Blog

  • Smooth Jazz

    Smooth jazz killed my brother Randy. He was coming into the S curves on I-5 just south of Seattle, listening to radio KYEZ, “Mellow Sounds of the Spheres,” when the music transported him into a trance-like state and he crashed into the side of a sixteen-wheeler bringing engine parts into Boeing.

    I called Randy on his cellphone moments before his death. We had planned to meet at Safeco Field for a Promise Keepers convention and he was late. Outside in the parking lot, I could hear they had already started the sobbing and back-slapping without us.

    Our last worldly conversation went as follows:

    Randy: Hello?

    Me: Randy, it’s me. You’re late for Keepers, dude!

    Randy: I’m almost there. Hey, let me switch the phone to my other hand while I turn down the smooth jazz—Oh, shit!

    I sued radio KYEZ. My case was basically that a lethal brew of whale calls and flaccid piano playing had driven my brother to his death. I lost.

    Smooth jazz killed my brother and KYEZ assassinated his character. All it took was their lawyers mentioning the Santana CD in Randy’s car and the jury started muttering and pinching fingers to their lips in the international hand signal for “tokin’ on a fatty.” I knew Randy would never have taken drugs before a Promise Keepers meeting, not even hallucinogenics, but never mind that. Soon the KYEZ lawyers were contending he was a classic rock listener. They started talking demographics: smooth jazz listeners were peaceful law-abiding citizens, but classic rock listeners (like my brother, they maintained) were middle-aged losers slumped in beanbag chairs in their parents’ basement, plotting half-assed misdemeanors under the wan glow of a grow lamp. This was an alarmingly accurate portrayal of my brother, but completely circumstantial. The judge, who looked to be eating peanuts during the whole trial, overruled every one of my objections, and he merely snickered when a KYEZ lawyer mentioned Bob Seger and flapped his arms in a derisive way. Never once did one of those lawyers look me in the eye or acknowledge my brother’s tragic death. They seemed to think I was a crackpot.

    When I stood up to make my closing argument, the courtroom grew dark and cold, like a great cloud full of snow had crept in to hear the verdict. I faced the jury and tried to make my voice sound Gregory Peck-ish.

    “‘Mellow Music of the Spheres’, feh! Most people worry about satanic lyrics by long-haired scofflaws who bite the heads off bats and pee on their fans, but smooth jazz is far more insidious and harmful. Smooth jazz has an opiate effect that makes people imagine they are standing under tropical waterfalls or feeding cookies to deer.

    “‘Mellow Music of the Spheres,’ feh! More like banal tripe for people too meek for real jazz and too stupid for classical music. Smooth jazz is played in the elevators of giant corporations to keep the drones complacent. It is even the soundtrack of the porn industry! Around the world, the most impressive boudoir acrobatics are being performed to the warbles of an off-key tenor sax and the kerplunk of a drum machine.”

    Here, I thought I might appeal to any religious nuts on the jury. “I believe the Lord handed us a pristine world, and we, like paper wasps, masticated it into a modern-day Babylon of concrete, non-biodegradable plastics, and smooth jazz. The radio station KYEZ, like the drug dealer on the corner, is keeping the good people of Seattle dull-eyed and slack-jawed. Please avenge my brother’s death and stamp out this blight on the Great American Dream.”

    I was laughed out of court. You haven’t felt low until your family honor is beaten down by a musical genre.
    It was then and there I decided to focus on one man: Yanni.

    I became the point man in the war against that smarmy, unshaven keyboard player. I began my duties by repeatedly calling his publicist down in Los Angeles and making fart noises, asking for “Yonic.” Sophomoric, sure, but it felt good to finally put a face on my anger, on my sorrow for Randy’s misguided FM listening habits.

    I tried soliciting funds for my crusade. Relatives and people at work were generally unsupportive. Only my lesbian friends, Joyce and Darla, pitched in. We made posters and brainstormed slogans and T-shirts among the bruised fruit in the co-op where they worked. They were teeming with suggestions, and I felt renewed strength in the cause knowing that the GLBT community supported me.

  • People of the Skyway

    Peter Bruce is a slight, sandy-haired, serious man who moves and speaks quickly and with purpose. Bruce loves the skyways, how when it’s raining or too hot or too cold they convey people between offices and restaurants and stores. While most people have never heard of him, anyone who’s connected with the skyways—whether in retail or in planning or policing them—knows Peter Bruce and listens when he talks. And he says things like, “I’d say, just from my observations over the years, that for every ten degrees below room temperature it is outside, skyway traffic goes up between five and ten percent.”

    Bruce, a mild-mannered convert to the Mormon religion, can talk like that because he makes a significant portion of his livelihood by counting pedestrians and gauging traffic in the skyways and on the street. His clients are retailers and government agencies. He estimates he’s counted foot traffic for eighty to ninety percent of the buildings within the skyway network as part of the Minneapolis business he started thirteen years ago. Before founding Community Enhancement/ Pedestrian Studies, Bruce conducted financial and market research for downtown real estate developers. After he struck out on his own, his first big job was to design the color-coded signage system in St. Paul’s skyways to help ease confusion for the overflow of visitors the capital city expected for the 1992 Super Bowl at the Metrodome (in which, by the way, the Washington Redskins beat the Buffalo Bills, 37-24).

    Bruce most loves the skyways, though, when they “augment the flow of people into and out of downtown cores”; when they “naturally complement and interact with the street level” to create a fast and efficient and, yes, eye-pleasing system of people-moving from office to condo to sandwich shop to theater. But he knows that doesn’t happen often enough. Like anyone who regularly uses the skyways in the Twin Cities, Bruce knows how difficult it can be to figure out how to get access to them from the street, or how to get back to the street once you’re in the skyway. This is the big challenge for planners, and it’s a longstanding conundrum. “No downtowns that remove people from the street, via skyways or tunnels, do that well,” Bruce says. (Some twenty or so other U.S. cities have skyways or tunnels—like Houston; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Hartford, Connecticut—though, when combined, the skyways in Minneapolis and St. Paul are the most extensive system in North America and probably the world.)

    Exceptions to the street/skyway barrier do exist. Bruce points to his newest favorite example, the Target Store on Nicollet Mall, where a pedestrian on the street can see, through the building’s glass entry, the escalator that ferries people to the second-floor skyway. The other legendary connection is the Crystal Court, whose expansive glass entrance leads into an open atrium where the escalator is clearly visible, and the skyway level is packed with retail. “Buildings could be retrofitted to be more like those,” Bruce says.

    But that’s probably not going to happen, as Peter Bruce is well aware, because he knows the downside of the skyway concept. “Anyone thinking about the vitality of the streets downtown can see that the street life is weakened by skyways,” he says. “But second-level retail is strengthened, and I think most people would say that I want more retail that I can get to while still staying warm in the winter.”

    If Peter Bruce is the ultimate scholar of the skyways, then Carol Robertson is the ultimate user. As this unofficial “Queen of the St. Paul skyways” knows, they appeal for reasons beyond the climate-controlled retail. A slight and energetic eighty-nine-year-old who looks barely old enough for retirement, Robertson takes to the skyways four or five times a week for an hourlong walk, during which she usually racks up three to four miles on her pedometer. Friendly yet reserved, she has lived a full and active life and is discreetly proud of it. And she loves the skyways for the chance they give her, in the twilight of her days, to walk and think and observe in comfort and safety.

    We meet one afternoon on the eastern fringe of the skyway system in Galtier Plaza’s food court. Robinson has lived on the forty-first floor of Galtier since 1991. Normally, she keeps to a precise route, moving quickly and with determination, but given her role today as a tour guide, she’s taking it easy. Given my arthritic knee, however, I still find her pace too swift—something she keeps apologizing for. Over the course of the next two hours we cover nearly the entire system, a rather odd couple making our way through the grid as best we can. From Galtier Plaza we head to the US Bank Center, whose Great Hall we circle three times, passing through the adjacent Pioneer and Endicott buildings and over to the First National Bank.

    After criss-crossing Fifth Street through two different skyways, we enter the Bremer Building, where the former St. Paul Athletic Club sits—now a fitness center. “That was a real loss,” Robertson says. “My husband and I loved the restaurant there.” (Her husband, Edward, died in 1996.) It’s clear that the skyways are more than a walking track for Robertson, that in fact they’ve been something more of a lifeline, giving her sheltered access to restaurants, banks, stores, and many other necessities of life that can be hard to get to, especially at a certain age. One of her favorite spots is the view from a skyway attached to the “new” Pioneer Press Building, where a twisting scarlet sculpture is ablaze in the afternoon sun. “Isn’t that just beautiful?” she says, without interrupting her pace.

    We cross Wabasha Street into the Lowry Medical Building and the City Hall Annex. Robertson asks about my knee, and offers to stop and go back, but I decline. We push across St. Peter Street and pass the Saint Paul Hotel. We hit another prime spot, the Town Square skyway, which even in midafternoon is filled with people. We’re in the home stretch. Another favorite spot of Robertson’s is the 400 Building, which has a huge lobby where matching indoor and outdoor trees face each other through windows that stand two stories high. “I love how this lobby brings the outside in and pushes the inside out,” Robertson says. A few minutes later, I drop her off back at Galtier. Later, examining a map of the St. Paul skyways, I calculate that the two of us traversed about half the system.

    When I chose to move from downtown Chicago to downtown St. Paul in the last days of January 2003, my friends in Illinois thought I was nuts. I couldn’t really argue. As it happened, the winter of 2003 was a mild one in Minnesota, not much different from a typical Chicago winter. So I was more than a little surprised to find so few people on the streets. And then I realized why: Most people preferred the skyways to the sidewalks. This annoyed me because, while the sidewalks seemed like frigid deserts, overhead people made their way through the city in sacrilegious comfort, minus the usual winter gear they should have been wearing—that I was wearing.

    I’d only lived in Chicago and New York City—two places where the quality of street life defines the quality of life. Two walking cities. And now I found myself in a place where people seek shelter from the streets in second-story terrariums—skyways, skywalks, elevated pedways, “plus-fifteens” (the name Calgary uses to describe their skyways—fifteen feet above ground—that connect all its downtown office towers). Most stores, restaurants, barber shops, and bars turned to the skyways, carrying out one of the most common dictums of business: Go where the people are. During my first few months in the Twin Cities, I stubbornly disdained these street-life-draining monstrosities. I could handle whatever changes the weather threw at me, unlike my new neighbors, these supposedly weathered and hardy Minnesotans.

    Which got me to thinking: Why doesn’t Chicago or New York or any of dozens of other cold-climate urban centers have skyways? After all, the main difference between winters in the Twin Cities and in other places is the outlier months, November and March, which tend to be colder and snowier here. The answer is simple to urban architects and planners like Ken Greenberg, head of Toronto-based Greenberg Consultants: Skyways are a bad idea. “The skyway network is a prime example of a highly focused, oversimplified solution to one problem—exposure to climate—that in turn creates others,” he says. “Climate protection is achieved but at a great cost. Street life virtually disappears; retail is moribund, functioning at best for weekday noon hours but not on weekends or in the evening.” That criticism hits its mark in both downtowns, but particularly in St. Paul, which practically ceases to exist outside regular office hours. As one fellow bus-rider remarked to another the other day, heading from downtown toward Lowertown, “This really is a ghost town after five.”

    A primary mover behind the downtown development blueprint St. Paul has been following since 1996, “The Saint Paul on the Mississippi Development Framework,” Greenberg points out that retail and street life can and do thrive in similar, very cold urban areas without skyways—even in places just outside downtown. “A good example is Grand Avenue in St. Paul,” he says. And downtown St. Paul itself, before the skyways. “Where skyway solutions have been employed in other cities like Toronto, Calgary, and Edmonton,” Greenberg adds, “the results have been similar.”

    For evidence, Greenberg points to an April 11, 2004, editorial in the Hartford Courant, in which urban planner Toni Gold delights in the demise of that city’s twenty-year-old skyways (which they called “skywalks”). Gold, who works at a New York City nonprofit called Project for Public Spaces, begins her commentary: “Hartford’s skywalks are coming down, with barely a whimper of protest from their one-time proponents, or even a hurray from their one-time opponents. Well, hurray, I say. Two cheers for city sidewalks. It’s now become obvious and widely acknowledged that cities should reinforce their sidewalks, not compete with them.” She ends her piece by quoting one of the most well-known urban planners of the last century: “As usual, William H. Whyte had the right take. Speaking at a conference in 1981 he said: ‘It’s distressing to go to a city and know what’s going to be there. You can almost plug your second-level walkways right in…But we already have in the central city the most fundamental spaces of all, the streets and street corners. These are our great treasures, and they’re right under our noses. They’re messy. They’re crowded. They’re full of all kinds of people. They’re animated. Absolutely full of life. And they’re our future.’”

    Greenberg even suggests that Twin Cities leaders should reconsider the necessity of skyways. He believes it’d be better to build “mid-block passages,” which he describes as sheltered or semi-sheltered public pathways or interlinked lobbies that lead through the interior of blocks—as opposed to skyways that link buildings across streets. “They provide partial protection from the elements,” he says, “and while they require people to cross streets, they make for a reasonable winter-city experience. These could be grand, well-lit, and attractive street-level protected spaces that could make a real contribution to the quality of downtown pedestrian life.”

    Mid-block passages sound nice, but the fact is that skyways are an entrenched and virtually irreplaceable part of downtown Minneapolis, and, to a slightly lesser degree, downtown St. Paul. How did this come to be? Most people will tell you that the opening in the mid-1950s of Southdale Center, the first fully enclosed shopping mall in the country, played a big role in the skyways’ development. Political and business leaders in both cities understood that they had to do something to keep their downtown retail and entertainment markets viable in the face of the pending exodus-to-suburbia that was sweeping across the U.S. in the post-World War II euphoria of the fifties. Skyways are among the earliest results of suburban influences on downtown Minneapolis, a kind of proto-mall decades before City Center and Gaviidae Commons were built. The idea was to make it more convenient for Twin Citizens to spend their dollars downtown rather than out in Richfield, Bloomington, or White Bear Lake. In other words, to offer roughly the same experience as the suburban malls were offering.

    Edward Baker—the architect who designed the first two skyways in Minneapolis in 1962 and 1963 and later collaborated with Philip Johnson on the IDS Center and its Crystal Court—agrees with that line of thinking. But he also offers another, more pointed and political explanation, one that centers on the urban renewal plans for the Gateway District in downtown Minneapolis.

    His story begins with a Minneapolis mayor by the name of Hubert Humphrey, who got it into his head that he wanted to redevelop the seedy red-light district along Washington Avenue. “A Democratic friend of his owned most of the property around there and was given a long option on it, about a dollar per square foot, I think, as long as he redeveloped the area,” Baker says. One of Baker’s clients was a man named Leslie Park, who owned a significant portion of the real estate around Seventh and Marquette. “One day Park told me, ‘We have to do something, because if we don’t, the whole downtown will shift over to Washington Avenue.’ He and other property owners around Seventh and Marquette weren’t going to let that happen.”

    Park asked Baker to come up with a creative idea for that area, something that would catch people’s eye and imagination—and keep downtown centered there. “I made a sketch on how to connect all four corners of the Seventh and Marquette intersection with a plaza, making it light and airy, and with a restaurant at the second level over the street, so that people could walk on the second-floor level.” The driving idea, Baker explains, was to alleviate the traffic on the street by putting the pedestrians on the second floor. As it turned out, however, Baker could never have built a restaurant above Seventh and Marquette, because the City of Minneapolis, which owns the actual streets, would have charged exorbitant fees to allow retail to occur above them. “So we went with bridges connecting the buildings across the streets with walkways that became skyways,” Baker says, adding that connecting that block cost $26 million.

    Watson Davidson is the man most often credited for starting the skyway system in St. Paul (though some skyway purists disagree). The Davidson family at one time owned a great deal of downtown St. Paul, including the historic Pioneer Press and Endicott buildings. Seeing the success of the Minneapolis skyways, Watson Davidson built one in 1967 connecting the Pioneer and Endicott buildings across Fourth Street to the Federal Courts Building; the second came in 1970, when the Fifth Street Center project included a skyway over Cedar Street.

    Minneapolis’s IDS Center, completed in 1973, was the first to incorporate a retail center built around skyways. After that feat, it got to be so that “if you built a building downtown, you had to include a skyway,” Baker says. “The system became enormous—and, frankly, a little unwieldy, I think. But it’s become a way of living, because people do find it’s a wonderful way to go to work.”

    Indeed, thanks to the transportation division of the City of Minneapolis, the pedestrian commute between parking space and office space, for many workers, no longer involves going outside at all. Mike Monahan, an engineer, was intimately involved with the huge expansion of the skyway system during his career—he joined the Transportation and Parking Services division of the Department of Public Works in 1969 and was its director from 1985 until he retired in 1999. During that time, he saw the skyway transformed from a quaint, even amusing urban oddity of the frigid North into an irreplaceable feeder system that conveys tens of thousands of people each day from ramps on the fringes of downtown Minneapolis into the business and retail core. Ed Baker points to the threat of Washington Avenue development as the initial inspiration for the skyway system; Monahan knows intimately how the system achieved its unprecedented growth: “The parking ramps became economic tools, is what happened,” he says. “When the Government Center ramp went in [1973], the Government Center wasn’t there, the Lutheran Brotherhood building wasn’t there. ‘Build it and they will come’ was the idea—and they did.” The city built one ramp after another at the fringe of downtown, knowing the skyways would follow, until it was virtually ringed with major parking complexes.

    It wasn’t that easy, of course. Someone had to pay for all those garages. This is where Minneapolis hit the mother lode: Starting in the late 1980s, the city got the federal government to pay ninety percent of the $100 million bill to construct three massive parking ramps around the Target Center along Fourth, Fifth, and Seventh streets. Known collectively as the Third Avenue Distributor (“TAD”) ramps, they contain seven thousand parking spaces, which were subsequently tied into the skyway system as anticipated. How’d Monahan and his colleagues do it? They did it by convincing federal officials that enabling commuters to park their pollution-spewing vehicles in these fringe parking lots would help improve air quality in the downtown core. No matter that the ramps would also encourage the auto-centric culture that does overall damage to air quality—the federal government went for it. Minneapolis and the state paid only $5 million each for the $100 million project, which stretched into the 1990s.

    “The ramps are nicely connected on all corners by skyways to downtown via the Target Center,” says pedestrian counter and skyway expert Peter Bruce. “And so they really do promote the whole idea of a skyway culture.”

    “One writer from out of town called the skyways ‘gerbil trails,’” laughs Todd Klingel, president and CEO of the Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce. “I loved that one; it’s probably my favorite description. Because we do have whole groups of people exercising in the skyways.” Klingel, owner of a robust sense of humor, has been involved with downtown Minneapolis issues for twenty-five years and he loves the skyways. He calls them “the biggest indoor winter cabin in the world.” But he’s also aware of their limitations. The lack of a universal signage system in the skyways makes it difficult for people to find their way through them, and the fact that the skyways are not open twenty-four hours can cause real problems, especially for visitors. “I’ve heard stories from visitors about how on a really cold night they went to dinner through a skyway—so didn’t take their coats—and then find the skyway closed after dinner, forcing them outside. So they’re cold and lost. There are some bad things that happen because the skyways aren’t open twenty-four hours.”’

    There is a wealth of untold stories from thirty years of life up in the skyway. Rob Allen, police inspector for the First Precinct in Minneapolis, remembers his moonlighting days doing security there: “I guess there’s something about skyways that makes people feel romantic, because occasionally I’d have to get on the speaker and tell some couple to get a room. People don’t realize how many security cameras there are in the skyways.” Which brings me to another point: Two of the most prominent stores in downtown Minneapolis, Marshall Field’s and Saks Fifth Avenue, allow people to walk from skyway to skyway right through their stores—even when the stores aren’t open. One would assume that sticky-fingered people have taken advantage. While such thievery does occur, Allen says, it doesn’t happen nearly as often as you’d think. Ann Massey, general manager for the downtown Saks, says the store opens its doors for the skyway pass-thru at 7:30 a.m., while the store itself doesn’t open until ten. “It’s the truth,” Massey says. “People don’t steal. It’s because Minneapolis people are so nice and honest. Really. I think it shows that we trust the public and they trust us.”

    The Minneapolis Downtown Council, which favors skyways—and was in fact created to monitor the skyways—keeps a list of locations where it believes the city should build additional skyway bridges because of heavy foot-traffic, or remove skyways because of under-use. It is possible to recycle the latter into the former. In the early 1990s, Lutheran Brotherhood decided that a new Sixth Street skyway connecting its building to the Government Center would be superior to the Fifth Street one that already existed. Monahan and Greg Finstad, a former assistant, recall how one cold Sunday morning at five a.m., workers finished dismantling the one hundred forty-foot skyway, loaded it in pieces onto trucks (fourteen axles, ninety-eight tires), and drove it to a rail yard along Interstate 394. A few years later, the city wanted a skyway connecting the Seventh Street parking ramp across First Avenue to the Carmichael Lynch Building. “And so I said, ‘Hey, I’ve got a skyway for you,’” Monahan laughs. That’s how one hundred and forty feet of skyway got recycled. “We saved $300,000 by doing that,” Finstad says. “With Minneapolis being pioneers in recycling, we thought it’d be a good idea.”

    For better or worse, the skyway system exerts a major influence on the culture of both downtowns—their daily look and feel and pulse. There are more than one hundred skyways in the Twin Cities (about seventy in Minneapolis, forty in St. Paul). Are they really efficient at bringing customers to retail operations? Apparently they are. In St. Paul, for example, according to a walking survey the city mapped in 2000, there were slightly more than two hundred skyway-level businesses, compared to ninety on the street. In Minneapolis, the ratio is closer to sixty-forty, though no one knows for sure, because, for some odd reason, no one in Minneapolis has ever counted. But the power of this discrepancy is evident in the lease rates. In St. Paul, skyway space costs between twenty-five and thirty-five dollars per square foot, depending on location and the ease of retail access. The cost of sidewalk space is much cheaper—between ten and twenty dollars less per square foot, a huge difference in commercial value. In Minneapolis, skyway-level rent is in the range of twenty to fifty dollars per square foot, whereas street-level property goes for ten to thirty dollars per square foot. It’s clear that retail wants to be on the second level.

    Equity Commercial Services manages four buildings in downtown Minneapolis, buildings that include twenty-eight skyway-level businesses. Chuck Howard is a principal at Equity. “You’re selling two different things when you’re talking street level versus skyway level,” he says. “The thing that draws a business to the street level is if they are a national group and want a corner that really stands out. In general it’s preferable to be on the skyway, because for the most part skyway traffic stays on the skyway. It’s a detriment if you aren’t connected in downtown Minneapolis.”

    Now that I work in downtown Minneapolis, I understand the draw of the skyways. It’s amazing how often I—a person who disdained skyways for my first four months here—have found myself walking through those that ring the building where I work (the Pillsbury Center), rushing to the credit union or the dry cleaners or to the several lunch places I favor. Many days I don’t feel the fresh air on my face from the moment I head into work until the moment I leave. It’s funny. Even on beautiful days, when a walk outside would be a pleasure, I rush along from Point A to Point B indoors because, well, it’s so much quicker. I’m more than a little amused that I’ve become a skyway stalwart, a victim of the seductive ease and convenience of the system.

    So: Skyways are wonderful urban conveniences that do a great job of delivering people from car to office and office to stores or restaurants or theaters—or they are bloodsuckers erasing the life that downtown streets should be teeming with. No matter which side one takes, anyone who knows the skyways well knows their two faces, their yin and yang. Even Ed Baker, the putative inventor of the skyway, recognizes the mixed blessing. That they drain life from the street, he says, is “a valid criticism.” But the solution, he argues, is to get more people to live downtown by increasing available housing, which would put more people on both the streets and in the skyways. “Then the skyways could be a great amenity not just for people working downtown but also for people living downtown.”

    Pedestrian consultant Peter Bruce also knows the downside of skyways, how they can suck the marrow from the street fifteen feet below. For a city center to be healthy, Bruce knows that people must be on the streets, too. “We’ve done a great job here of helping people avoid the streets,” he says. He praises Minneapolis mayor R.T. Rybak for refusing to build a large hotel adjacent to the Minneapolis Convention Center, precisely because “people wouldn’t get out on the streets enough.” What Bruce envisions when he looks into the future is “a new science” of city-center urban planning, one that more elegantly holds together everything that a downtown can be, one that includes street amenities like outdoor sculpture (he considers the “Peanuts” campaign in St. Paul a particularly brilliant example) and clear signage and traffic signals and well-paved sidewalks, as well as easy-to-access and more transparent skyways—in other words, smooth and enjoyable transitions between the street and the office and retail and housing and entertainment, efficient exchanges that not only make life easier for people who work downtown, but also pique people’s curiosity and lure them to live and play downtown. “Now that’s planning I’d really like to be involved with,” Bruce says.

  • Best of Class

    Once upon a time, high school seniors all had their yearbook pictures taken against a blue marbleized background, just like everybody else on picture day. Maybe they posed with chin in hand or had a halo of backlighting, but their portraits were all pretty much the same. One day, an ambitious but anonymous photographer saw golden light streaming through the leaves of an oak tree outside his studio, and he had a revelation: posing a senior there, under that tree, would make a pretty sweet portrait. Later, he pulled a log up to the tree, so seniors could sit on it. A few brought their dogs.

    Self-expression and freedom of choice have significantly altered the business of senior portrait photography. “We’ve seen a change over the last five to seven years in what students are looking for,” said David Peterjohn, a senior director of business development for Lifetouch, a national chain whose Prestige Portraits division is devoted exclusively to photographing high school seniors. “They’re looking for more variety in their poses—both vertical and horizontal pictures, outdoor and indoor shots, with multiple sets. They are having four or five clothing changes, and bringing in props that show their personality.”

    A survey of recent yearbooks dug out of sock drawers gives evidence of this rich pageant. Today, students bring their pets: dogs, cats, or, say, an iguana or a prize bull. There are young men with their guitars, and also the xylophone player and the rock drummer who wish to be photographed with their instruments. Students pose with their Harleys, their BMWs, and their pickups. They surround themselves with athletic equipment or cheerleading paraphernalia. They create moods with different backdrops: There are “urban” back-alley doorways (shop students?); a pueblo-style setting with adobe walls and pottery (especially popular lately); or a discotheque conjured with colored smoke and dramatic lighting (eighties revival?).

    There will always be seniors who don’t bother with a portrait (the truant), or turn in a tongue-wagging snapshot (class clown), or go for the bare-minimum basic package (late bloomers). But the other end of the spectrum has grown more extreme. “They spend a lot of money on these portraits. It can be upwards of a thousand dollars,” said Jeff Kocur, a language arts teacher and yearbook advisor at Hopkins High School, where senior portraits for the yearbook are due this month. “It’s a pretty drawn-out ordeal for some.”

    Cretin-Derham Hall, the athletically inclined Catholic high school in St. Paul, saves its students from such agony and venality. It has always had strict guidelines regarding its yearbook photos. “For girls, a white or cream dress shirt. Boys wear a dark tie, dress shirt, and dark sports jacket,” said Theresa Haider, an English teacher and yearbook advisor. “We have one photographer that students can use free of charge for the yearbook.”

    It appears that Cretin-Derham Hall is now leading a back-to-basics counter-trend. “Schools are getting to where they want just head-and-shoulders portraits for their yearbooks,” said Beth Johnstone, who has operated Johnstone Photography in Minnetonka with her husband for the past sixteen years. “The six main schools we do pictures for want head-and-shoulder studio pictures—no outdoor scenes, no props, no full-body shots.” It turns out that Hopkins High is now a client. Last year it required head-and-shoulders portraits. “A lot of students resisted it,” said Kocur. “But parents liked the uniformity and consistency.” Of course they would—parents are totally boring. Kocur, however, pointed out something essential about the nature of a yearbook portrait. “The fact that they played football is not important. It’s a portrait; we want to focus on the face, not the extracurricular elements of their lives. The football thing will come through elsewhere in the yearbook.”

    “As a school we want to put our best foot forward with the yearbook,” said Haider. “The kids obviously have the right to get any other photos they want taken.” A Cretin-Derham Hall alumna, she’s come to her own conclusions about self-expression and freedom of choice in senior portraiture. “Today, some of my senior pictures look so 1995,” she said. “I was wearing a bodysuit with a vest and jeans. But my official yearbook picture is much more reflective of me as a student and young person. You can’t really date it; it’s just a nice picture.”

    Just a nice picture is, well, nice, but why would parents and teachers want to rob their children of the opportunity to laugh at themselves and their fashion blunders twenty years hence? The answer is one of the great enduring injustices: Adults are, it is true, just so totally lame.
    —Julie Caniglia

  • “It vibrates. But is it, y’know, a vibrator?”

    I’d just been dumped by a guy when I first heard about the Bakken Museum’s vibrator collection. Minneapolis’s Bakken, for the record, bills itself as “The Museum of Electricity in Life,” and since my bulb had just gone out, I thought looking into the long history of self-satisfaction might be a pleasant diversion.

    I learned that the museum (named for its founder, Earl Bakken, inventor of the pacemaker and founder of Medtronic) houses the world’s largest vibrator collection, including a number of turn-of-the-century gadgets, the genial digi-genital progenitors of our modern day devices. (Try saying that five times fast.)

    Could it be true that this little museum on the banks of Lake Calhoun had such a collection on display? An electro-phallic chronology of female sexual independence? I naively pictured glass cases filled with oblong devices, beginning with old-timey cracked leather fixtures with odd metal knobs, and arriving in modernity with colorful plastic toys like “the Rabbit,” the trembling tool that made a recluse of Sex and the City’s Charlotte.

    With a tight deadline and no research under my belt (Ba-da-bing! Thank you! I’ll be here all week!), I called the Bakken. “I’m, ah, I’m with… Is it true that you have the world’s largest vibrator—exhibit of vibrators?” I asked the switchboard operator, who sighed. “Because I checked the website and it doesn’t seem like you have them on display,” I added. Listed exhibits included The Mystery of Magnetism, Magnetism and the Human Body, Batteries, Eighteenth Century Electricity, and The Spark of Life. And while that last one seemed promising, and some of them were even billed as “hands-on” exhibits, none seemed to fit the bill. “Do you get that question a lot?” I asked.

    “We do, in fact,” he said, and he patched me through to the museum’s Curator of Instruments, Dr. Ellen Kuhfeld, who confirmed a collection of vibrators—not on display, but in museum storage—and agreed to take me into the vault.

    Kuhfeld, who has a Ph.D. in nuclear physics, described her duties at the Bakken as “something between a warehouse job and a university position.” Guiding me through the two thousand objects in the collection, she pointed out early pacemakers and defibrillators, violet ray machines used to clear up skin conditions, and an electrocardiograph built in 1945. She showed me C. Walton Lillehei’s surgical headlamp and pointed to the box that holds a Jarvik-7 artificial heart.

    You get the feeling that Kuhfeld, beleaguered by questions about the museum’s most private of collections, would rather talk about anything but, um, the business at hand. But finally we arrived at the vibrators, which are catalogued as “musculo-skeletal relaxation devices,” and Kuhfeld carefully pulled each one off the shelf. The oldest in the collection, a Weiss vibrator dating from between the 1880s and 1930s, looked like a tiny black-leather spy camera with a small spring-coiled arm on the top. It was designed, Kuhfeld told me, to treat deafness by delivering a pulse to the inner ear. A number of early-twentieth-century devices, among them the New Life Vibrator, looked like blow dryers and came with various rubber attachments. Kuhfeld explained that these were advertised as remedies for everything from back pain to wrinkles to weak bladders, curing through heat and vibration. Next she showed me an electric hairbrush. Not exactly what I was expecting.

    “So, are any of these actually vibrators?” I asked.

    “Well, they’re all classified as vibrators,” replied Kuhfeld, pulling another object off the shelf. “It depends on what you mean by ‘vibrators.’”

    “I mean, what we think of today as vibrators,” I said.

    Dr. Kuhfeld blinked back at me. She was giving nothing away.

    “Devices for female sexual pleasuring,” I finally said.

    At this point, Kuhfeld placed on the table an instrument made in Denmark in the early 1900s. It included three thin metal shafts, whose uses were unfathomable.

    “Well, this isn’t something I’d want near my pleasure,” Dr. Kuhfeld said.

    “So, you have nothing like what we think of as a vibrator?” I asked Dr. Kuhfeld on our way out of the crypt. Kuhfeld didn’t exactly answer my question. Instead she stopped and gestured to a kerosene lamp from Russia that doubled as a thermoelectric generator. “For the outback. The places where electricity hadn’t yet arrived.”

    The truth according to historian and author Rachel Maines is that though these tools were advertised as chiropractic devices, their salubrious effects were overshadowed by their more ecstatic applications. In her book The Technology of Orgasm, Maines, who spent time researching at the Bakken Library, traces their origins back to the Victorian medical treatment of “hysteria,” a condition thought to be caused by a woman’s failure to come to orgasm. Victorian doctors treated the “disease” by massaging their patients’ genitals, and turned to the electrical gizmos to make their jobs a little easier. According to Maines, as electricity became available across the country, these vibrators saw new domestic uses, though ads for them only hinted at anything beyond simple chiropractic relief.

    While the more kinky history of some of its vibrating devices isn’t something the Bakken seems eager to trumpet, it’s not exactly the titillating display that urban myth has made it out to be. Visitors to the Bakken who want to shiver and thrill are advised to sit in on the Frankenstein show. Or spin the magnetic love puppies, whose noses quiver when they meet.—Shannon Olson

  • A Taste for Blood

    Ghoulish white faces with dark eyes lurked beneath the chandeliers and timber beams. They whispered in Slavic-sounding accents. A man with pointy ears and a deformed face shuffled under the candelabrum shaped like a dragon, muttering to himself. This was a particularly strange evening at the historic James J. Hill House, because everyone present was a vampire.

    “Smile, you’re dead,” Genevieve Woodward said to a small woman with pigtails, and then whispered something in her ear. Genevieve and others were playing an unusual game, in which players dress and act as the vampire characters they create—complete with personality, life story, and various magical powers. It is called live-action role-playing, or LARP.

    The vampires congregate each month, usually in a rented building on the Macalester College campus, where some are students. But they occasionally save up to make a playground of places
    like a glasshouse conservatory or historic museum.

    Forty of them gathered in the Hill House’s art gallery, fussing with their costumes and stepping around security ropes. Some sat in folding chairs near the antique furnishings; all adhered to a sacred vow not to touch anything. Their undead leader, who wore a bowler hat and a gray face, addressed them in a low, raspy voice.

    “I hope last month treated you well.” This, like a lot of what was said, seemed to be some kind of password or code; someone from the crowd then discreetly nodded at Genevieve, who stepped forward to interrupt.

    “OK, this explodes,” she announced with calm authority. She pointed to a spot on a couch in the center of the art gallery. The tall blonde was distinct from the crowd, because she wore a large white T-shirt with the word “Goddess” printed on it. She was one of four deities who were running this elaborate game. They are known formally as the “storytellers.”

    “It’s shiny. Everyone do a courage throw,” Genevieve instructed. The silence was broken by the sound of fists slapping into palms, as players engaged in a group round of rock-paper-scissors to determine their next move.

    “We create the world,” Genevieve told me, speaking for the storytellers. When the pretty twenty-six-year-old returns to human form, she works on a master’s degree in fisheries at the University of Minnesota. She thinks of LARP as a creative outlet. “It’s my way of sharing my little plot lines and story ideas.”

    Crouched in the back of the exploding art gallery was John Schwartzbauer, whose dyed black hair and thick black eyeliner nicely complemented his entirely black outfit. Nearby, a smaller Schwartzbauer with wire-rimmed glasses and a black bandanna, also dressed in black, mimicked John’s stance. “This is the little brother. He’s larping now,” John said. “It’ll be really lame when the father joins. It’ll be lame, but it’ll be cool.”

    He proudly explained that the identical arm cuffs he and his brother Luke wore were a project made by the thirteen-year-old. “It is really cute,” John said. “I have huge hopes for his geek factor.” John, a peppy twenty-year-old, said he used to be a shy, antisocial teenager playing less interactive games like Dungeons & Dragons in dark basements, away from people. He said that live action role-playing “propelled me out of the gloom that I was in.” During daylight hours, he is a professional butcher. But he hopes to enroll as a mortuary science student.

    This game was part of the fourth large-scale role-playing project to emerge from a scene that, for the last five years, has been casually headquartered at the Aster Café in Minneapolis. The storytellers are exquisitely organized, even requiring young Luke to bring a permission slip from his parents before he would be allowed to play. Who knew Goths were so responsible?—Juliah Rueckert

  • The Trek Begins

    A few weeks ago, William Shatner stopped by Riverside, Iowa, to audition locals for Invasion Iowa, a sci-fi screenplay he supposedly co-wrote with Leonard Nimoy. It turned out to be a put-on. There will be no Invasion Iowa, only a reality-TV show making fun of Riversiders.

    Why did Shatner, an unapologetic Canadian, decide to pick on Riverside? At some point during the original Star Trek series in the sixties, it was said that Capt. James Tiberius Kirk of the starship Enterprise was born in a small town in Iowa. Years later, that gave Riverside City Council member Steve Miller an idea. In 1985, he wrote to Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry and asked why Riverside, Iowa, shouldn’t be the “future birthplace of Captain Kirk.” Perhaps seeing a chance to generate a little publicity for their new sci-fi series (Star Trek: The Next Generation was just being conceived), the producers agreed.

    The town festival, on the last Saturday in June, soon changed its name from the unfantastic “Riverfest” to “Trek Fest.” Naturally, this adjustment lured more sci-fi fans dressed as Vulcans, Klingons, coneheads, and future cadets of Starfleet. A sign reading, “Where the West Begins” used to welcome Riverside visitors, but the town motto has since been changed to “Where the Trek Begins.” Videos of Star Trek are screened after the parade, and collectors trade memorabilia at a swap meet.

    In August, I beamed down and explored the area in the wake of the festival. Some people in town were still feeling a little overwhelmed by all the trekkies who had converged on Riverside. “I don’t watch Star Trek, but the festival was pretty fun,” said Ron, a clerk at the Kwik-n-EZ. “There was a costume contest over there at the park, but I didn’t dress up.”

    A sculptor who was fixing up downtown storefronts had a more enthusiastic take on the festivities. He said, “It ain’t the Green Bay Packers, but it sure is a flying farce that sets us apart from every other podunk town in Iowa. I think Riverside should take advantage of it and have all sorts of prequels filmed of his life before Star Trek and Starfleet.” Any profit from Trek Fest is dedicated to erecting a monument to Captain Kirk’s future birth. Unfortunately, Paramount—the company that owns the rights to all Star Trek paraphernalia and armaments—won’t let little Riverside erect a Star Trek statue without a hefty licensing fee: forty thousand dollars.

    “That’s extortion!” griped the Riverside sculptor, known to locals as simply “Artist Bob.” To skirt these legal obstacles, the town built a twenty-foot-long USS Enterprise and mounted it on a trailer in the town park but named it the USS Riverside. Apart from that, a plaque behind the yellow New Image Salon marks where the future local hero will be born on March 21, 2233. Vials of “Kirk Dirt” from this spot are for sale for three dollars via catalog.

    “The other local legend,” said Artist Bob, “is that he’ll be conceived on the pool table in Murphy’s Bar—of course, that probably puts him in the running with everybody else in town. I doubt they’ll put up any sort of plaque for that, though.”

    Bob also passed along the gossip that people in town have been wondering what Kirk’s ancestry will be, because his great-great-grandparents probably are alive today.

    “There’s something strange and special about this town that people just up and do things,” he said. “I just gotta hand it to the son-of-a-bitch who wrote Gene Roddenberry. That’s genius. I hope Riverside goes overboard and keeps expanding on this crazy idea.”—Eric Dregni

  • Fear Factory

    American solipsism is a funny thing. Each of us tends to believe two contradictory destinies await us: On the one hand, incredible luck and wealth will eventually be ours. On the other hand, violent tragedy is one terrorist strike away. This is the American Dream gone to seed and become a psychosis.

    We each believe we are the star of our own made-for-TV movie, which has helped us arrive at a twisted understanding of probability. We know, because we saw it on TV, that someone has to win the lottery, and someone has to be the next victim of violence. Naturally, it may as well be me. This despite all evidence to the contrary.

    If we looked earnestly at our own lives, minus the commercial breaks, we might see that life in general is pretty mellow, its pleasures and pains mostly subtle. There is not a great chance that a hijacked plane will land on your house, or that a van will arrive with a gigantic cashier’s check. In fact, there is no meaningful chance at all. There is a whole world out there that operates independently of our own routines, pleasures, and impediments. We sit down for the ten o’clock news, and the TV collapses time and space; we can’t help fearing the worst and expecting the best for ourselves.

    Sadly, you will not win the lottery. But on the bright side, neither will you be attacked by a terrorist. Terrorism is not about reality, it is about perception. In other words, it is about media manipulation. Anyone serious about terrorism must recognize that media coverage is not the solution to terror; it is terror’s best tool. What would happen if our newspapers relegated all news of terrorism to the back pages? What if the only people who took notice of terror alerts and webcam beheadings were secret government agencies in a position to do something about them? Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer recently insisted on posting terrorism warnings at Minnesota polling places. She, like any purveyor of terror, wanted you to embrace your fear, no matter how irrational it might be. We haven’t worked out the math, but we’re pretty sure that odds are significantly better that you will be struck by lightning than by a terrorist on November 2. (Statisticians say the annual odds of a lightning strike on an American are 300,000:1.)

    If you insist on being motivated by fear, then it may be more realistic to worry about how you would pay the deductible for an emergency appendectomy. Or how you might find the cash for your children’s orthodontics. Or you might agonize about how your full-time job at minimum wage still puts you well under the federal definition of poverty. (Did we mention that you may no longer qualify for overtime, thanks to new federal regulations?)

    But if these boogeymen are still not sufficiently scary, and you crave the fear you can get only from the Fox News Channel, you might consider that there are twenty-five thousand homicides committed with guns each year in your homeland. There are thirty thousand suicides each year in your homeland. If your main worry is terrorism, you might consider that we are effectively terrorizing ourselves—and not a kaffiyeh in sight.

    Still, we understand that nothing terrorizes like the idea of an enraged Islamic fundamentalist on American soil. So in the interest of fomenting that highly specialized brand of fear, we’ll point out that the War on Terrorism has actually increased the incidence of Islamic terrorism worldwide, not decreased it. This should not be surprising for one simple reason: When anybody takes the trouble to ask, Islamic outliers say their essential complaint is the presence of American “infidels” in Muslim lands. Now consider that your government’s approach to eliminating Islamic terrorists has been to do precisely what angers them most, and what best animates their recruitment efforts: forcibly occupying the world’s most ancient Islamic enclaves.

    But seriously. Can these Al Qaeda nut-jobs reach you? No. If you’re going to leave the house with a tinfoil hat on your head and a handgun in your lunchbox, at least be afraid of the right things for the right reasons. And know that if the lightning doesn’t get you, your own gun probably will. At least your bereaved children will have your lottery winnings.—Hans Eisenbeis

  • Double Shot

    After Richard Avedon, the famous portraitist and New Yorker staff photographer, died on October 1, the owners of the Black Forest Inn in South Minneapolis draped their notorious Avedon print in black chiffon. The colossal photograph—a black and white portrait of eleven members of the Daughters of the American Revolution—covers a wall in their backroom bar. It is a fine counterpoint to the Teutonic woodwork and Bavarian kitsch in the rest of the place.

    The piece was given in 1970 to Erich and Joanne Christ, the Inn’s owners, by Avedon himself. The artist frequented their establishment during his exhibit just down the street at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, which was the first museum retrospective of his work in the country. The gift surprised the Christs, as they never got close to Avedon during his brief stay here, despite the many visits he apparently paid to their bar.

    Sixteen years later, Ellis Nelson, a regular at the bar, was sitting on his favorite stool when he pulled out a revolver and opened fire on the photograph. “That was a wild day,” remembers Erich, who was walking his wife and infant son through the parking lot when the shooting occurred. “People came running out of every hole in the place shouting ‘He’s got a gun! He’s got a gun!’ and I said to myself, ‘Ellis, this time you really did it.’” When police later questioned the shooter, trying to uncover a motive, Nelson was reported to have answered, “That photo always bugged the hell out of me.”

    “It does have an element of satire,” says Joanne, referring to the piece. The subjects—members of a patriotic national women’s organization—range in age from roughly fifty to seventy and, being posed in full formal regalia, look more than a little smug. Avedon was branded by some as an unsympathetic photographer known to sucker-punch a trusting subject—making his sitters appear drugged and burned-out in some instances, coaxing them to expose themselves in others. In this case, the Daughters’ personalities are disparate, but all equally repellent. One looks paralyzingly self-conscious. Another lifts her chin, beaming like a queen in what seems an emphatic assertion of superiority. Another wrinkles her nose as if she’d caught a whiff of something pungent. And another, turned from the camera, showcases the fine satin and lacework decorating her expansive backside.

    Popular opinion about the piece varies, but most of the regulars, known to asperse the Daughters once they’ve had a few Hefeweizen, find the piece disagreeable (though many enjoy slipping their fingers into its bullet holes). Unfortunately, the window of opportunity appears to have closed on understanding what pushed Ellis Nelson over the edge. According to the Christs, who are still in contact with him despite a lifelong restraining order preventing him from returning to the Black Forest Inn, he is fragile.

    However agitated Nelson might have been back in 1986, his aim was impressive. Sure, he was within fifteen feet of his target, but he did not miss his mark. He fired just two bullets into the Daughters, hitting one in the chest, another right through the temple.

    The Christs say Avedon was not pleased by the shooting. To appease him, they researched the costs of repair. But after receiving some frightfully steep estimates, they opted to leave the Daughters of the American Revolution forever wounded. Besides, by then the piece was attracting a new crowd of gawkers and urban folklorists. “Rather than losing a bunch of business on account of it, we got busy,” says Erich. “The damage Ellis did was off-set by the notoriety he established.”—Christy DeSmith

  • What Awaits Karl Rove in the Afterlife?

    • Shared bathroom with
    Bill O’Reilly

    • “Mission Accomplished”
    branded into flesh

    • Kidneys pecked out
    by Lee Atwater

    • Daily brunch with Dick Cheney

    • What’s left of hair pulled out
    by mixed-race love children

    • Steady audio feed from the
    Hillary Clinton Presidential Library

  • It’s My Country, I’ll Cry if I Want To

    For many years, country music was one of the shibboleths of the alternative nation: If you were born after 1950, lived in a city, and considered yourself smart and hip, you’d say you liked “all kinds of music”—pause—“except country.” There were almost as many “Country and Western” jokes as knock-knock jokes. And the folk revolution of the late sixties was remarkably irrelevant to mainstream country. (Vietnam, the great divider of that generation, pitted cowboys squarely against hippies.)

    Like the new Imax film Our Country, the whole genre has too often been a self-parody. That makes it hard to take seriously, and it’s a shame. If you look no further than the far right of the FM dial, there are lots of reasons to hate country. The great decline really started in the seventies and early eighties, culminating in gone-to-seed dudes like Mac Davis, Conway Twitty, George Jones, and Glen Campbell. At the time, it was the men who were the derelicts of country music, not the women. (God bless you, Dolly, Tammy, Loretta, and Emmylou.) The same reasons to loathe country music persist today in the saccharine pop of straw-stuffed FM stars like Shania Twain, Toby Keith, and Garth Brooks. (I’ve found a simple formula to distinguish the good from the bad: If it sounds like a commercial for Ford or Budweiser, it probably will be one before long. This is bad.)

    We might have dismissed mainstream country the same way we’ve dismissed classical music. In the nineties, though, something funny started to happen. Young urbanites, especially those who’d been steeped in punk rock, were forever on the lookout for novelty. Moving forward often requires looking backward; some musicians began to study older forms of folk music. Eventually, they got so far as to punkify blues (Jon Spencer, not to mention his less-deserving copycats, the White Stripes) and jazz (Medeski, Martin, & Wood and protégés like the Bad Plus and Happy Apple).

    And somewhere along the line, an earnest new generation of musicians got sucked into one of America’s great and durable traditions: electrified folk, otherwise known as true blue country music. A band like the Jayhawks helped launch alt-country, with garrisons in Wilco, Joe Henry, Steve Earle, Lucinda Williams, and many others. For the urbane and curious, these artists opened the doors to historical country music, and, frankly, made it cool again. I think it’s fair to say that the alternative-country gang, no matter what their pretensions, helped to reclaim American country music as it was played up until about 1970—that is, before a whole lot of coke and sequins got snorted off the coffee tables of huge record companies in Nashville. Needless to say, the Jayhawks’ Gary Louris probably has more in common with Hank Williams than Keith Urban does.

    Then again, so what? That rare insight may scratch a certain kind of elitist itch, but it doesn’t much explain country music today—not the brand most Americans would recognize, anyway. Which brings us to people like George Strait and Tim McGraw. Modern fans of Hank Williams and Jimmie Rodgers and the Carter Family likely avoid the lo-cal molasses to be heard on country radio today. Still, as off-putting as it might be to city slickers, the fact is that contemporary country radio covers a massive swath of the nation. I’ve come to think of it as a harmless little diversion—like petting zoos and the New York Yankees and Ted Turner and other easy-to-digest artifacts of life in the USA.

    Sure, a song like “Suds in the Bucket” or “Live Like You Were Dying” is simply high-shine pop music sung with a bizarre (and carefully calibrated) redneck twang. But for whatever it’s worth, modern country music is admirable, at least on a mechanical level. It is some of the best-written and -constructed music today, and it makes most rock and pop seem like it was written by a sixteen-year-old. (As indeed, it often is.) This does not necessarily make country good, nor rock ’n’ roll bad.

    Enthused amateurism is one of the great achievements of punk rock that was stolen from folk music, and country doesn’t want it back. In every other genre of pop music, especially rock, jazz, and hip-hop, the expectation is that a band writes and performs its own material. But even at this late date, country music continues to operate with a Tin Pan Alley/Brill Building model. A glance at the current top twenty country songs shows that more than half were written by someone other than the recording artist. Nashville is lousy with agents connecting songwriters with song performers.

    The result is a specialization of labor—call it an assembly line—which makes for an end product that has its selling points. The songwriting itself is often polished and clever, and the instrumentation and production is the best that can be had from studio session professionals. What makes most of this material sound so much like pop music is that it is seamlessly orchestrated. In other words, it’s built to the same factory specs as bubblegum pop. It should sound the same. Most of it is created the same way as “product” from Linkin Park and Destiny’s Child.

    Even with all the pop obfuscation, there are still certain conventions that signify a song as country: a fiddle, a banjo, a Dobro, or that twangy accent. With modern production and polish, though, it’s the last of these that is often the only identifying characteristic between country and, say, adult contemporary. I’ve long been obsessed with the “redneck” accent that rural populations affect from Mankato to Missoula, Atlanta to Calgary, Austin to Washington D.C. Some think of it as Southern or even Western, but it is a state of mind, not a state of place—the linguistic equivalent of the pickup truck. I’ve heard it from the mouths of cabdrivers and steelworkers in midtown Manhattan. I believe I’ve even heard it from the mouth of our Connecticut-born, Yale- and Harvard-educated, superrich president.

    Beyond country’s musical conventions, there are the hackneyed characters, themes, and storylines that still flourish like crabgrass. Country music today reflects a certain set of values that we’ve come to associate with rural life and Red America. These read like a Republican stump speech: self-sufficiency, fidelity, hard work, a firm sense of right and wrong, family values, respect for God and country. In country music, the bad guys are always irredeemable rascals who can’t give up the bottle or the wandering eye or the rambling road. In country music, the heroes are the World’s Greatest Husband and the Most Loyal Wife in the Universe—and, in times of war, American soldiers and the Almighty, who must look an awful lot like Uncle Sam.

    It’s telling that country is such a huge radio phenomenon. Country radio reaches seventy million listeners nationwide, almost half the entire adult population. Together with right-wing talk, it rules that medium. It doesn’t have as much impact elsewhere, however. Rock and pop, for example, outsell country by a long shot in the CD store and the iTunes queue. On the concert circuit, heavy metal puts to shame the box-office loot from country. But nationally, no other genre even comes close on the radio. In the Twin Cities—remember, a non-rural metropolitan area of around two million pairs of ears—country station K102 is second only to classic rock KQRS.

    Country radio is especially interesting to consider from a demographic point of view. Advertisers have known forever that modern country has a huge appeal to women, particularly suburban soccer moms. I credit all those sentimental, tearjerking odes to simplicity, fealty, and family, as well as the bitter laments about cheating, lying, rambling men. Country deals in these stereotypes comfortably and openly and can always be reduced to the essential tension between the happy home and the open road, between putting down roots versus moving on West.

    Nor is it surprising that, if all other music genres are infes
    ted with Democrats and lefties (try to imagine a conservative answer to the “Vote for Change” lineup—Ted Nugent?), country music is the bailiwick of conservatives. I despise the equivalence of “Republican” with “patriotic,” but I’m intrigued by the simple pun offered by “country” music—country as in not the city, but also country as in nation. It is a triangulation that doesn’t always make sense, particularly with the rise in the seventies of outlaw country, on the one hand, and rope-smoking hippie folk like John Denver on the other. Then again, commercial country during that period was not particularly nationalistic. Certainly not like it is today.

    If there was ever any doubt about the general political leanings of country as a whole, it was swept away in the outrage that has dogged the Dixie Chicks, ever since singer Natalie Maines made it known that she thinks George W. Bush is lower than a snake’s belly in a wagonwheel rut. It is one thing for some Euro-fag like Bono to shamelessly diss a sitting Republican president, but quite another for one of country music’s biggest stars to go all lefty. Disloyalty and dissent don’t sit well with country musicians or Republicans these days.
    If you listen very closely, you can hear Woody Guthrie spinning in his grave.

    Our Country is a strange, superficial overview of the history of country music currently playing at the Minnesota Zoo’s Imax theater. If you saw it, you had a good time, but you didn’t learn much. And you wondered why it was necessary to play what amounts to a thirty-five-minute music video (lightly salted with an instantly forgotten thumbnail history) on the world’s largest movie screen. You would have wondered why such a shallow treatment of such a massive subject needed to be told with six-story-high images, and you would have been left with the main impression that it was in order to show you Lee Ann Womack’s breasts the size of two Harvestore silos.

    The main attraction was the music, of course— some of it good, some of it atrocious, most of it pretty conventional, all of it contemporary. More than a hundred current stars make cameos (Dwight Yoakam, Lyle Lovett, Alan Jackson, Crystal Gayle, Loretta Lynn), playing standards or dressing up like dead heroes such as Patsy Cline or Hank Williams. The overall effect of this long, uneven exercise in “Where’s Waldo?” is one of penance-paying. For all the depredation they have visited on the genre, particularly from the stage of the Grand Ole Opry, the unidentified stars of the movie take their turns playing real country, or a semblance of the same. Country music, like so many other things these days, relies on a reputation for being simple and real, but it’s just show business after all, and just about as fake as a three dollar bill.

    Maybe the strangest aspect of the film is how it compresses the origins of country music into a single, breathtaking, narrative-free panoramic shot of what is supposed to be Ireland, but looks suspiciously like New Zealand. Apparently, fiddles and pennywhistles made it to the New World by way of a single desperate Irishman who had his Da’s fiddle pressed on him as he shipped for Ellis Island. Thirty years later, Jimmie Rodgers invented country music somewhere in America, and you eventually get Willie Nelson, voilà!

    Needless to say, there isn’t much of a storyline to this history. It’s simply a diversion between scenes in the real show—for example, an astonishingly decadent, “We Are the World”-style jam to Pete Seeger’s “Turn, Turn, Turn,” starring everyone from Dolly Parton to Roger McGuinn. A lovely song, but one that’s hardly relevant to the origins of country music, and not considered part of the contemporary canon. There are so many stories to tell along the way—from how country begat rockabilly which begat rock ’n’ roll, for example, or how gospel and swing were folded into various forms of country. As I say, it’s a huge story, and probably one that can’t be told in any amount of footage of any caliber.

    Like modern country music itself, Our Country is pretty inoffensive. It could have been a lot worse. Even the film’s attempt to link country music with God-fearing patriotism is so slight and random—“This generation had its own Pearl Harbor” (September 11), cue “Living in the Promiseland”—as to seem absurd. I guess I can continue to ponder the paradox of what necessary connection there is between conservative politics and country music, and I won’t let it bother me that Lee Ann Womack’s barn-size breasts heave in my face as I do so. That, I think, would be un-American.