October 18, 2020 - It's the One

 

In the wake of Eddie Van Halen's death, I've been having numerous conversations with friends about Eddie, the band, and the impact he and they have had on me, on us, and on music. Yesterday, a friend asked what my favorite Van Halen song is. He might as well ask me to choose a favorite food. Ice cream. No, lasagna. Wait, lobster. Hang on, ribs. Barbecue in general. I can't decide! 

That said, I think I can choose the Van Halen song that best embodies them: "I'm the One" from 1978's Van Halen. This one song has everything a classic Van Halen song needs. In no particular order, here are those elements.

Eddie's crunching riffs at the opening of the song. While the sound isn't the cleanest, that's part of the appeal. It drags the listener into the depths immediately.

Alex's violent drumming: For years I've been reading the pointless back-and-forths of Van Halen fans arguing the Dave vs. Sammy issue. I think one factor that's overlooked is Alex's style. It seems to me that his drumming lessened in intensity when Sammy was with them; this, as much as anything, impacted their sound and their style.

Roth's lyrics and vocals: While the lyrics in this particular song are minimal - two three line verses, a bridge repeated twice, and the chorus - they're classic, fun-time Dave. "We came here to entertain you/Leaving here we aggravate you/Don't you know it means the same to me" That braggadocious, bombastic tone that says they're here to party and eff you if you don't like it. Combine that with his unique howls and yelps (listen to that first "Ah, ha!" at the 0:14 mark). Roth was never considered a great singer. It didn't matter. It's the energy that his singing conveys that makes him one of the greatest front men in the history of the business. I know I'm biased, but I'll put him alongside Freddie Mercury, Mick Jagger, and Robert Plant when it comes to commanding the stage.

Michael Anthony's harmonies: Years ago I read that the reason he chose to play bass is that everyone else wanted to be the guitar hero; he wanted only to be in a band. I never thought his bass playing was truly stellar (evidenced by his own admission that for years of solos in their live performances, he wasn't playing as much as inflicting pain on himself). Where he becomes invaluable is his high harmonies. This is another reason Van Halen is a unique entity. Many bands have an element that makes them stand out; Van Halen has four (at least). 

Eddie's solos: I feel this is self-evident. His unique style is what elevates this band above other hard rockers and him into the pantheon of legends. This particular song has two solos, each one clean (in contrast to the opening chords), crisp, and blistering. I would not take the over/under in regards to how many people Eddie inspired to take up the guitar to sound like him and how many he inspired to quit knowing they never could.

The bridge: Listen from the 2:50 mark to 3:07. Listen to what is essentially a barbershop quartet bridge stuck in the middle of this hard rocking song. Listen and then ask yourself not only what other band would attempt this, but what other band could make it work. 

If someone asks you, "What was Van Halen?", play them this song. It has all the answers.

Journalistic Integrity (?) - September/October 4, 2020

 

I originally wrote this on September 4, 2020, but held back because something felt off. That reason is at the end.

In many local town newspapers this week, an article appeared (look on page six), which is a travesty on numerous levels. First, it's awful from a journalistic perspective. Start with the headline: "Guess What May Be Coming Back". It's beyond vague. I don't know. Is it poodle skirts? Base six math? Jesus? In today's COVID-19 climate, is it local business? In-person schooling? The possibilities are endless. Then let's look at the fact that there is no byline. To be fair, half of the articles in the paper have no byline, but it's not exactly a confidence builder when we have no idea where the information we're reading comes from. And the tone of the article is not exactly objective. Rarely do news articles resort to all caps (these changes are coming "in a VERY BIG way!"). And this article has six exclamation points, another sign that we should be wary about the lack of objectivity. 

But here's part of the problem. This is not journalism; it's an advertisement for an estate planning firm. The article professes to be in our best interest by letting us know about potential changes in the estate taxes, but it preys on fear. While they admittedly don't know what will happen in the November election, they "do need to let you know what may happen if Democrats wind up winning" control of the executive and legislative branches. They even want us to be aware of what others have said could happen: "For example, here's an article that appeared this summer in the New York Times, entitled 'Tax the Rich and Their Heirs'." One problem: there is no article from the Times included here, only a title. Also missing is the fact that this is an op-ed piece, not a news story (it's here if you want to read it).

The article discusses the federal Estate Tax exemption of $11.58 million dollars (possibly doubled for a married couple), and then they write a paragraph discussing the Massachusetts exemption of one million dollars. The opening line of the following paragraph claims that "that exemption may be significantly reduced at any time." This brings us back to the poor writing in this article. "That exemption" appears to refer to Massachusetts exemption referenced in the prior paragraph. If that's the case, the Democrats winning the federal elections in November has nothing to do with it; they have no control over state law. If they're referring to the federal rate, the previous paragraph about Massachusetts rates serves zero purpose.

The sidebar at the end of the article doesn't even try to hide its purpose. It's a blatant call for people to contact them to protect their wealth and do it now as "[it's] likely that any Estate Tax change is likely to made effective retroactively to January 1!" It's not even subtle. Call us now! NOW! And let's not overlook the poor writing with the repetitive use of "likely".

And despite all that, I come back to my biggest issue. This is an advertisement, plain and simple. Why not take out an actual ad, saying "Estate Taxes might go up. Call us for help."? Same message, less subterfuge, more efficacy. 

UPDATE: October 4, 2020:

I did some research to see if this article made it anywhere beyond the ten towns this publisher services. Turns out that this "article" was taken, almost word-for-word from a webpage/blog from a California estate planning firm. This accounts for some of the original problems I had. The article that was referenced but never provided? It's linked in this original publication. That paragraph about Massachusetts estate taxes that had nothing to do with the federal election? It's not in the original blog. The sidebar at the end that's not even pretending to be journalism? It makes sense in its original context. 

I made a couple of phone calls when I found this. The California firm has no association with the firm that put this in my local paper. I emailed the local firm asking if they have any association, but they never responded. I also emailed the publisher of my local papers to let them know. Given the number of plagiarism stories in recent years both national (Melania Trump copying Michelle Obama's speech) and local (a superintendent getting fired for plagiarizing an Oprah Winfrey story), this should never happen, regardless of the limited reach of these town papers. At the least, I plan to make my students aware that someone is always watching.