic. Could it be possible that the "war on drugs" is really just another attempt by the wealthy to keep an "undesirable" segment of the populous under control?

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Health really care about helping addicts, would he rather support a system that creates prescription-drug addicts?

NOTE: As far as I can from searching their product listing, Prudential does not deal in Methylphenidate. And of course, ADHD is properly diagnosed in many cases, and Ritalin has indeed been helpful in those cases.

No longer a Paint virgin

2008-05-24T22:45:00.002-07:00

Oh boy, so exciting, my first blog on the site!
Hey all, i'm Paula de Balla.
All in all, i'm quite happy with how stuff went down at the radio show and at the backstage lounge. However, I'm just a little disappointed that the sound on the radio show was better than the sound on stage at the backstage. I guess that's what you get without a sound check though.
If you want to check out the radio show, go to cjsf.ca and check the archives for May 20th "Melodies in Mind".
You'll get a few cracks at Matt (box man), and get a preview of a new song of Paint's, "Strangers".

I swear i'm more interesting in person.

Anyway, i'm off for some raspberry hukkha.

Fear and Loathing in Victoria?

2008-05-16T22:11:00.004-07:00

Since I'm sure it's burning in your loins, I'll confirm the rumours: that was indeed me on the CBC ten days or so ago talking about the University of British Columbia (UBC)'s letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper encouraging him consider scientific research on Insite, North America's only supervised injection site (based in Vancouver), rather than taking a moralistic, law-and-order stance on drug use in Canada. Okay, that wasn't exactly their recommendation, but that was essentially the stance I took (conjecture perhaps, but I think it's really just semantics).

In June 2003, Health Canada granted the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority (VCHA) an exemption under Section 56 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) to establish Insite under an umbrella of a scientific research pilot project in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (for a list of FAQs on Insite, go here).

Twenty-two peer-reviewed studies have been published by the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS (in conjunction with UBC researchers), in journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine, the British Medical Journal, the Canadian Medical Association Journal, and even The Lancet. A snapshot of the results indicate that Insite has led to an increase in intake into detoxification and treatment; a 70% decrease in needle-sharing (which has been a leading cause in epidemic rates of HIV and Hepatitis C infection in the Downtown Eastside -- as high as 85% for Hep C and 40% for HIV); and most significantly, ZERO deaths due to overdose (a more extensive summary of research results can be viewed here). Despite the overwhelming evidence that Insite has been successful, consistent with the use of supervised injection sites across Europe, the Harper government continues to rely on fear-mongering and reductionist tactics, using sensationalistic portrayals of drug addicts as violent, sporadic, and criminally-inclined. Consequently, the Section 56 exemption is set to run out on June 30.

On Wednesday, May 21, a bus-load of drug users and community supporters (of which I am one) will be going to Victoria to sit in on the British Columbia Legislative Assembly, where Vancouver-Mount Pleasant New Democratic MLA Jenny Kwan will be making a motion to keep Insite open as a medical health facility in the Provincial jurisdiction, thus taking it out of the hands of the Harper government and its inadequacies. This is a noble effort on part of the provincial government, and something the local community is excited to throw their support behind.

Vancouverites can hop on at 380 E. Hastings at 8 a.m. on the 21st, Victorians, see you there at 11!

Jetlag

2008-04-20T10:36:00.002-07:00

Hi. I'm Matt. I play drums in Paint. I probably won't contribute too much to this blog, but as I sat here on this sunny Sunday morning, I thought I'd share my thoughts on jetlag. This is mainly due to the fact that I am still trying to figure out what fucking time zone I'm in. I was in Toronto (centre of the universe and smog capital of Canada) for a week and returned home to Vancouver on Friday. Obviously, I was conscious of jetlag, but thought that I could buck it. WRONG!!! I'll just have to make do and walk around in permahaze until this shit passes.

Obviously, this is deep subject matter, especially from a drummer. Calm yourself. My next blog will be about drool...

The Housing Crisis in Vancouver is now a Human Rights Violation

2008-04-14T15:01:00.006-07:00

Article 25(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

We have a tendency to look at crises in housing as "Third World" problems, however, we are dealing with epidemic levels of HIV and Hepatitis C infection, social exclusion, and poverty right in our backyard in the ten-block radius known as Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Botswana has an adult HIV prevalence rate of 24.1%, the second highest in the world after Swaziland. In the Downtown Eastside, the HIV rate grew from 4% in 1992-1993 to 23% by 1998. It's now sitting around 18.6%. The reduction may be partly due to harm reduction initiatives in Vancouver, including the opening of North America's first safe injection site (Insite) in 2003.

In response to epidemics such as this, the Pivot Legal Society, the Impact on Community Coalition, and the Carnegie Community Action Project is officially filing a Human Rights complaint to the United Nations, arguing that the City of Vancouver has breached Article 25(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Since winning the 2010 Olympic bid in 2003, the City has converted or closed more than 1000 single room occupancy (SRO) beds through loopholes that allow tenants to be evicted while landlords carry out renovations to buildings. The City has purchased 17 SRO hotels, promising that they will be dedicated to social housing. This is, however, only 20% of the stock homes in he neighbourhood. This means as many as 5000 more people who are already on income assistance will end up on the streets by 2010.

Stephanie Levitz of The Canadian Press notes that "In 2006, a UN committee described the state of homelessness and inadequate housing in Canada as a 'national emergency,' and in the fall of 2007, the UN special rapporteur on housing took a two-week tour of Canada and recommended a national large-scale project of social housing" (April 11, 2008).

The complaint will take approximately 18 months to be resolved, just in time for the 2010 Olympic games. In the meantime, however, we are left with a crisis that is still actively displacing individuals and their families -- while the world watches in wait...

We're auditioning bass players

2008-04-11T00:11:00.001-07:00

...if you know anyone who plays bass and may be interested in our music, please refer them to us! Thanks :-)