Blog

  • Long Ball

    Not much has changed in the hoarse conversation about pro sports stadiums here in the Twin Cities, at least not in the last five years. Public antipathy and skepticism remain about the same, which is to say very high. If decision-makers have learned anything, it is that one does not speak about a new stadium and a public referendum in the same breath. Almost every poll in memory has shown a clear majority of Minnesotans rejecting the idea of public funding for new sports facilities. Yet here we are again. The latest plan to make its way through the daisy chain of hearings, committee meetings, and newspaper editorials would build a $478 million downtown ballpark for the Twins, to be funded mostly by raising sales taxes in Hennepin County.

    Sports professionals and fans seem to be taking advantage of the public’s exhaustion with the subject. It is hard to deny the success of the Xcel Energy Center. New stadiums in many other cities certainly raise the pulse of billionaires everywhere. And if the University of Minnesota can drum up thirty million dollars in seed money from TCF Bank, surely the Twins and the Vikings can do the same. Oddly, public outrage also has mellowed with time, as the threat of leaving has time and again turned out to be a feather-filled bluff. Minnesotans will not be blackmailed into an immediate payout, but if the empty threat is repeated for a decade, perhaps we’ll eventually cave.

    At some point, though, Minnesotans need to accept certain unpleasant realities. The more inflexible we are about a public payout today, the more likely it is that we’ll pay twice as much tomorrow. It is not a particularly righteous thing, but professional sports are permanently woven into our civic identity. The fact is, we see ourselves as a Big League city, and we will not stop seeing ourselves that way if the Twins decamp to Iowa, or the Vikings move to Nevada. In other words, only a fool would fail to see that, within five years, we’d be paying top dollar to lure professional sports back to the Twin Cities.

    You disagree? Let history be a guide: The National Basketball Association approved moving a Detroit basketball team here in 1947. That team cost $15,000, and thirteen years later, the Lakers moved to lakeless Los Angeles. Three decades later, the Timberwolves cost $30 million, the going rate for an expansion team in 1989, and we shelled out $104 million for a new facility. The Minnesota North Stars packed their bags and left “the state of hockey” in 1993. Seven years later, the Wild expansion fee cost $80 million, the team price tag rounded up to about $116 million, and St. Paul coughed up $175 million for a new arena.

    Thus it seems to be a question not of whether we’ll pay, but how much and when. Our main problem with the present plan is part of a larger, more general gripe. Just as the cities of blue America pay the bills for red America, it’s generally assumed that people in the city will shell out for what is a region-wide amenity. Normally, this is justified in one way: People who use the stadium will pay for it. But that is not exactly how it works. For years, those of us who live and work here have been forced to pay higher prices—whether or not we are buying tickets at the Target Center or the Metrodome. If you come downtown, you already pay a higher rate of sales tax, there are plenty of fees, and parking costs are almost criminal. Thus there has been a slow but perceptible outflow of leisure dollars from our downtown districts to our suburbs, where parking is free, taxes are anathema, and surcharges minimal.

    However, now that the Twins have delineated “Twins Territory” (discovered to be roughly the entire state for which the team is named), why not reduce the burden for any proposed stadium by further spreading the cost? A microscopic sales tax increase statewide would easily pay for an amenity all Minnesotans can appreciate and use and lend their name to. We should stop punishing the city for being so popular.

  • Outside the Lines

    Last summer, the “Space T.U. Embrace” project performed for the first time at the Southern Theater in Minneapolis. Space to embrace? Space tee-you embrace? Why so cryptic? There was definitely buzz around Toni Pierce-Sands (“T”) and Uri Sands (“U”). They had launched their experimental project the year before, at the University of Minnesota, and the rumor was that the couple had created something unusual and captivating.

    That was immediately clear at the Southern, as the muscular Sands powered across the stage with weightless precision and god-like intention. He was a revelation, effortlessly sculpting space with an original blend of African and Indian, ballet and modern dance, symbolic and ritualistic moves.

    His perfect complement, Pierce-Sands was long, lean, and lithe as she gathered the space around her; then she turned loose-limbed goddess as she and Sands became the core of “Lady,” with the project’s entire cast—fifteen dancers of varying skin tones, ages, and sizes—engulfing them in a celebration of grace and generosity. Little question remained as to what space the dancers were embracing. This was a performance of uncommon openness, and the audience reciprocated with emotional enthusiasm.

    In the year since that performance, “T” and “U” have transformed their experiment into a proper dance company, complete with nonprofit status and new name, TU Dance, which debuts with a program of premieres this month (June 16-18 and 23-25 at the Southern Theater, 612-340-1725). Just as one of the Twin Cities’ most beloved companies, Jazzdance by Danny Buraczeski, was performing its final concerts and closing a remarkable fifteen-year chapter in local dance history, TU Dance was making a commitment to some kind of longevity. Coincidence? Perhaps. More likely the turn of events is a testament to the fertile ebb and flow of creativity in the local dance community.

    Still, it’s not every day that dance companies get founded here, and so the question remains: Why start a company? Why here, and why now? Sands and Pierce-Sands have enjoyed fruitful, high-profile careers as performers, in the U.S. and abroad. Sands’ choreography is in the repertories of numerous dance troupes. “We wanted to grow as artists and individuals, and to bring that growth into our community,” says Pierce-Sands of their decision. “The dance world has given us so much,” Sands adds; creating a company is a way for the pair to give back.

    But behind that contribution is a mission. “The Twin Cities is at a point where art isn’t reflecting the cultural richness that exists here,” Sands says. “So we decided to create a company that demonstrates that diversity, as well as the expertise of this area’s dancers. We think audiences, even people new to dance, will gravitate toward that.”

    The pair trace the origins of TU Dance back to Johnye Mae Pierce, who, according to her granddaughter, Pierce-Sands, was the first African-American woman to work in downtown St. Paul (she operated an elevator). Grandma Pierce’s support was unwavering as Toni grew up at Minnesota Dance Theatre, joined the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theatre in New York, moved to Paris to dance with Company Rick Odom, came back to St. Paul to have a son, returned to Ailey, and, eventually, began dating the company’s charismatic star, Uri Sands.

    “I met Uri twelve years ago in Philadelphia. He was dancing with Philadanco, and I was visiting a friend who was the rehearsal director,” recalls Pierce-Sands. “He was topless and wearing black spandex jazz pants,” she adds, laughing. “I honestly thought he was a little cocky at first.”

    Two years later, they met again at Ailey. “It took time for us to get to know each other, because we were both involved with other people at the time,” Pierce-Sands says. “Uri very much kept to himself and wrote a lot in his journals. He’s a thinker and that’s what attracted me to him.”

    The true test of their devotion came when Pierce-Sands returned to St. Paul to raise her son and be close to the rest of her family; she also had offers to join the faculties of the Minnesota Dance Theater school and the University of Minnesota dance program. Sands followed for two reasons: “Toni and walleye fishing,” he says. (An avid angler while growing up in Miami, Sands fishes Minnesota’s rivers and lakes, often with his stepson. Last year, his wife bought him a fishing boat for his birthday.)

    After briefly dancing with James Sewell Ballet, Sands became a Minnesota Dance Theater company member and resident choreographer. In 2002, he signed on as a dancer and choreographer with North Carolina Dance Theatre in Charlotte, where he’s been stationed about half of the year. “It’s a lucrative situation for me and my family,” he explains. But after a couple of years of watching the couple run hither and yon, Grandma Pierce sat them down. “She told us, ‘Why don’t you guys try to work for yourselves and make your own stuff look good, instead of making everybody else’s stuff look good?’” says Pierce-Sands. “That really inspired us.”

    The duo started off with research, assessing foundation support, opportunities for performances, and the variety of dance artists and companies already in the Twin Cities. “We were looking for something we could piggyback on, some way to enhance what the community had started,” says Pierce-Sands. While they’re hesitant to say they discovered an unfilled niche, the couple did find one characteristic troubling. “The Twin Cities has one of the most diverse communities I’ve ever seen,” Sands says, “but its audiences are segregated.”

    Audiences, he argues, are loyal to specific niches—ethnic, ballet, modern, improvisation, dance theater, or even ballroom—but they rarely cross into other disciplines. TU Dance aims to attract those various niches, in part by featuring dancers schooled in a variety of disciplines, who “reflect the cultural diversity here in the Twin Cities,” he says.

    ***

    Among the company’s eighteen members are guest artists from Complexions in New York City and Alonso King’s Lines Ballet in San Francisco—both of which have African-American artistic directors and repertories with work inspired by the African-American experience—and from North Carolina Dance Theatre. For local representation, TU’s founders cherry-picked from Twin Cities companies, including Venezuelan charmer Abdo Sayegh, a longtime company member of Minnesota Dance Theater; Stephanie Fellner, the petite powerhouse from Ballet of the Dolls; and Penelope Freeh and Peggy Seipp-Roy, who are dynamic regulars with James Sewell Ballet. The exquisite Mary Ann Bradley was a Jazzdance member, and also performs with the postmodern troupe ARENA Dances.

    In other words, TU Dance may aim to draw together and integrate audiences, but it will not sacrifice artistic excellence. “They [Toni and Uri] are driven to be an exemplar of high-quality dance performance,” says Jeff Bartlett, curator of programming at the Southern Theater. “Actually, they’re somewhat intolerant of a mindset that allows for anything less. For them, that’s not okay.”

    A third component of TU Dance’s strategy is accessibility. Pointing to the long-term success of their alma mater, Sands says that Alvin Ailey’s shows consistently sell out because the company’s works “speak to the human experience.” Similarly, the pieces he has choreographed for TU Dance “reference particular cultures, social situations, or life events. Accessibility comes through work that taps into the emotional, spiritual, and psychological aspects of our being.”

    Audiences may find other ways into TU Dance’s work, adds Pierce-Sands. “One of the lessons we learned at Ailey was that you could bring your father, who doesn’t know anything about dance, but he enjoys the music. That’s making dance accessible. We don’t have any expectations on how some
    one should look at dance. We just try to give audiences as many opportunities as possible to grasp something meaningful.”

    Sands and Pierce-Sands didn’t just look locally for dancers; teachers, choreographers, company managers, and presenters throughout the Twin Cities offered advice, especially on the mounds of paperwork necessary for incorporation and tax-exempt status. “As we launch this endeavor, one thing in particular we’ve found is that nothing in life is done on your own,” Sands says. “The dance community is helping us form this company.”

    The Southern’s Bartlett has been instrumental. “They have good heads on their shoulders,” he says of the couple, “and part of why they do is because of their experience outside this town, specifically in the Ailey company. A life in that company educates you about the reality of the dance world, it provides a lot of tools, and gives you a glimpse of what success looks like.”

    Danny Buraczeski also played a critical role. “He’s an incredible artist and mentor, whether through advice or example,” says Pierce-Sands. “Does his company folding make us apprehensive? No. Actually, we feel even more compelled to continue.” Her partner sounds equally determined. “The only way we know to start a dance company is like the only way we learned how to swim,” he says. “Just jump in the water.”

  • The Worthlessness of Things

    In the photo, he’s twenty-five or so. Quite obviously, the picture was taken in the early 1970s. He is wearing loud plaid pants, a shiny pink shirt with ruffles down the front and at the cuffs, and a huge bowtie and vest. His afro is cropped, but not too close, and he’s smiling, one of those big, open-mouthed smiles that shows the gap in his front teeth. But there’s something off in the man’s expression, too. It’s in the eyes. They look hollow and sad, as though deep down the man is missing something. Something he’s never had and will never get.

    The picture is a little wrinkled and stained, as if it had gotten wet, and set crookedly in a frame that’s much too large. It dangles haphazardly from a nail on a basement wall in a suburban Minneapolis rambler. It’s one of thousands of things left behind by this man with the smile—piles and boxes and suitcases full of stuff, which are being pawed through by a crowd of bargain hunters. Whatever goes unsold will wind up in an enormous black trash bin that stands out front, menacingly, under the picture window.

    This sale was different from a typical estate sale, which is different from a typical garage sale. While a garage sale represents a thinning out, the happy prospect of making room for a den or a sauna or a new season of dresses, an estate sale represents obliteration—the end of a life, or at least a life in a particular home. Usually, the endless array of items, which range from lamps to pantyhose, are neatly tagged and arranged throughout the house by a relative, or by a company that takes a cut. Everybody wants a cut. But this particular sale was chaotic, the fallout from some ongoing disaster.
    Because the arrangements are normally so logical, with their displays and tidy categorizations, it’s easy for browsers to trace the arc of a person’s existence. You can see that when they were young they traveled, went to Mexico a couple of times or Greece. There may even be Spanish language textbooks, or books on reading Latin. Reading habits are generally more ambitious in youth; there’s often a focus on modern literature and classics (which may themselves have been modern when purchased) like Fitzgerald, Hemingway, or even Rimbaud. Or there is evidence of curiosity in science or nature or philosophy. But as life progresses, ambitions dissipate or are sacrificed and the books get more modest and practical: mysteries, romance novels, true crime, and exercise guides like Stretching for Seniors. Often the newest books describe how to go on without a spouse, cook for one, cope with diabetes, or beat lung cancer. Books on diseases present significant clues. So do stacks of old TV Guides and matchbooks from Treasure Island casino. At some point, it seems, living becomes simply a matter of passing time.

    Clothing choices evolve, too, of course. Sizes generally increase as the wearer ages; the fabrics become more uniformly polyester and rayon. Wash and wear. And there are more cardigans with wadded tissue in the pockets. With shoes, women’s heels get lower and the styles wider, to accommodate foot problems that result from a life of moving around.

    In all, visiting an estate sale is like going on an archeological expedition through the ruins of somebody’s life; you, the explorer, make guesses and assumptions based on the evidence at hand. An abundance of holiday decorations usually means grandchildren. Lots of hammers and tools mean a handyman—someone who had no children to inherit them or had children who went to law school. And if, when you go into the bathroom, you see bars of soap and cans of half-used shaving cream and hairspray, all for fifty cents each, well then you have to face facts. The people who lived in the house are dead.

    At those moments, you feel like a vulture picking at a sun-dried carcass by the side of the highway. But, hey, this stuff has to go somewhere, you think. Maybe it’ll help pay for the funeral. And you reassure yourself that at least you’re not part of the network of hardcore collectors who stand outside a house at seven for an eight o’clock sale. Those are the true vampires, hoping to snap up the dishes, records, antique bureaus, nineteenth-century silver spoons, and anything else that might objectively be worth something. That might be sold on eBay for a profit. These shoppers rush from table to table with poker faces and pockets full of cash, laughing to themselves—these people don’t know what they have. Me, I go late, on the last day of a sale usually, which is often bag day. That means you can have as much junk as you can stuff into a paper sack for one or two dollars. What I look for are the sentimental items, which some might say makes me the worst type of vampire of all. I want those things that, while worth next to nothing monetarily, were special to whomever owned them. A homemade painting of a frowning poodle. A crocheted pillow that reads, “World’s Greatest Postman.” Photographs from birthday parties and Thanksgivings. Men smiling in shiny pink shirts.

    It’s an attempt, I suppose, to gather sentimentality all in one place. I’m a glutton for meaning, even somebody else’s meaning. And so my own collection of stuff is largely made up of items that once made somebody else laugh or cry, trinkets and keepsakes that were stowed in drawers and albums and chests, propped on kitchen windowsills. They are idyllic farm scenes embroidered quite obviously without patterns and little houses fashioned from matchsticks, examined and perfected as much as the builder’s talents allowed. Part of the appeal is that that these items, sitting on the “bargain” table on the last day of a sale, seem orphaned. I’m consistently surprised that nobody wants them, for they, more so than the Tiffany lamp or the ruby pendant, carry on the spirit of their former owner. Perhaps that’s why people don’t want them—nobody likes to think about the past, it seems, only tomorrow. Except for people like me. My house is full of ghosts.

    Our things speak for us, especially when we are gone. They do this both by their specificity and their context. I think about my own home: What will somebody, someday, make of my collection of other people’s poorly executed art projects, photos of unrelated relatives, and a video library that includes Ikiru and Road House? Will someone get excited about the dress in which I was married, the one my husband bought at a garage sale, and will she wear it proudly to a cocktail party in the twenty-second century? Or will it be cut up and made into sofa pillows? Or, worse, will it go directly into the big black trash bin that will be waiting under my picture window? It’s a disconcerting notion, that the fate of my possessions is out of my hands. I might choose to bequeath some things, but, really, I don’t have much that’s worth bequeathing. I won’t be around to tell the stories, funny and sad, that make my things meaningful—to describe the spot where I found the rock that looks like Abe Lincoln’s head, or relate how a napkin comes from a bar where I was served free drinks by an eighty-five-year-old birthday boy. I won’t be able to define my own history. It will be defined by estate-sale shoppers, just as I attempt to define the history of the smiling, gap-toothed man.

    ***

    The man’s suburban home was stuffed with clues, but they were muddled, confusing—they didn’t add up. Items weren’t organized or labeled. They sat in slowly rotting piles, abandoned, perhaps suddenly, reminding me of those Robert Polidori shots of Chernobyl where dingy stuffing spills from forgotten teddy bears and paint peels from walls in blisters. The man’s cupboards still contained cans of food and jars of pickles. The paper towel holder held paper towels. There were albums full of photos—the man next to a gravestone, him with a circle of kids completing some sort of craft project, him on a sofa with his arm around a pretty woman in a red dress—and a selection of African artifacts: drums, masks, and carvings, all a
    little beat up. But they’d certainly taken effort to collect. These were not the kinds of things you leave behind unless you have to.

    The most striking thing about this estate sale, however, was the sheer, surreal volume of what the man had accumulated. One room was floor-to-ceiling electronics. There were maybe thirty telephones, some working, some not; fifty or more radios of various types and sizes; an impressive collection of small televisions; and a couple of electric organs. Two children were banging on the organs. Nobody told them to stop. What difference did it make? Desperation breeds disrespect. And, besides, it was bag day. Everything had to go. Everywhere in the house, there was clothing—piled up along the walls, flowing out of half-crushed boxes, covering floors like torn wrapping paper on Christmas morning. Aside from what was plainly visible, in room after room there stood towering piles of suitcases stuffed tight with clothing—men’s, women’s, children’s, from all eras. Some rooms you simply couldn’t go into, as there was nowhere to begin. People threw up their hands. Flicked off the lights. Walked away.

    Sales like this one are always rife with gossip. Pickers wondered aloud what had happened, and stories were circulating. Those running the sale, white people, not too friendly, seemed to be disgusted with the gap-toothed man. He’d been evicted, they explained. Couldn’t say why. But what about all the radios, the suitcases, the institutional cans of refried beans? Were these the remains of a garbage house or what? A paunchy man in a white Vikings sweatshirt carrying a receipt pad said he wasn’t sure. He scratched his head. He thought the man had been African and that he had been gathering materials and goods for a relief effort. So the man, at least in his own mind, had intended one day to send all this stuff to wherever in Africa he came from. This was evidence of best laid plans not just gone awry, but exploded.

    I walked into a side room, where there was a small book collection on a shelf. I picked out two dictionaries and placed them in my paper sack, next to a carved, cracked wooden statue of a man with his head in his hands, and the photos. Browsing the rest, I spotted a book about living with schizophrenia. So there was that.

    The picture of the man in the shiny pink shirt haunted me. I put it away when I got home. Then I took it out again. And then I pinned it above my desk. What had happened to him? I opened his dictionaries and found a name inscribed meticulously inside, along with dates and origins: “November 10, 1997—Diggers.” It was an African name. I started searching. First, I drove back by the house, which had gone up for sale. I called the listing real estate agent, who was abrasive about the inquiry, probably because he, for whatever reason, had been the one who evicted the man. No doubt, he must have been a handful, but the one-man-relief-effort also couldn’t have been all bad. Regarding the motive behind the many mounds of stuff, the agent said, “I believe he was going to ship it off, but he wasn’t very good with follow-through.” Most of what remained at the end of bag day wound up in the big black trash bin. Now it was officially garbage. The agent verified the man’s name, said he was around fifty years old. He wouldn’t put me in touch with the owner of the house, couldn’t tell me how long the man had lived there, didn’t know where he had gone. “As far as I’m concerned,” the agent said via cell phone, busy, on his way to a showing, “he fell off the face of the earth.”

    Google came next. There were a couple of people in the Midwest with the man’s last name, a doctor in Wisconsin and a yoga instructor who had just moved from Minnesota to California. I left messages for them both, and for the property owner, whom I found through Hennepin County tax records. No one returned my calls. My curiosity growing, I phoned people at local homeless shelters, but they aren’t allowed to say who stays where, for privacy reasons. I even performed one of those online background searches that cost fifty dollars, which turned up a couple of scrapes with the law, a drug possession charge, another for domestic abuse. Some nonpayment of taxes.

    Finally, a phone message came from the doctor in Wisconsin. He spoke with a heavy accent. “Yes, he is my older brother,” he said. “If you have any questions you can call me at my office. He is still in Minneapolis.” I, of course, did call his office. Several times. But I didn’t hear another word from the doctor in Wisconsin. I only know that his brother is alive somewhere in the city. Who he is, what happened, why things fell apart, remains a mystery. And maybe, in the end, the details of his life are none of my business anyway. I will simply enjoy the items that were once his—the wooden statue, a bowl, a pickax with a loose head. I will imbue these items with my own meanings, create a truth for them based on the thinnest of clues, just as somebody, someday, will do again after I am dead or gone.

  • Rebel Riders

    Lowriding isn’t about how close your Impala sits to the concrete. It’s
    about flexing your muscles, gritting your teeth, and shining your wheel
    covers. At least that’s what we came away thinking after the “Hydraulic
    Showdown” event, which was part of last month’s Cinco de Mayo festival
    in St. Paul. But the art of lowriding was not lost on us—not with all
    that horsepower on display, and all those eye-popping paint jobs,
    ornate mags, painstakingly detailed decals and astonishing tattoos. The
    owners of these automotive masterpieces smiled mischievously from
    behind goatees and dark glasses. Then they hopped into their rides,
    cranked the tunes (a lowrider’s nothing without massive subwoofers),
    and rolled ever so slowly by the honeys.

  • Cue The Meatloaf

    “Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad” would be an appropriate, if obnoxious, theme song for Ron Gardenhire’s Twins, for this or any season. The mantra in the Minnesota clubhouse during Gardenhire’s tenure has always been, “We’re just trying to win each series. The rest will take care of itself.”

    That’s a decent, ambitious goal for a baseball team. A .660 winning percentage should be more than enough to easily win any division. The 2004 Cardinals played .648 ball and led the majors with 105 wins. The White Sox, of course, are playing at an unreal .707 clip so far this year, and no one really expects them to be able to keep that up. The Twins current .590 winning percentage is better than they finished last year, and would have been good enough to win three divisions in ’04; still, barring a complete Chicago collapse they’ll probably have to crank it up a notch, or at the very least keep rolling at their present pace to close ground on the Sox.

    Thanks once again to the weird schedule, Minnesota and Chicago won’t meet again until August, and the two teams will play their remaining thirteen games against each other in the season’s final two months (including seven games in September).

    The last couple games of the Toronto series were encouraging on all sorts of levels. The team bounced back from Johan Santana’s discouraging (and almost shocking) outing on Tuesday, and got a decent start from Kyle Lohse on Wednesday, and a spectacular start out of Joe Mays today. Juan Rincon and Joe Nathan appear to have suffered no lingering effects from their shaky outings in last Friday’s eleven-inning train wreck against Texas.

    Michael Cuddyer continued his May resurrection, going four-for-seven with three RBIs in the last couple games (and raising his batting average to .274). Two of those RBIs came on his bases-loaded double off Gustavo Chacin in the sixth inning of today’s 4-0 victory in the series finale. The thirteen-pitch battle that resulted in that double was one of the great at-bats you’ll ever see (Cuddyer fouled off eight two-strike pitches, including one long, high blast that just hooked foul down the leftfield line), and was all the more significant given the Twins futility with the bases loaded so far this year.

    “I saw all of his pitches in that at-bat,” Cuddyer said afterwards. “I saw some of them several times, in fact. I was just trying to stay back, get a good swing, and try to drive the ball. In an at-bat like that, after a while you stop trying to guess and just try to see each pitch. In the back of my mind, though, I knew he’d thrown me a change-up my previous time up, and I hadn’t seen it yet. It turned out that was the pitch I eventually hit, but by then, of course, I was no longer really looking for it.”

    Finally, to return to Meatloaf for a moment, I’d like to give you a heads up that I’ve started to assemble my All-Time Fat Bastard team, and I welcome early suggestions for worthy candidates.

  • The Fairer Sex

    When I login at home, I use the equvialent of the old wooden, crank-up party line—my dial-up America Online account. I have to admit that I always wait enthusiastically for the slow emergence of today’s headlines, like tea leaves swirling in the digital kettle. There are usually three main “news” headlines that rotate in a rudimentary server push on AOL’s homepage. These are the most distilled, highest-proof example you’ll ever find of Time-Warner’s idea of what captures the most eyeballs in the least amount of time. (Technically speaking, they are normally breathtaking in their brevity. I doubt whether AOL editors ever waste more than twenty-five characters on a story head; anyone who has ever tried to fit headlines to space knows what a special talent this requires.)

    The breakdown of the rotation goes something like this: First, the hard news story, preferably with heavy overtones of partisan positioning. (That way, you can salt in two or three reader surveys as an additional enticement.) Second, there is usually a celebrity story of one kind or another, most often having to do with a current scandal or A&E release. Third comes the highly solicitious reader service—Are you too fat? Having enough sex? Working too hard? Is your spouse having an affair? How much would you spend to save your dog’s life? Where will you vacation this summer? Is there a cocktail in your near future? (AOL’s homepage on the web expands this formula to five items—two celebrity bits and two service bits.)

    Anyway, this morning’s hard news bit was this: “Should Women Serve?” (Paired with a photo of a female GI in fatigues with an M-16, it did not function quite like the double or triple entendre it does here.) This struck me as provocative, although I resisted the urge to click through to the story. Clicking through is usually a disappointment—AOL’s news stories are almost always stripped down wire items with no teeth or boots. The brevity and concision of that smart headline is most often linked to a story that would barely pass muster in almost any high-school newspaper in the land.

    But it did get me thinking. I’ve been saying for months that Democrats would be insane to propose Hillary Clinton for prez in 2008—largely because of entrenched, genteel misogyny. You think Americans are uncomfortable with the idea of gay marriage? Wait until you start push-polling them on whether the US can withstand a woman as commander in chief. That’s why we say only under ONE condition should the Dems put Billary on the ticket: They must also get a referendum on as many ballots as possible to eliminate the vote for women. It would totally work.

  • Crapping on the Koran, part 2

    Will wonders never cease? The conservative columnist of the NY Times, David Brooks, came to the defense of Newsweek today.

    Brooks takes note of the fact that radical Islamists hardly need a short item in an American magazine with an excellent reputation to incite them to senseless violence against almost everyone.

    He doesn’t actually put it in so many words, but, he suggests we ask Muslim clerics, “Where is the Koran, if not in the toilet, when you are encouraging children to blow themselves up to kill fellow Muslims in Afganistan?”

    Now I’ve never incited Muslims to violence by, for example, calling for a “crusade” or invading their country, unlike a certain President I know. And I’ve never pissed off Hindus by calling them devil worshipers, like a certain Christian leader.

    But, I have written some fairly inflammatory things about right wing Christians in this space, and so far no one has walked in here ringed with C4. Of course, I’m not an “activist” judge either. Maybe the Christian bombers are saving themselves for when it really counts.

  • Those Godless Television Geniuses, Always Doing Satan's Work

    CBS tinkers with the magic formula, and the youth of America burn in Hell: “Joan of Arcadia” is out; Jennifer Love Hewitt talking to dead people is in.

    “I think talking to ghosts may skew younger than talking to God,” Moonves said.

  • A Hard Pat on the Backside

    We were a little pressed for time yesterday, since our presence was requested at Minnesota Magazine Day. This is an annual to-do over at the Hyatt, hosted graciously by the Minnesota Ad Federation. It consists of a “magazine grab”—basically a shopping spree for most major titles from Hearst, Fairchild, Conde Nast, and the other big nationals. (Also any locals you haven’t already seen.) If you’ve paid the admission fee, you grab as many magazines as you can manage to carry—which is great for doing research, we’ve found.

    Then there is lunch and a little motivational speech or two. Yesterday’s speakers included an executive from the Magazine Publishers of America, and the keynote came from People Magazine publisher Paul Caine. The usual bromides were uncapped. The song was upbeat, in the key of heavy flattery. National magazine professionals love to come to Minneapolis to compliment us on our terrific advertising climate. Indeed, this is a great town for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the presence of some of the nation’s best advertising houses, some of the nation’s most solvent ad-buyers, and not a few enthusiastic readers of magazines. We’re getting a little tired of hearing how great we are, actually. While the local publishing scene gets some respect—smart people here not only read magazines and buy ads in them, they also happen to make a few good titles, too—we think it’s not quite sufficient to our desserts.

    Each year, the pep talk rarely diverges from the same script. It’s almost comical to hear about how healthy and vital and beloved magazines are, coming from the mouths of people who sell national advertising in them. And yet, the rule doesn’t usually apply in the opposite direction. You should buy an ad in an Advance Publications property, but Advance Publications isn’t all that interested in returning the favor.

    What we mean by this is that the national publishing and advertising communities basically syphon off our money and our creativity without a lot of direct local inputs. Anecdotally and scientifically, it has been proven many times over that good local publications have emotional value to local readers that a national cannot touch. Despite the brilliant local print environment, national advertisers count the Twin Cities outside the top-ten advertising markets in the nation, and therefore do not buy ads in magazines or newspapers here. (Virtually none. They may occasionally make a buy in a title that is part of larger national pool, like Village Voice Media.) Take a look at Boston, San Francisco, Chicago, even Seattle—there are numerous terrible publications in those cities that sell national advertising like it’s going out of style.

    It is frustrating that so many ad-buyers still make their decisions on the most artificial bases—a periodical’s reach in terms of raw circulation numbers. The magazine industry is allegedly trying to gather its eggs into one basket in order to promote all magazines—rather like the Milk Board pushing milk. But these sorts of campaigns will disproportionately benefit the largest publishers as long as ad-buyers look no further than the top line of the ABC Audit.

    Yesterday, we took note—but not advantage—of the Audit Bureau of Circulation’s traditional donation to the festivities. It is a cash bar. They are happy to offer all the usual medicines, for a nominal fee of course. You’ll forgive us for saying that this begins to look like the equivalent of a “kick me” sign pasted on the ass of an entire industry, but maybe especially the local yokels.

  • Freedom of Information

    maonixon.jpg
    Can you give me some advice on how to deal with Woodward and Bernstein?

    I had the opportunity to have lunch with an editor of the Beijing English language daily newspaper China Daily on Sunday. He was in town as part of an exchange program for Asian journalists to see how we do it over here.

    In preparation for our meeting, he’d read the May issue of the Rake, and noticed an ad for the Friends of the Minneapolis Library which featured a little blurb about Mao Ze Dong, and compared him in unflattering terms to American librarians, who are guardians of our free access to information. I asked him what he thought of that, and he just smiled.

    In journalistic, if not terribly polite fashion, I pursued the theme a bit. “Does the government closely monitor what you publish in your newspaper?” I asked. “Yes,” he replied.

    “Is there someone in the government who assures what you write conforms with the story the government wants to tell?” I continued. Again, “Yes.”

    “Who does that for your newspaper?”

    “I do.”

    “Oh…How do you like your sandwich?”

    I thought back on this in the context of the blowup over the Newsweek flap over the report on whether some copies of the Koran were finding their way into Guantanamo toilets. The Bush version of the Maoist Censorship Society has certainly had its jollies being righteously indignant about the story that a Pentagon report contained the information about the crapped-on Korans. (Note please that the story has been reported before on several occasions and that the Pentagon was shown the story and didn’t deny it before it ran. It’s also worth mention that the reporter, Michael Isikoff, was a lot more popular with Republicans when he broke the Monica Lewinsky story.)

    But those troublesome facts have nothing to do with what’s going on here. What this flap is about is a concerted effort to discredit the press at every opportunity–with the hoped-for result of limiting the press’s desire to do the sort of investigative reporting that revealed the official sanction and practice of torture by Bush and his decorated Myrmidons.

    Mao didn’t have a troublesome First Amendment to deal with, so his methods of information control didn’t have to suffer any intermediate hurdles to get his message across. But given the obstacles Bushies face, don’t you agree they are doing a great job of making sure America gets the news they want?