Twenty for 2012: 16-20

20. Fiona Apple :: The Idler Wheel ...

It doesn't seem possible that it's been 16 years since Fiona Apple announced her presence to the world via a series of both stunning and controversial videos from her debut album Tidal. If you watched much MTV then and were forward enough to think about those type of things, you could be forgiven for believing Fiona Apple would end up being left to the Buzz Bin of history. She was talented for sure but there was something about a scantily clad Apple in the basement of a 70's tract house basement hosting a parent's party from hell that made it hard to believe she was built to last. Time has proven otherwise. In the decade and a half career that has followed Apple has shown herself to be both a careful and daring artist. Careful in that she takes her time. She is more than willing to sit out the cycles of fame in order to produce daring works of art. Four albums in and nary a bad album. Further she might have gone and written her best. As an album The Idler Wheel fills a hole in a genre that has been lacking for many years: the piano driven album. There are many explanations for its decline: Perhaps it is because touring with a piano in tow is cost prohibitive. Perhaps the instrument has just fallen out of favor. Perhaps it's a combination of reasons. I don't know. It's too bad. The piano is a wonderfully rich instrument capable of carrying so many themes and emotions which Apple does here with verve. She uses it to lay all her neuroses, quirks, and fears in one tight offering. It's visceral, raw, and unnerving. It's also a wholly satisfying, if not cathartic, affair.

19. Rose Thomas :: With Love

Although coincidental, it is fitting that Rosie Thomas follows Fiona Apple on this list. Like Apple, Rosie Thomas is reviving the piano album genre. Like Apple, she's a remarkably honest songwriter. You never have to guess what either of them are feeling at a given moment. They wear their heart on their sleeve for sure. Both are industry veterans who boast a steady (if sometimes slow) output of work. But that's where the similarities end. While Apple is claustrophobic and daunting, Thomas is spacious and free. Where Apple's music can come across as stylistically impenetrable and lyrically jaded, Thomas is sunny and optimistic. Ying and yang if you will. Although this may be counter-intuitive, I find Thomas who is the more daring of the two. I find our time to be one that has rewarded the dark and cynical. There is little risk in venting your anger and frustrations. It might even be expected. What is risky is making an album of irony-free love songs inspired by Bette Midler. Thomas sets herself up to be mocked mercilessly by the cynical taste makers and doesn't seem to care one whit. To me that is risky. And for that reason it might just be the most punk record of the year.

Original Review

18. Sara Watkins :: Sun Midnight Sun

Sara Watkins made a name for herself with the great contemporary bluegrass duo Nickel Creek. Perhaps it was covering Pavement or opening for Wilco but Nickel Creek made it cool to listen to ostensibly traditional bluegrass. Still all things must end as the beand went on indefinite hiatus. While Nickel Creek may have gone on extended elipsis as a group, creative partners Sara Watkins and Chris Thile have been busy. Thile has pursued the slightly more progressive side of the genre with his Punch Brothers project. Watkins, on the other hand, has stretched out her legs and has reclined in the sunnier lands where Graham Parsons lives forever.

Fans of Nickel Creek will be pleased to know Sun Midnight Sun retains some familiar elements. For starters the vocals are the same and once again Watkins showcases her prodigious fiddling skills. There are notable differences though. Here those skills are in service to a much more conventional song structure. If you take away the instrument choices, you are left with songs that are comfortable in any modern genre. (Even if she does stretch it to its breaking point on her blistering take of the Everly Brothers' "You're the One I Love" featuring Fiona Apple on vocals.) Much like Rosie Thomas, Watkins uses her easy going and pleasing voice to guide the listeners through bluegrass romps, country crooning, and campfire sing-alongs. The end product is comforting and rewarding; fitting of Watkins considerable talents as a songwriter and performer.

17. Jon Cleary :: Occapella!

In the words of Jerry Maguire: You had me at Allen Toussaint.

New Orleans blues pianist Jon Cleary is best known for his session work with such heavyweights as Bonnie Raitt, D'Angelo, and Eric Clapton. In between his extensive session work, Cleary has managed to piece together a sizable catalogue under his own name. Although bearing his name, Occapella! is not original material. In his own words Occapella! is Cleary "having fun with the songbook of Allen Toussaint" with "fun" being the operative word. That much is apparent on the funky opener "Let's Get Low Down". Built on Cleary's rollicking piano and steady snare hits, Dr. John and Bonnie Raitt join Cleary for an apotheosis of ace musical veterans at the top of their game and clearly having a good time. The festive and collegiate feeling continues throughout this good times album.

16. The Bad Plus :: Made Possible

It has been said that it is not always clear if The Bad Plus are a piano jazz trio that make rock records or an instrumental rock trio that make jazz albums. (I think it's the former.) In the end it doesn't really matter, especially when they keep making albums this good. Made Possible has also been dubbed their "electronic album" due to the synthesized elements that pepper the work. I think this might be overstating the case as it took me three or four listens to really notice that particular element. The subtlety of that particular sound actually points to the solidity of The Bad Plus's writing. Rather than working with a "I must add something new to shake things up" mentality, they are able to organically weave it into their loose and often skeletal song structures that give a post-punk aesthetic to an ostensibly post-bop genre.

View the Rest of the List: 15-11 | 10-6 | 5-1

Tift Merritt--Traveling Alone

Here is a fun car game for that next long trip: First, pick an area of interest. It could be gothic novels, cartoon characters, television game show hosts. It really doesn't matter. Second, pick four representatives from your area of interest to be the new faces on Mount Rushmore. Instant fun.

Today's area of interest: Queens of Alt-Country.

The first three are probably the easiest: Emmylou Harris, Alison Krauss, and Gillian Welch. They're well known. They have an impeccable body of work. You would be hard pressed to find someone who dislikes any one of them.

Naming that last artist is a bit trickier. Lucinda Williams comes to mind. She could probably earn the spot on the strength of Car Wheel on a Gravel Road alone. We can't forget Patty Griffin. Her gift as a songwriter is well-documented. She has also gotten better on her own right with each passing album. Personally I thought she blew Emmylou Harris off the stage when I saw them play together a couple of summers back. No disrespect to Emmylou, Griffin is just that good. Neko Case's name could legitimately get thrown out there. She too has an impeccable back catalogue and as a bonus is an icon of sorts in the indie world.

These are all good nominees but I offer up to you Tift Merritt. And why not?

The fact that she's not a first balloter alongside Harris, Krauss, and Welch is beyond me. She was poised to be huge. I'm proof positive that she was the right voice that came at the right time to make as broad as splash as the aforementioned artists.

The soundtrack to the film O Brother Where Art Thou? was released in late 2000. Critics and consumers alike loved it. It spawned a roots revival that saw a spike of interest in distinctly American music that had been flying outside of the mainstream for far too long. I too was smitten. And it was the tracks featuring the voices of Harris, Krauss, and Welch that opened me up to the world of modern alt-country. (We'll set aside the question of whether the term "alt-country" is even remotely appropriate for now.) The genre's moment had arrived. I and the rest of the record buying public was ready. So it wasn't a huge surprise to see the debut album by the newest voice in this movement featured in a circular for Best Buy: Bramble Rose by Tift Merritt. I don't recall if I ever listened to it before purchasing it. I probably didn't. She had the right pedigree. (If you like Gillian Welch and Wilco you'll love Tift Merritt.) That was enough for me. It should have been enough for the rest of the nation as well.

Everything about about Bramble Rose and its 2004 follow-up Tambourine made Merritt right for both critical and mainstream success. Those albums were big, bold, and bright. They straddled the line between country and rock. They were catchy but never generically so. You never questioned her accessibility but there was an ineffable authenticity to them that made you feel like you were in the know. Yet mass success never came.

Albums three and four found Merritt pulling back the reigns a bit. Gone was the Memphis soul of "U Turn" and "Stray Paper". Also gone were radio baiting tracks like "Virginia, No One Can Warn You". Another Country and See You on the Moon found Merritt moving to a more introspective place. They turned down the volume for nuanced works tracing the steps of our daily dance between individualism and community, between love and loss, between brokenness and hope. These were the nuanced piece of works that solidified Merritt's place as an artiste. For those of us following her closely we knew she would be around for a long time.

This brings us to Traveling Alone. Traveling Alone is an apotheosis of sorts. Early Merritt was (strangely) compared to Lucinda Williams. Later Merritt has been compared to Emmylou Harris. These comparisons are meant to be complimentary. They're meant to speak to the considerable skill and staying power of Merritt the singer and Merritt the writer. I'd be the first to admit that the Harris comparisons are especially apt these days. In her early days, Merritt's strategy was to blow you out of the room with her voice and rollicking tunes. Today she's someone comfortable and confident enough to seduce you with simply a voice sans diva-like hysteria. The minimalism of "Small Town Relations" would devour a lesser artist. Merritt on the other hand pulls back before stepping forward to assert herself in defiance allowing her carry herself above the carnage of relationships destroying each other. Her willingness to lay herself bare with just an acoustic guitar or piano backing her and devastate us in the process is certainly Emmylou-esque.

This isn't to say Merritt has gone coffee shop on us. Her band is big and powerful. Recorded quickly it captures the immediacy of the live show. "Still Not Home" is probably the most rock-oriented track of her career. Her slight North Carolina twang is about the only remnant of modern alternative country. Beyond that the electric guitar licks and propulsive drums drive the track forward. Early single "Sweet Spot" earns its honor by hooking its way into your ear with a catchy country jangle and sing along feel complete with promises of "looking for that sweet spot" and to "turn the radio on". At a brisk 2:51, it never overstays its welcome but leaves you wanting more in the best way possible.

On the other hand, these comparisons are not fair. Why should Merritt settle on being the next X. Why not let her be the first Tift Merritt. If it was not already clear, Traveling Alone brings it all into sharp focus. Tift Merritt is as brave and bold of a voice in music today, alt-country or otherwise. Traveling Alone deserves your attention.

First Presbyterian Church's Rooted Blog Posts

Rooted is a very exciting program of First Presbyterian Church in Bellingham, Washington that unites the congregation, strengthens families, and deepens its understanding of foundational scripture by studying the same Bible passages as a church family. The Sunday sermons coincide with the children’s Sunday school lessons, and gives opportunities to dig deeper into the Word together beyond Sunday morning.

One way the church has done this is by hosting a blog where members of the congregation reflect on that days readings.


You can follow the blog here.

As a featured blogger for the program you can also find a running list of my contributions below:

11/15/2012--Nothing Basic About It: Joshua 9
11/8/2012--The Blue Parakeet: Judges 4
11/1/2012--We Built this City: Numbers 35
10/25/2012--Consequences: Numbers 20
10/18/2012--The Infinite Forest of Scripture: Exodus 38
10/11/2012--The Glory of the Lord: Exodus 30
10/4/2012--Flame Retardant Suits: Exodus 24
9/27/2012--Graduation Goggles: Exodus 17
9/20/2012--With God on our Side: Exodus 12:29–51
9/13/2012--The Disruptive God: Exodus 8

Election Values: 11–20

Over the last two months, Yale professor and theologian Miroslav Volf has been providing his 20 election values that should guide us when we consider for whom and what we might vote. I'm compiling them here in one easy list. The only thing I changed is formatting and some spelling errors. 

Part One can be found here.

In this year of presidential elections, I decided to summarize key values that guide me as I make the decision for whom to cast my vote. It takes knowing three basic things to choose a candidate for public office responsibly:

1. values we hope the candidate will stand for and the order of priority among them;
2. ways in which and means by which these values are best implemented in any given situation;
3. capacity—ability and determination—to contribute to the implementation of these values.

Most important are the values. As I identified each value, I thought it important to (1) name the basic content of the value, (2) give a brief rationale for holding it, (3) suggest some parameters of legitimate debate about it, and (4) identify key questions for the candidate.

I write as a Christian theologian, from the perspective of my own understanding of the Christian faith. Whole books have been written on each of these values, explicating them and adjudicating complex debates about them. In giving rationale for a given value, I only take one or two verses from the Bible to back up my position, more to flag the direction in which giving a rationale would need to go than in fact strictly to offer a rationale. I have identified some 20 such values. In coming days I will post one a day.

Value #11:

Value: Those who are frail on account of their advanced age deserve our special help. They need adequate medical assistance, social interaction, and meaningful activities. (Humanity of a society is measured by how well it treats those from whom it can no longer expect much benefit.)

Rationale: “A father to the fatherless, a defender of widows, is God in his holy dwelling” (Psalm 68:5). In the contemporary world, “elderly,” arguably, belong to the categories of the “poor” and “widows”

Debate: The debate here is the extent of the responsibility for the wellbeing of the elderly. How much resources should a society set aside for the care of elderly, and what are the best ways to manage those resources.

Question to Ask: What will you do to help honor the elderly and attend to their specific needs?

Value #12:

Value: War is almost never justifiable, and every adequate justification has to show how a particular war is an instance of loving one’s neighbors and loving one’s enemies.

Rationale: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? (Matthew 5:43-44).

Debate: There is a legitimate debate on whether acts of war can ever be a form of love of neighbor and of enemy and, if they can, what kind of action of an enemy is a justifiable cause for a war (rule of a tyrant?) and what kind of conduct of war (drones?) is necessary for war to be just.

Questions to Ask: Has the candidate supported or advocated ending of unjust wars in the past? Has the candidate condemned significant forms of unjust conduct of war?

Value #13

Value: No nation represents an exception to the requirements of justice according to which countries should relate to one another. America should exert its international power by doing what is just and persuading rather than exertion of military power, and should pursue its own interests in concert with other nations of the world.

Rationale: “In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets” (Matthew 7:12).

Debate: The debate should not be whether America is somehow exceptional (and therefore permitted to do what other nations are no, as, for instance, carrying out raids in search for terrorists in other nations). The debate should rather be about what does it mean for the one remaining superpower to act responsibly in the community of nations.

Question to Ask: At the international level, would the candidate renounce double moral standard: one for the U.S. and its allies and another for the rest of the world?

Value #14:

Value: We should never torture.

Rationale: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Luke 10:27); “Love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44).

Debate: There is no debate on this one, at least not a debate that, from my reading of Christian moral obligations, is legitimate.

Questions to Ask: Has the candidate unequivocally condemned use of torture?

Value #15:

Value: Unborn human life, just like fully developed human life, deserves our respect, protection, and nurture.

Rationale: “For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13); “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13).

Debate: There is a legitimate debate about the point at which what can plausibly be deemed human life begins.

Question to Ask: Is the candidate firmly committed to reducing the number of abortions performed?

Value #16: On Healthcare

Value: All people—poor or rich—should have access to affordable basic healthcare, just as all are responsible to live in a way conducive to physical and mental health.

Rationale: “Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness” (Matthew 9:35).

Debate: There is a legitimate debate as to how best to ensure that all people have access to affordable healthcare, but not weather the destitute should or should not be left to fend for themselves when faced with serious or chronic illness. We roughly know what it takes to lead a healthy lifestyle (exercise, minimal intake of sugar, no substance abuse, etc.), but we can and ought to debate most effective ways to help people lead such a lifestyle (for instance, how heavily should the food industry be regulated).

Questions to Ask: Which candidate is more likely to give the destitute effective access to healthcare? Which candidate is more likely to reduce the number of people who need to seek medical help?

Value # 17: Care for Creation

Value: We are part of God’s creation, and we must seek to preserve the integrity of God’s creation as an interdependent ecosystem and, if possible, to pass it on to the future generations improved. Above all, we should not damage the creation by leading a lifestyle marked by acquisitiveness and wastefulness.

Rationale: “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it” (Genesis 2:15).

Debate: Debate here is should be about the extent of ecological damage (for instance, whether or not we are barreling toward a climate apocalypse) and about the appropriate means and sacrifices necessary to preserve God’s creation.

Question to Ask: Which candidate shows better understanding of the ecological health of the planet and has a better track record in preventing devastation of what God has created and pronounced good?

Value #18:

Value: We should honor every human being and respect all faiths (without necessarily affirming them as true).

Rationale: “Show proper respect to everyone” (1 Peter 2:17).

Debate: The debate about relation to other religions should not be whether we should have the *right* to mock what others hold to be holy; we do have that right. At the same time, the debate should not be about whether we have a moral obligation not to make use of that right; we ought not mock what other people hold to be holy. Instead, the debate should be about what the authentic teachings and practices of individual religions are, to what extent the claims of their teachings are true (or false), and in what ways each religion fosters (or hinders) human flourishing.

Question to Ask: Will the candidate promote respect for all religions, including Islam, while at the same time affirming the need for honest debate about how true and salutary they are?

Value #19: On Offenders

Value: Mere retributive punishment is an inadequate and mistaken way of dealing with offenders. We need to find creative ways to reconcile offenders to their victims and reintegrate them into the society.

Rationale: “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation” (2 Corinthians 5:17-19). “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility” (Ephesians 2:14).

Debate: We should debate viable alternatives to incarceration (in the U.S. the highest in the world!) and how best to achieve reintegration of offenders into the society.

Question to Ask: What are you proposing to do to reduce the number of incarcerated people in the U.S.?

Value #20:

Value: Competence, though essential, matters less than character because knowledge, though crucial, matters less than love.

Rationale: “If I … understand all mysteries and all knowledge … but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:2).

Debate: The debate should be about what dimensions of character matter most and what blend of virtues and competencies is most needed at this time.

Questions to Ask: Whom does the candidate strive to be like? To whom does he, in fact, most resemble in character? Will the fear of losing power corrupt him?