Category: Article

  • A River Runs Through Us

    If you follow pop culture’s magic rule of three, then the Mississippi River counts as a bona-fide trend this summer. There’s the promotional extravaganza called the Grand Excursion, and the Minneapolis Institute of Art’s ambitious exhibition, Art & Life Along The Mississippi River, 1850-1861 (which covers the time of the original 1854 Grand Excursion), plus all of their attendant hoopla. On the heels of those events is the July 9 opening of Sleeping by the Mississippi, a series of photographs at the Weinstein Gallery by Alec Soth. This exhibition might not have the grandness of the Excursion or the breadth of Art & Life, but it’s one ripple created by the splash that Soth made in the past year.

    The Minneapolis photographer was one of the standout artists at the 2004 Whitney Biennial this spring; a concurrent show at Yossi Milo, Soth’s New York gallery, satisfied the demand to see (and, of course, purchase) more work from the Mississippi series. There has since been another gallery show in San Francisco, and a book will be published this September.

    What is it about this body of work—forty-five images of people, landscapes, and interiors shot in and around small towns along the river—that struck such a chord with the art world? It’s not just the cognoscenti, it’s thousands of museumgoers eager to see what the Biennial branded as the latest and greatest American art; it’s art directors at major glossy magazines calling to commission a Soth photo shoot. It’s Gerhard Steidl, the legendary German publisher of art and photo books, taking on a relative unknown.

    At the Biennial in particular, which displays the wares of more than a hundred artists, it’s a feat for any work to truly captivate. These ritualistic surveys, regardless of the thematic declarations of their curators, inevitably end up more like a bazaar than an art exhibit, and are just as exhausting to take in. After dozens of galleries filled with sprawling wall paintings, arid conceptual sculptures, videos demanding ten minutes (or more!) of your time, and room-sized installations of psychedelia, Soth’s “straight” photography served as a welcome and earthy respite. The stark, large-format images invited, even demanded scrutiny: a jumpsuited man standing on a roof, holding two model airplanes; the garish green walls and tapestry armchair in an Iowa brothel; a rusting bed frame nearly swallowed by foliage in a swampy backwater. At the Biennial, these were like the wallflowers at a school dance that the guys suddenly found compelling for their freshness and honesty.

    Soth himself has a simple explanation for his work’s reception at that exhibition. He told me, “I think it was popular because it’s accessible.” Fair enough. But it’s possible that viewers also somehow intuited what this series meant to its creator. Finally acting on a long-standing dream, Soth set out to travel south along the Mississippi, with no objective in mind other than to satisfy his own boyish wanderlust. He was also, however, quite consciously following in the tradition of American road photography embodied by Walker Evans and other WPA photographers in the thirties, Robert Frank in the fifties, and William Eggleston, Joel Sternfeld, Robert Adams, and Steven Shore in the sixties and seventies.

    Unlike those artists, however, Soth seeks a kinship with the bohemian figures and eccentrics that he both admires and photographs. “One of the things I love about the river is how, as you follow it from north down south, these different types of personalities emerge,” he says. He admits to being particularly drawn to personalities that reinforce the national narrative about the Big River—the slow decline of this once-glorious economic engine, so essential to the nation’s growth; the shores, small towns, and people that now embody a lost America full of picturesque oddities; a dreamy obsolescence. Certainly Soth didn’t choose to photograph the million-dollar lofts along the Mississippi in Minneapolis and elsewhere. Nor did he take in the riverboat casinos or factories or suburbs or golf courses—all of which his teacher, Joel Sternfeld, with whom he’s often compared, might have photographed had he undertaken a Mississippi River series. While Sternfeld tends to train his lens on the socio-economic landscape, Soth’s sensibility is shamelessly romantic: the artsy, weathered domicile in “Peter’s houseboat, Winona, Minnesota”; the fluorescent glow of a gas station that falls on gravestones in “Cemetery, Fountain City, Wisconsin”; the battered furniture in “Luxora, Arkansas” gathered to create an outdoor living room for vagrants.

    In the forthcoming book, images are edited so that they move from the frigid north in early spring to the blossoming of New Orleans during Lent and Easter. Throughout, beds are among the most overt of themes, with their intimate allusions to dreaming, loving, sex, illness, death, religion, and rebirth.

    Particularly dreamy instances of amateur art, and the art of self-transformation, are another compelling thread: a cartoonish rendering of a headless muscleman’s body drawn on a vivid blue wall; a black-haired figure painted on a sliding glass door. A Mississippi matron poses proudly with her own “photograph of an angel” (as seen in a cloud formation), while a Louisiana prisoner has written “Preacher + Man” on his T-shirt collar. And toward the end of the book, a strapping, bewigged cross-dresser in Easter finery sits primly on a Disney princess bedspread.

    These images all play with a familiar Mississippi River narrative, but they also touch on Midwestern exoticism and the Southern Gothic, and reveal the river itself as the common thread between the two. Ever since Lewis and Clark, and even before, civilized folk on the East Coast have periodically looked westward to renew their surprise and delight at what curious things are to be found in the hinterland: Convicts, preachermen, hookers, wrestlers, all-around oddballs.

    Soth’s romanticism leads him constantly to strike at the tyranny of literalism that plagues photography as a point-and-shoot medium. This body of work is intricately composed, using a cumbersome 8×10 format camera—the old-fashioned type set on a tripod, which requires the photographer to throw a cloth over his head and shoulders. In this regard, Soth is not so much a photographer but a picture-maker, scrupulously manipulating colors, angles, poses, props.
    This is shown to advantage in a work like “Mother and daughter, Davenport, Iowa,” with its amazing contrasts in focus—the clarity of the daughter’s fingernails and cigarette, or the mother’s toes—and the slight blur on legs, feet, fabric. You begin analyzing the poses of arms and legs, and thinking about the conversation that transpired during the long set-up of the camera and the scene it would record.

    Elsewhere, Soth’s eye can become a bit too fastidious, even obsessive. In “New Orleans, Louisiana,” the position of a chair seems so intentional that you want to find the blocking marks taped on the floor. This begins to impugn the rest of the composition: Did the photographer sweep that small pile of detritus into one corner of the image in order to counterbalance the light bulb in the opposite? Similarly, there’s a whiff of heavy-handed staging in “Immaculate Conception Church, Kaskaskia, Illinois”—in the way an old armchair is situated in a brick-walled corner beneath a picture of priest, draped with a gold vestment, with a large, cheap mountain landscape leaning on its side in a doorway. Soth cheerfully admits that the aura of one image would be “ruined” if the viewer knew its “true story.” (He wouldn’t reveal the story, and I won’t reveal the image—and I’m not sure it makes a difference anyway.)

    Soth is probably the last person who could have predicted his good fortune. A few years ago, he was “mister conservative,” a workaday guy tied to his job and hi
    s home, where he helped his wife care for her mother, who lived with them and recently succumbed to cancer. “I was always painfully shy, even in college,” he says, noting that his classmates must be shocked to find that he ended up photographing people.

    Instead of waxing poetic about his vision or his determination, Soth credits his success to good timing and good luck. He received the Minnesota trifecta of artist grants (the Jerome, the McKnight, the state arts board) in relatively quick succession, which brought him attention from Walker Art Center, which in turn led to the Whitney Biennial and the 2003 Santa Fe Prize for Photography. Now that he’s got a post-Biennial bandwagon (something that doesn’t happen to all hundred-plus artists in that show), he’s taking it as far as it will go. “My philosophy is to take advantage of as many opportunities as I can,” he says. “I’m a pragmatic Midwestern boy!”

    There’s a savvy edge to that pragmatism, too. Sleeping by the Mississippi has deep roots in the tradition of American road photography, but Soth is leery of being branded “the Mississippi River guy,” or even the “8×10 format guy.” He notes wryly that in turning in his work for an editorial assignment, the art director was disappointed to see digital images instead of negatives shot with his 8×10 camera: “I was shooting while riding a bike,” he says, laughing. “I was shooting moving vehicles.”

    He’s also chosen to ignore the advice of an art-world “goofball” who urged him to move to New York. “First, that’s cynical,” he says. “Second, I absolutely disagree that as a photographer, you have to live in New York to be successful. Where would photography be if everyone lived there? Look at what that does to other art forms.” But perhaps most important, Soth is well aware that his status as the “exotic Midwesterner” carries a certain amount of mileage with Eastern art and media figures. Why relocate there? Here is where he can be pragmatic and romantic at the same time.

  • Too Much Is Not Enough

    “I am big,” sneered Norma Desmond, the superannuated silent-movie star in Billy Wilder’s mid-century classic, Sunset Blvd. “It’s the pictures that got small.” Today, Ms. Desmond must serve as the patron saint for any number of superstars wondering where the magic went. But now, of course, it’s not just the pictures that have gotten smaller. Audiences have shrunk too, and so has our interest in just sitting back and watching. When we’re not playing videogames, we’re starring in reality TV series. When we’re not starring in reality TV series, we’re blogging. In a world of niche markets and interactivity, it’s almost impossible to be big like Norma Desmond was big, and one day soon, our own disgruntled superstars will descend upon suburban shopping malls and cineplexes with AK-47s blazing.

    But even as the potency of superstardom diminishes, the idea of it remains as tantalizing as ever, and thus I direct your attention to Superstar USA, an anti-talent show that aired on the WB in May and June. A deft amalgamation of Fox’s American Idol and MTV’s Punk’d, eager hopefuls who turned up for the show’s open auditions thought they were participating in a search for the next overnight pop star. Superstar was really on the prowl for karaoke Kevorkians, song-butchers so lethal they could kill classic hits in five notes or less.

    Superstar employed three judges, all closely modeled after their American Idol forebears. Eighties novelty rapper Tone-Loc provided mechanical urban flava in the manner of American Idol’s Randy Jackson. (However, understanding that it is technically impossible to jam more “dawgs” and “a’ights” into a sentence than Jackson does, Loc simply played it cool.) Second-tier pop star Vitamin C was a revelation in the Paula Abdul role of MILFish nurturer: Who knew the woman behind generic hits like “Graduation” and “Smile” was so funny and appealing? Lastly, there was television producer Chris Briggs, an acerbic, leather-clad cad, Superstar’s Simon Cowell.

    Together, this trio dispatched talented performers with hilarious poker-faced viciousness. “I didn’t sense there was the preparation with that song, which is disrespectful to Gladys Knight,” exclaimed Briggs to one singer. “And it’s a little disrespectful to the Pips.” Awful performers, on the other hand, were greeted with equally exaggerated deadpandering. “You made love to that song,” Briggs told a finalist named Tamara after her semi-narcoleptic performance. “You seduced it over dinner. You massaged it. You led it discreetly into the bedroom. You disrobed it. You laid it upon the bed gently. You found a rhythm.”

    No matter how tone-deaf or rhythmically challenged, the performers ate up such praise like Ruben Stoddard attacking a box of donuts. Eventually, twelve finalists were flown to Hollywood to compete for a recording contract and a $100,000 prize. There, they received state-of-the-art celebrity processing (image enhancement, vocal triage, dance lessons, etc.) and engaged in more performances. Rosa, a pretty twenty-two-year-old from Mexico City, sang in a quavering soprano that transformed hackneyed pop lyrics into strangely beautiful Martian poetry. High-kicking, hip-grinding Nina Diva favored costumes that made her look like a hooker moonlighting as an aerobics instructor. Eighteen-year-old Frank, a manorexic clothes-horse from New Jersey, belted out “Survivor” in a nasal monotone while stalking the stage in high heels and flared slacks with fishnet cuffs.

    As I write this in early June, the WB has yet to air Superstar’s final episode, wherein host Brian McFayden reveals the truth behind the show and destroys the visions of superstardom swooshing around inside the contestants’ fame-addled heads. At times, it has seemed like the show is actually a hoax on its viewers, with the contestants in on the gag. After all, could sweetly confident Mario, a cadaverous nerd with the dance moves of a depressed flamingo, really think he had a legitimate shot at international superstardom? Didn’t he have friends or family to give him a reality check?

    In the end, Superstar USA was real: The contestants’ inventive vocal flourishes, performance tics, and singular fashion choices were too off-handed and variegated to have been crafted by some reality-show writer. Which, of course, means that Superstar USA was indeed a pretty mean-spirited enterprise, capitalizing on unsuspecting oddballs, and using predatory editing techniques and off-screen manipulation to exaggerate their haplessness and their hubris. One example: The contestants were apparently told which songs to sing only minutes before their performances, and thus didn’t always know the words. Jamie Foss, a beautifully upholstered blonde from Erskine, Minnesota, met this challenge with can-do aplomb, writing the lyrics on her hand. The producers loved her ingenuity and promised that the cameras would cut away from her whenever she needed to consult her notes. In reality, of course, they zoomed in on her hands repeatedly.

    The idea that people whose aspirations run circles around their abilities deserve to be publicly humiliated for such folly gains currency with each passing TV season. MTV laid the groundwork for this conceit, perhaps inadvertently, with shows like FANatic (crazed fans meet their favorite stars) and Becoming (crazed fans don their favorite stars’ clothes and make music videos). True, these shows were somewhat subversive in relegating superstars to bit-player status and making fans the biggest stars of all.

    Very punk concept in theory, it was often the opposite in practice. As everyday teens interacted with their heroes, the differences were thrown into bold relief. The superstars were beautiful, self-assured, worthy of worship. The fans were awkward, tongue-tied geeks, obvious and unsightly trespassers in the realm of celebrity.

    On Fox’s American Idol, designated dream-killer Simon Cowell explicated the subtextual cues of FANatic and Becoming with bracing clarity. “You’re absolutely dreadful,” he tells aspirants who don’t measure up, because for him, it’s not enough to break bad news, he wants to break spirits too. For American Idol, the old order still holds. A precious talented few belong on stage; the rest belong on Barcaloungers, and they need to know their place. The artistic sanctity of near-gods like Barry Manilow and Elton John must be preserved.

    At Superstar USA, the ruling forces are more attuned to the zeitgeist. They know that talent is just another commodity now. Sure, it may be relatively scarce on a per-capita basis, but in an age where services like iTunes put thousands of songs at your fingertips, it’s still available on-demand. In fact, there’s actually a talent glut: Thousands of expertly styled, technically accomplished Stepford singers are milling around out there who know exactly what’s expected of them and exactly how to deliver it. They’ve studied, they’ve polished, they’re suffocatingly professional. Indeed, how else to explain the popularity of William Hung, American Idol’s own Johnny Rotten, except as the audience’s collective gasp for fresh air? Gently wobbling to “She Bangs,” politely dismissing Simon’s fussy strictures, Hung reminded viewers of Punk Rock 101’s primary lesson: that technique can be oppressive and limiting—an uptight, middle-aged, British-accented drag.

    American Idol remains resolutely married to the idea of talent. In contrast, Superstar USA just wanted to entertain. “Cookie-cutter pop star wannabes with good voices need not apply, because we’re looking for someone different,” declared host McFayden. “There is an infectiousness to these people that’s fun to watch,” said judge Briggs. And however conveniently such sentiments helped to mitigate the show’s inherent sadism, they were also true. If Mario and Nina Diva and all the rest had merely been bad singers, the show would have gotten old fast. What kept it engagi
    ng was their personalities, their unique twists on stale pop-star conventions, their style, and their spirit. Sure, none of the WB’s superstars are likely to go platinum, but for a few weeks in the spring of 2004, they were the most interesting thing on TV—candid, vulnerable, full of enthusiasm and irrepressible confidence. Best of all, they were completely unpredictable.

    They were also pretty disposable, but these days, who isn’t? While Superstar USA drew criticism for exploiting naïve dreamers—the Parents Television Council dubbed it the “ultimate sick joke”—it also poked fun at its own inconsequence in an era where superstars are a dime a dozen and loyal fans are the scarcest resource of all. Indeed, remember who got hired as judges. Tone-Loc was a superstar himself once, going double-platinum on his 1989 debut album. Vitamin C was a viable commodity even more recently, with a platinum album and five Top 40 singles between 1999 and 2001. Both are smart and personable, both have musical talent, and yet despite their successful track records, look where they are now. In her time, Norma Desmond would have been too big to participate in a low-budget, gimmicky reality show that hardly anyone watched, but in 2004, fame’s a bitch, and real-life former icons have to pay the bills somehow. That, perhaps, is superstardom’s cruelest joke of all.

  • Walking the Talk

    Mayor R.T. Rybak was scheduled to deliver the opening remarks at the 2004 Walkable Communities Workshop a few weeks ago, but he must’ve run up against a few obstacles on his way to the Coyle Community Center, tucked into the northernmost corner of Cedar Riverside, near the I-35/Washington Avenue interchange. According to the workshop, such obstacles could include narrow sidewalks, faded crosswalks, construction barriers, or even ugly buildings. And Minneapolis is riddled with these types of liabilities.

    The workshop’s unusually large turnout of enthusiastic walkers—plus a smattering of Metro Transit workers, city planners, community leaders, designers, and a police officer—caused the parking lot to overflow with cars, mini-vans, and SUVs. For my own part, I wedged my little sedan between two dumpsters, rather than parking and walking from two blocks away. I know now what my trepidations were: There are just too many impediments to walkability, like the shattered sidewalk I spotted earlier on Cedar Avenue as I was speeding past the Triple Rock Social Club. No thanks.

    The workshop was led by Deb Spicer and Peter Moe. They are from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking, and they are fluent in the language of pedestrians. “Signage,” “visioning,” and “wayfinding” were favorite words, and they also dwelled on “obesity” for a moment. According to the journal Obesity Research, Minnesota taxpayers fork over $1.3 billion each year to pay for obesity-related medical costs. Spicer said that major contributing factors to the continuing rise in the gross domestic weight are urban sprawl and a transportation system designed for cars rather than pedestrians. This situation, according to Moe, is totally “old-school.”

    Based on old zoning laws, residential areas have been separated from commercial and civic centers. Thus getting to most post offices, schools, and shops requires a fair amount of driving. Moe was enthused about Excelsior Boulevard in St. Louis Park, which was recently renovated. New condos are mixed with ground-level retail sites. He said this is an example of a good new-school community plan. The wider sidewalks, numerous benches, and delightful architecture create an environment that encourages pedestrian behavior.

    This is not the case with Cedar Riverside, where the group went on a “walking audit” to identify “barriers and opportunities.” Even though there were no local business owners in the group, and only two women were from the neighborhood, attendees were willing to offer their thoughts before we even got to the sidewalk: “We need signage!” “That hill is too high. It’s not safe!” “Maybe we can get some pretty, antique-looking lights, ones that arch and hang over the trees.” “Hey, what if that parking lot were turned into a little road?”

    Many believe the light-rail train now running through Cedar Riverside will further boost the neighborhood, which is already viewed as a vital gateway for new arrivals, immigrants, and refugees. According to the walkability group, Cedar Riverside also needs to be an active, safe zone for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. “This is where vision comes in,” said Moe, “an opportunity to turn a space into a place.” We passed in front of a housing complex, an empty lot punctuated by broken chunks of pavement and scrappy, meager landscaping. “Hey, wouldn’t this make a great plaza?” quipped a perky college student. “Maybe we could erect signs in different languages to assist with wayfinding,” said an earnest older woman. —Molly Priesmeyer

  • Wine, wine, wine! Wine from the Hills

    Why do people admire Napoleon? I don’t mean the French—they have reasons of their own for boosting Bonaparte, such as a dearth of more recent political heroes. But what inspires so many ordinary Anglophones in their cloying fascination for the great dictator? It’s not just the sticky puff-pastries and the Napoleon brandy (but what has that to do with Napoleon?), nor the English eccentrics who put In Memoriam notices for him on appropriate anniversaries in what these days passes for the Personal Column of the London Times.

    Something more sinister runs through the websites devoted to Napoleon—dozens of them when last I looked at Google—adulation of a species of power rooted in populism, fed by violence, and dressed in glamour. It would not be fair to condemn Napoleon for his most effusive modern admirer, Bokassa I, former ruler of the Central African Empire. It is said that after he was finally ousted from power, his freezer was found filled with human flesh.

    Napoleon was not that bad. But the dapper little French tyrant forms quite a contrast with his most persistent opponent, that amiable old duffer George III. Maybe “Farmer George” should have noticed sooner than he did that his North American subjects were falling out among themselves—though surely it was equally unreasonable of John Hancock to expect His Majesty to read his signature, however big it was written, from the far side of the Atlantic.

    Of course there were contemporaries who saw through Napoleon. Beethoven withdrew the dedication of his Third Symphony, the Eroica, when Napoleon crowned himself emperor. Dr. Stephen Maturin’s passion for rescuing his native Catalonia from the Corsican corporal inspired him to serve as a surgeon in the Royal Navy and to star in Master and Commander (wonderful film, all those chaps getting really wet). The Duke of Wellington admitted that Napoleon’s hat on the battlefield was worth forty thousand men, but also said (with his customary damning pithiness—Earl Stanhope’s Conversations with Wellington is one of the finest collections of one-liners in the language) that Napoleon was no gentleman.

    It was Wellington’s army’s long campaigns on the Iberian Peninsula (aided by indigenous guerrillas—which is how the word entered English) that slowly wore down Napoleon’s power. The battle that broke the French grip on Spain took place in July 1812 outside the city of Salamanca, halfway between Madrid and Oporto on the coast of Portugal. Skillful use of “dead ground” in the hilly terrain contributed much to Wellington’s victory, but all the same the loss of life was terrible. Seven thousand French and five thousand allies killed and wounded—ten percent of the force.

    The hills near Salamanca have recently begun to produce a very pleasing red wine, which can be had around here for about $10. The makers are called Bodegas Valdeaguila and have been in business only since 2000; their wine is called (appropriately enough) Viña Salamanca. Given a little air it is ripe and fruity, with a pleasantly leafy flavor in the aftertaste. At the center there are tannins which tingle somewhat; they would battle effectively with spicy sausage or a paella laced with pepper. These effects are produced by equal quantities of two grape varieties, the Tempranillo, the grape of Ribera del Duero (north of here) and Rioja, and, less familiar, the Rufete, an endemic variety suited to the long sunny days, cool evenings and low rainfall of the hill country (the rain in Spain, you will recall, falls mainly in the plain).

    Wine, olives, grain, the perennial staples of Mediterranean life—this will go onward the same, though dynasties pass, as Thomas Hardy said. No bad thing, maybe, that a winemaker’s alliance with nature can furnish distraction from man’s misuse of power.

  • Soundtrack to Mary

    When it comes to material possessions, I’m closer to Fred Sanford than Gandhi. I’m moving later this summer and already I’m so tired of hearing everyone say, “Oh, you’re moving—that’s a great time to get rid of all of your stuff.”

    Ummmm, did I say that’s what I wanted to do? I understand the general purge of useless crap that occurs when moving, i.e. old take-out menus in the kitchen junk drawer, dust-covered cat toys that got kicked under the couch during the Clinton administration, or 1999’s tax returns. But I have no intention of parting with everything else and I’m starting to resent the implication that I’m one of those crazy-but-doesn’t-know-it people featured on a Fox 9 Investigates segment about garbage houses—you know, the wingnuts who see nothing wrong with sleeping on an artificial Christmas tree and a pile of used pull tabs. I promise you that in order to answer the phone in my apartment, you won’t need to step over any food product, empty Huggies boxes, or hamster feces.

    The reality is that I will be losing square footage and therefore will have to be more creative and selective about what is on display in living areas and what remains boxed in the basement. Therein lays my problem. I like to know that I can look at my stuff on a moment’s notice. If I want to refer back to an old Q magazine article on the Verve, I don’t want to run the risk of seeing water bugs to do it.

    I like stuff. Stuff makes me comfortable. To know me is to know my stuff. I’ve never understood people who don’t have stuff. I don’t trust people who fill the voids in their lives with family and meaningful careers. It’s important for me to point out that when I talk about my love of stuff, I can safely separate myself from the “bad people who like bad stuff.” You know, there’s a big difference between measuring your self-worth based on the ownership of new cars, bling, and children—and, say, vintage lampshades, Dean Martin biographies, and thirty-eight pairs of clunky black boots.

    Dig if you will this picture: My ultimate fantasy house would be the Addams Family’s altogether ooky crib. My perfect bedroom resembles the inside of I Dream of Jeannie’s bottle. Blank walls and tasteful open spaces break my heart. If you have extra space in your closet, you obviously don’t own enough 1930s dress mannequins.

  • Walter Mosley

    Though he has written in many genres including science fiction, political essays, and literary fiction like the recent The Man in My Basement, Walter Mosley’s widest acclaim comes from crime novels, especially his Easy Rawlins series, which earned him praise as Bill Clinton’s favorite novelist. The first Easy book, Devil in a Blue Dress, was made into a film with Denzel Washington in 1995. The latest, Little Scarlet, finds Rawlins tracking down a killer during the tumultuous Watts Riots of 1965.

    How did Little Scarlet come about?

    I was writing my nonfiction book What Next, which is partially a memoir of my father. I was writing about my father’s response to the riots, and it caused me to start thinking about them, not exactly in the way I remember my father reacting to them. And I thought, wow, I should write from this point of view. And the other thing is that [in the series] I’m working on a timeline, working through the contemporary history of Los Angeles from a black point of view, and Watts was the next thing up after the [Kennedy] assassination.

    Race and class issues are at the heart of your writing, more than for most mystery writers. Were you drawn to mysteries as a vehicle for discussing these issues?

    I made this discovery that if you write a crime novel about an important political issue, you’re going to have a much broader audience. People read it because of the genre, and not necessarily what they might learn from it. But you can attract anybody from a housewife in Texas to the president of the United States.

    In Scarlet, Easy claims that the Watts riots gave rise to a completely new relationship between black and white culture, that after the riots everything had changed. “If it’s not broke, you don’t fix it” is a general notion in human life and maybe all animal life. People don’t go around trying to change things if they work. Black people were kind of invisible. They were held back by a certain set of rules and norms of society that most people didn’t have to pay attention to. And they seemed to be all right. You could go to black neighborhoods, they could be around but you didn’t have to know their name or know anything about them. They couldn’t insinuate themselves into your life. And it was OK. And all of a sudden there was this incredible riot, and all these people you never knew and never had to think about, you have to know and think about, even though you still don’t know anything about them. It really is like a second movement in the Civil Rights movement.

    In What Next, you draw a parallel between the rage that fueled the Watts riots and the rage in the Middle East against America today, and suggest that black America is in a unique position to help bring about peace in the world.

    My apartment looked out on the World Trade Center, and I watched the airplanes crash into it. I was deeply moved by it, but at some point I realized that everybody I knew who was black wasn’t surprised. They were outraged, angered, afraid—but not surprised. Many people said, “You knew this had to happen, bad as we’ve been treating them.” And I began to understand this knowledge in the African-American community about how America is seen around the world that many other Americans don’t have, because they aren’t that close to a history of oppression from the United States. Whereas black Americans are. So what you have is a people who are in a very good position to start to talk about how we might pursue an international peace. Most Americans have no notion why so many people in other parts of the world hate America. And that’s something we really need to talk about.

    Little Scarlet will be released July 5; Mosley appears at Once Upon a Crime bookstore in Minneapolis July 29.

  • Andrew Litton

    In the past two years the Minnesota Orchestra’s once-moribund Sommerfest series has surged back to life, thanks in part to the guidance of artistic director Andrew Litton (who also wields a baton as the Dallas Symphony’s music director). This year’s program is satisfyingly broadminded, anchored by traditional classical works by composers like Brahms and Dvorak, but also includes a crowd-pleasing night of movie music from films like Lord of the Rings. Jazz is covered by the Duke Ellington Orchestra and the great hard-bop ivory man Oscar Peterson, and there’s even a nod to experimental rock with pianist Christopher O’Riley’s Radiohead reinterpretations. Litton will lead the orchestra in a selection of Gershwin tunes (one of his specialties) and Vivaldi’s Four Seasons, and close out this year’s fest with Beethoven’s only opera, Fidelio. When we asked Litton what he’d bring to entertain him if stranded on a deserted isle, his list was appropriately heavy on aural delights—but he also knows there’s more to life than just music.

    1) “First would be my piano, with the complete Beethoven piano sonatas, and the score to Rachmaninoff’s third piano concerto because I’ve always wanted to learn that and I’ve never had the time. Those thirty-two sonatas have everything. It would never be boring to have that treasure trove of music to look through.

    2) “My complete Oscar Peterson collection, which is about 114 CDs. He’s my hero. I’m so excited that he’s coming to Sommerfest this year that I can hardly stand it. He represents all that I think is great about music. Maybe I’m being selfish by asking for all 114, but even a selection of ten would do! For me, his approach to the piano is as educational as listening to any of the great classical pianists—plus the fact that he can just sit down and play, and make up stuff on the spot.

    3) “Richard Strauss’ Der Rosenkavalier. It would be wonderful to have that, and I’d dream that if I ever get off the island I’ll get to conduct it. It would always give me hope.

    4) “I’d like to cheat a little bit and take my kids along. They’re the most entertaining thing I know. They’re five and eight, so they’re at a very funny, very entertaining age.

    5) “A case of 1982 Bourdeaux that’s kept in the shade. That is one of my passions, I confess, so why not put it here on my list for the world to judge? (laughs) That sounds like a pretty nice island now. I’m very happy. When do I leave?”
    Sommerfest runs July 9-31. For a complete schedule, visit www.minnesotaorchestra.org.

  • Louise Erdrich, Four Souls

    Even at her worst, Louise Erdrich still produces some of the best stuff in print. The rambling, poorly edited The Master Butcher’s Singing Club was a great read despite its flaws. And now one of our favorite locals is back and playing to her strengths with another short, near-perfect book the likes of which put her on the map nearly twenty years ago. The thread of her lead character, Fleur Pillager, can be traced to the 1986 Love Medicine sequel The Beet Queen, where she appears from nowhere to salvage the wayward Karl Adare. Erdrich follows her thread backward now, with her usual set of startlingly different narrative voices. (Available July 1)

  • Jonathan Ames, Wake Up, Sir!

    Although the wildly prolific P.G. Wodehouse turned out almost a hundred novels in his lifetime, the world can always make room for another story in his marvelously droll, light-as-a-feather comic voice. Ames’ latest novel is a loving parody of Wodehouse’s most famous creations, Jeeves and Wooster, seen through the eyes of Alan Blair, a would-be writer and heavy drinker who has somehow acquired an imaginary valet named (of course) Jeeves. Their relationship is like a benign version of Jack Nicholson and his butler in The Shining—no murders, but lots of witty repartee. Blair’s Jewish self-identity and deep-set neuroses make him as akin to Woody Allen as Bertie Wooster, and his hapless distension from reality gives Wake Up a vibe that’s akin to A Confederacy of Dunces, as well as any of Wodehouse’s artfully constructed farces. Ask your valet to pick up a copy for you. (Available July 13)

  • Mary Logue, Bone Harvest

    We’re pleased as punch that local mystery novelist and poet Mary Logue is back between boards with a bona-fide Claire Watkins mystery. This one is an ambitious suspense tale set in the familiar area around Pepin, Wisconsin. A fifty-year-old murder mystery and a modern terrorist are somehow linked, and Logue’s most beloved detective takes the case. What we love about Logue is the importance of place, and how her
    real-life summer home in the Wisconsin bluff country is the secret muse of this particular work. There may be local novelists who score higher on the New York Times bestseller lists, but we consider Logue and her partner Pete Hautman the reigning royalty of Minnesota murder mysteries. (Available now)