Carl Sagan Tells Johnny Carson What’s Wrong with Star Wars: “They’re All White” & There’s a “Large Amount of Human Chauvinism in It” (1978)

Is Star Wars sci­ence fic­tion or fan­ta­sy? Dif­fer­ent fans make dif­fer­ent argu­ments, some even opt­ing for a third way, claim­ing that the ever-mul­ti­ply­ing sto­ries of its ever-expand­ing fic­tion­al uni­verse belong to nei­ther genre. Back in 1978, the year after the release of the orig­i­nal Star Wars film (which no one then called “A New Hope,” let alone “Episode Four”), the ques­tion was approached by no less a pop­u­lar sci­en­tif­ic per­son­al­i­ty than Carl Sagan. It hap­pened on nation­al tele­vi­sion, as the astronomer, cos­mol­o­gist, writer, and tele­vi­sion host in his own right sat oppo­site John­ny Car­son. “The eleven-year-old in me loved them,” Sagan says in the clip above of Star WarsClose Encoun­ters of the Third Kind, and oth­er then-recent space-themed block­busters. “But they could’ve made a bet­ter effort to do things right.”

Every­one remem­bers how Star Wars sets its stage: “A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.” But right there, Sagan has a prob­lem. Despite its remote­ness from us, this galaxy hap­pens also to be pop­u­lat­ed by human beings, “the result of a unique evo­lu­tion­ary sequence, based upon so many indi­vid­u­al­ly unlike­ly, ran­dom events on the Earth.”

So Homo sapi­ens could­n’t have evolved on any oth­er plan­et, Car­son asks, let alone one in anoth­er galaxy? “It’s extreme­ly unlike­ly that there would be crea­tures as sim­i­lar to us as the dom­i­nant ones in Star Wars.” He goes on to make a more spe­cif­ic cri­tique, one pub­li­cized again in recent years as ahead of its time: “They’re all white.” That is, in the skins of most of the movie’s char­ac­ters, “not even the oth­er col­ors rep­re­sent­ed on the Earth are present, much less greens and blues and pur­ples and oranges.”

Car­son responds, as any­one would, by bring­ing up Star Warscan­ti­na scene, with its rogue’s gallery of var­i­ous­ly non-humanoid habitués. “But none of them seemed to be in charge of the galaxy,” Sagan points out. “Every­body in charge of the galaxy seemed to look like us. I thought there was a large amount of human chau­vin­ism in it.” That no medal is bestowed upon Chew­bac­ca, despite his hero­ics, Sagan declares an exam­ple of “anti-Wook­iee dis­crim­i­na­tion” — with tongue in cheek, grant­ed, but point­ing up how much more inter­est­ing sci­ence fic­tion could be if it relied a lit­tle less on human con­ven­tions and drew a lit­tle more from sci­en­tif­ic dis­cov­er­ies. Not that Star Wars is nec­es­sar­i­ly sci­ence fic­tion. “It was a shootout, was­n’t it?” Car­son asks. “A West­ern in out­er space.” John­ny nev­er did hes­i­tate to call ’em as he saw ’em.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Fans Recon­struct Authen­tic Ver­sion of Star Wars, As It Was Shown in The­aters in 1977

The Com­plete Star Wars “Fil­mu­men­tary”: A 6‑Hour, Fan-Made Star Wars Doc­u­men­tary, with Behind-the-Scenes Footage & Com­men­tary

Carl Sagan Pre­dicts the Decline of Amer­i­ca: Unable to Know “What’s True,” We Will Slide, “With­out Notic­ing, Back into Super­sti­tion & Dark­ness” (1995)

Carl Sagan on the Impor­tance of Choos­ing Wise­ly What You Read (Even If You Read a Book a Week)

Blade Run­ner: The Pil­lar of Sci-Fi Cin­e­ma that Siskel, Ebert, and Stu­dio Execs Orig­i­nal­ly Hat­ed

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities, the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

Andy Warhol’s Art Explained: What Makes His Iconic Campbell’s Soup Cans & Marilyn Monroe Diptych Art?

Pop Art looks out into the world. It does­n’t look like a paint­ing of some­thing, it looks like the thing itself. — Artist Roy Licht­en­stein

By 2021, most of us accept that Andy Warhol’s Camp­bel­l’s Soup Cans are art, but there are some who are still not con­fi­dent as to why.

No shame in that.

Art His­to­ri­an Steven Zuck­er and the Khan Academy’s Sal Khan tack­le the ques­tion head on in the below video, con­clud­ing that the work is not only a reflec­tion of the time in which it was cre­at­ed, but that the enor­mi­ty of its impact was made pos­si­ble by that tim­ing.

Forty-five years before Warhol escort­ed those low­ly, instant­ly rec­og­niz­able soup cans from the super­mar­ket to the far lofti­er realm of muse­um and gallery, the art world was thrown into an uproar over Mar­cel Duchamp’s provoca­tive ready­made, Foun­tain, a pre­fab­ri­cat­ed uri­nal sub­mit­ted to the Soci­ety of Inde­pen­dent Artists inau­gur­al exhi­bi­tion as the work of the fic­ti­tious R. Mutt. The Tate Modern’s web­site sum­ma­rizes its impor­tance:

Foun­tain test­ed beliefs about art and the role of taste in the art world. Inter­viewed in 1964, Duchamp said he had cho­sen a uri­nal in part because he thought it had the least chance of being liked (although many at the time did find it aes­thet­i­cal­ly pleas­ing). He con­tin­ued: ‘I was draw­ing people’s atten­tion to the fact that art is a mirage. A mirage, exact­ly like an oasis appears in the desert. It is very beau­ti­ful until, of course, you are dying of thirst. But you don’t die in the field of art. The mirage is sol­id.’

Campbell’s soup cans pos­sess a sim­i­lar solid­i­ty.

The famil­iar label dates back to 1898 when a Campbell’s exec drew inspi­ra­tion from Cor­nell Uni­ver­si­ty’s red and white foot­ball uni­forms.

A full page mag­a­zine ad from 1934 intro­duces Cream of Mush­room and Noo­dle with Chick­en (soon to become Chick­en Noo­dle) by remind­ing read­ers to “Look for the Red-and-White Label.”

By 1962, Campbell’s had giv­en con­sumers their pick of 32 fla­vors, and Warhol paint­ed all 32 of them. Not the con­tents. Just those uni­form cans.

Los Ange­les’ Ferus Gallery sold five of them before gal­lerist Irv­ing Blum real­ized that their impact was great­est when all 32 were dis­played togeth­er, to echo how con­sumers were used to see­ing the real thing.

Warhol had a per­son­al con­nec­tion to his sub­ject mat­ter, but it wasn’t like he set out to rep a life­long favorite. Rather, he was fol­low­ing up on a friend’s sug­ges­tion to paint some­thing every­one would would rec­og­nize, with or with­out pas­sion­ate feel­ings. (He seemed to be with­out:)

I used to drink it. I used to have the same lunch every day, for 20 years, I guess, the same thing over and over again.

Warhol brought a suc­cess­ful com­mer­cial illus­tra­tor’s eye to his Campell’s Soup Cans, cap­i­tal­iz­ing on the public’s exist­ing knowl­edge. The col­ors, the cus­tom cur­sive logo over the sans serif fla­vor font, and the shape of the cans had couched them­selves in the ear­ly-60s Amer­i­can con­scious­ness.

As had indus­tri­al­iza­tion as the over­ar­ch­ing sys­tem by which most lives were ordered. The artist may not have offered overt com­ment on mass pro­duced items, con­ve­nience foods, or brand loy­al­ty. He just depend­ed on the pub­lic to be so inti­mate­ly acquaint­ed with them, they had fad­ed into the wall­pa­per of their dai­ly lives.

Nor was the pub­lic over­ly accus­tomed to every­day objects recon­cep­tu­al­ized as art. These days, we’re a bit blasé.

Warhol’s sub­ject mat­ter may have been pro­sa­ic, but his tim­ing, Khan and Zuck­er tell us, could not have been bet­ter.

As Campbell’s is to soup, Mar­i­lyn Mon­roe is to celebri­ty — an endur­ing house­hold name. Her sexy, youth­ful image is imprint­ed on fans born decades after her death.

The most uni­ver­sal Mar­i­lyn is the one from the Nia­gara pub­lic­i­ty still, immor­tal­ized in acrylic and silkscreen in Warhol’s Mar­i­lyn Dip­tych. One of his most defin­ing works, it was pro­duced the same year as his soup cans (and Monroe’s sui­cide at the age of 36).

In con­sid­er­ing this work for his ongo­ing series, Great Art Explained, gal­lerist James Payne delves into Warhol’s fas­ci­na­tion with mul­ti­ples, celebri­ty, reli­gious iconog­ra­phy, machi­na­tion, and death, not­ing that “both Warhol and Mar­i­lyn under­stood trans­for­ma­tion”:

From ear­ly on in his career, Andy Warhol had an extra­or­di­nary abil­i­ty of find­ing the sacred in the pro­fane.… He was a prod­uct of the East­ern Euro­pean immi­grant expe­ri­ence who him­self became an icon, a shy, gay, work­ing class man who became the court painter of the 1970s, an artist who embraced con­sumerism,  celebri­ty and the coun­ter­cul­ture and changed mod­ern art in the process.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Andy Warhol Demys­ti­fied: Four Videos Explain His Ground­break­ing Art and Its Cul­tur­al Impact

Andy Warhol Explains Why He Decid­ed to Give Up Paint­ing & Man­age the Vel­vet Under­ground Instead (1966)

Take a Vir­tu­al Tour of the Andy Warhol Exhi­bi­tion at the Tate Mod­ern

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, the­ater­mak­er, and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday

Radiohead’s Thom Yorke Releases a Super Creepy Version of “Creep”

Like many bands with a killer, career-launch­ing debut sin­gle, Radio­head has had a long, love-hate rela­tion­ship with 1992’s “Creep”. There’s no way they would have become sta­di­um fillers with­out it, but they’re also under­stand­ably sick of it. Accord­ing to setlist.fm, they played it over 310 times between 1992 and 1998, and then they kind of dropped it from their gigs once they entered their Kid A phase. Only in 2016, dur­ing the Moon Shaped Pool tours did they add it back into the set.

But man, 2016 seems like a lonnnnnng time ago, doesn’t it? Everybody’s still fig­ur­ing out the future of live con­certs. Nobody is sure how far ahead is safe enough to announce tick­et sales. Will venues be open or shut again? Into the fray of uncer­tain­ty comes this odd­i­ty: a nine-plus minute ver­sion of “Creep” cred­it­ed to Thom Yorke. (“Thom Yorke should col­lab with Radio­head more often” says one wag in the YouTube com­ments). You want Creep, ya say? Well, here’s a LOT of it.

Thom Yorke takes his vocals, stretch­es them out until they’re cor­rupt­ed dig­i­tal­ly, and fills the airy gaps with acoustic gui­tar, adding twice as many bars as the orig­i­nal. As NPR said, Yorke’s vocals sound like a “rant from a man who’s lost his mind to old age and iso­la­tion.” (Hence the “Very 2021 Remix” title). It was about 30 years ago, we have to add, though we hate to admit it. Elec­tron­ic bur­bles and bass throbs enter halfway through and fur­ther dis­turb the already dis­turb­ing.

Yorke cre­at­ed the mix for fash­ion design­er Jun Taka­hashi, whose ani­mat­ed art­work runs in a loop for the video. The song accom­pa­nies Takahashi’s UNDERWORLD Fall 2021 col­lec­tion run­way show.

As Pitch­fork points out, Yorke has con­tributed music to fash­ion shows before:

n 2016, he con­tributed an orig­i­nal song called “Coloured Can­dy” to Rag & Bone’s 2017 Spring/Summer show­case. Years pri­or, he con­tributed the songs “Stuck Togeth­er” and “Twist” for anoth­er one of the fash­ion label’s shows.

Yorke, by the way, hasn’t been lay­ing low dur­ing the plague year. In May of this year he debuted a new side band called The Smile at Glas­ton­bury, called out the John­son gov­ern­ment as “spine­less” regard­ing their response to COVID and the live music scene, and shared a 30-minute mix of new music on BBC Radio 6. What comes next? Stay tuned.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Radiohead’s Thom Yorke Per­forms Songs from His New Sound­track for the Hor­ror Film, Sus­piria

Radio­head Bal­lets: Watch Bal­lets Chore­o­graphed Cre­ative­ly to the Music of Radio­head

Thom Yorke’s Iso­lat­ed Vocal Track on Radiohead’s 1992 Clas­sic, ‘Creep’

Intro­duc­ing The Radio­head Pub­lic Library: Radio­head Makes Their Full Cat­a­logue Avail­able via a Free Online Web Site

Ted Mills is a free­lance writer on the arts who cur­rent­ly hosts the Notes from the Shed pod­cast and is the pro­duc­er of KCR­W’s Curi­ous Coast. You can also fol­low him on Twit­ter at @tedmills, and/or watch his films here.

What the Eagles’ “Hotel California” Really Means

Dur­ing the Satan­ic pan­ic of the 1980s, a new breed of witchfind­er cast a drag­net through pop cul­ture, scoop­ing up songs, artists, and albums that were alleged­ly part of a demon­ic con­spir­a­cy to cor­rupt America’s youth. One song rou­tine­ly appear­ing on such lists — “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” by the Eagles. Real­ly? The Eagles? Biggest-sell­ing rock band in the U.S.? Soft-rock super­stars who paved the cocaine-col­ored way for even soft­er yacht rock super­stars?

They were hard­ly Black Sab­bath, but the band’s “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” was real­ly about Anton LaVey’s Church of Satan, it was said (just lis­ten to it back­wards). Depend­ing on your feel­ings about Satanism and/or the Eagles, “the truth proves far less sat­is­fy­ing than the myr­i­ad rumors that have sprung up,” writes David Mikkel­son at Snopes. “The song is usu­al­ly inter­pret­ed as an alle­go­ry about hedo­nism and greed in South­ern Cal­i­for­nia in the 1970s.” It turned out to be a self-ful­fill­ing prophe­cy.

Hotel Cal­i­for­nia, the album, rock­et­ed the Eagles beyond “suc­cess on a fright­en­ing lev­el” and into total burnout. By the time they made their last album of the 70s, The Long Run, they felt trapped in a celebri­ty hell, one that would have to freeze over before they reunit­ed, as Don Hen­ley remarked (hence the title of 1994’s Hell Freezes Over). For the Eagles, hell was the oth­er peo­ple in the band, the con­stant tour­ing, and the incred­i­ble amounts of mon­ey thrown their way, more curse than bless­ing, appar­ent­ly.

Despite these inter­nal ten­sions, the Eagles pro­duced a per­fect sound­track for the 70s. “They reflect­ed the emerg­ing musi­cal style of a 70s post-war Amer­i­ca, and the first tru­ly sex­u­al­ly lib­er­at­ed gen­er­a­tion…. had no trou­ble iden­ti­fy­ing with a band that sang like angels and par­tied like dev­ils,” writes Marc Eliot. “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” has been so close­ly iden­ti­fied with Amer­i­can cul­ture that “when a US spy plane made an emer­gency land­ing in Chi­na in 2001,” Mark Sav­age notes at the BBC, “the crew mem­bers were asked to recite the lyrics to prove their nation­al­i­ty.”

In truth, “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” is nei­ther writ­ten in praise of Satan nor Amer­i­ca. Its work­ing title was “Mex­i­can Reg­gae,” a nod to the unusu­al strum­ming pat­tern, which “fol­lowed a pat­tern clos­er to fla­men­co than to rock,” Sav­age writes, “but played on the off-beat.” The for­bid­ding land­scape in the song’s lyrics, an “atmos­phere of a man in an unfa­mil­iar rur­al set­ting, unsure about what he’s wit­ness­ing,” came from the 1965 nov­el The Magus by Eng­lish author John Fowles, a coun­ter­cul­tur­al favorite, says Glen Frey: “We decid­ed to cre­ate some­thing strange, just to see if we could do it.”

There was, of course, more to the song — the stan­dard inter­pre­ta­tion of “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” as a cri­tique of 1970s excess­es has been affirmed by Don Hen­ley and Frey, who wrote most of the lyrics. The song, Hen­ley said in a 1995 inter­view, “sort of cap­tured the zeit­geist of the time, which was a time of great excess in this coun­try and in the music busi­ness in par­tic­u­lar…. Lyri­cal­ly, the song deals with tra­di­tion­al or clas­si­cal themes of con­flict: dark­ness and light, good and evil, youth and age, the spir­i­tu­al ver­sus the sec­u­lar. I guess you could say it’s a song about loss of inno­cence”  — a feel­ing, as Joe Walsh says in the inter­view clip above, that came out of the expe­ri­ence of arriv­ing and try­ing to make it in L.A. “Nobody was from Cal­i­for­nia,” Walsh says. “Every­body was from Ohio.”

“Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” also “hides” a dig at Eagles rivals Steely Dan in the lyrics, “they stab it with their steely knives” and bare­ly con­ceals Henley’s con­tempt for his ex-girl­friend, L.A. jew­el­ry design­er Loree Rod­kin, as he lat­er admit­ted: “There’s some of every girl I’ve ever been with in all my songs; they’re com­bi­na­tions of char­ac­ters, like fic­tion. Some of the more deroga­to­ry parts of ‘Hotel Cal­i­for­nia,’ how­ev­er, are def­i­nite­ly about Loree Rod­kin – ‘Her mind is Tiffany twist­ed, she got the Mer­cedes bends/She got a lot of pret­ty boys that she calls friends’ – that’s about her, and I wouldn’t be crow­ing if I were Ms. Rod­kin. As far as I’m con­cerned, she’s the Nor­ma Desmond of her gen­er­a­tion.”

Henley’s most tren­chant com­men­tary on the song comes from the 2013 doc­u­men­tary His­to­ry of the Eagles, in which he talks frankly about the band’s crit­i­cal take on their suc­cess and the cul­ture that pro­duced and embraced “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia”:

On just about every album we made, there was some kind of com­men­tary on the music busi­ness, and on Amer­i­can cul­ture in gen­er­al. The hotel itself could be tak­en as a metaphor not only for the myth-mak­ing of South­ern Cal­i­for­nia, but for the myth-mak­ing that is the Amer­i­can Dream, because it is a fine line between the Amer­i­can Dream, and the Amer­i­can night­mare.

As for those baroque gui­tar arrange­ments? For that part of the sto­ry, we must turn to Don Felder, who com­posed the song — after Walsh joined the band to replace Bernie Lead­on — in order to show­case the tal­ents of two lead play­ers. See Felder talk about his major con­tri­bu­tion at the top and see him play the “Hotel Cal­i­for­nia” solo at the Met­ro­pol­i­tan Muse­um of Art in a clip from CBS’s Sun­day Morn­ing.

Just above, see an inter­view with Felder back­stage at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, in which he dis­cuss­es the role of impro­vi­sa­tion in his process, and how his back­ground in jazz led him to write the “Mex­i­can reg­gae” that would even­tu­al­ly play on Amer­i­can radio every 11 min­utes, their most refined state­ment of the “themes that run through all our work,” Hen­ley says: “loss of inno­cence, the cost of naiveté, the per­ils of fame, of excess; explo­ration of the dark under­bel­ly of the Amer­i­can dream, ide­al­ism real­ized and ide­al­ism thwart­ed, illu­sion ver­sus real­i­ty, the dif­fi­cul­ties of bal­anc­ing lov­ing rela­tion­ships and work, try­ing to square the con­flict­ing rela­tion­ship between busi­ness and art; the cor­rup­tion in pol­i­tics, the fad­ing away of the Six­ties dream of ‘peace, love and under­stand­ing.’”

Relat­ed Con­tent:

How Joni Mitchell Wrote “Wood­stock,” the Song that Defined the Leg­endary Music Fes­ti­val, Even Though She Wasn’t There (1969)

David Bowie Dreamed of Turn­ing George Orwell’s 1984 Into a Musi­cal: Hear the Songs That Sur­vived the Aban­doned Project

What Makes This Song Great?: Pro­duc­er Rick Beato Breaks Down the Great­ness of Clas­sic Rock Songs in His New Video Series

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

An Introduction to Nicolas Bourbaki, One of the Most Influential Mathematicians of All Time … Who Never Actually Lived

In 20th-cen­tu­ry math­e­mat­ics, the renowned name of Nico­las Bour­ba­ki stands alone in its class — the class, that is, of renowned math­e­mat­i­cal names that don’t actu­al­ly belong to real peo­ple. Bour­ba­ki refers not to a math­e­mati­cian, but to math­e­mati­cians; a whole secret soci­ety of them, in fact, who made their name by col­lec­tive­ly com­pos­ing Ele­ments of Math­e­mat­ic. Not, mind you, Ele­ments of Math­e­mat­ics: “Bourbaki’s Ele­ments of Math­e­mat­ic — a series of text­books and pro­gram­mat­ic writ­ings first appear­ing in 1939—pointedly omit­ted the ‘s’ from the end of ‘Math­e­mat­ics,’ ” writes JSTOR Dai­ly’s Michael Barany, “as a way of insist­ing on the fun­da­men­tal uni­ty and coher­ence of a dizzy­ing­ly var­ie­gat­ed field.”

That’s mere­ly the tip of Bour­bak­i’s ice­berg of eccen­tric­i­ties. Formed in 1934 “by alum­ni of the École nor­male supérieure, a sto­ried train­ing ground for French aca­d­e­m­ic and polit­i­cal elites,” this group of high-pow­ered math­e­mat­i­cal minds set about rec­ti­fy­ing their coun­try’s loss of near­ly an entire gen­er­a­tion of math­e­mati­cians in the First World War. (While Ger­many had kept its bright­est stu­dents and sci­en­tists out of bat­tle, the French com­mit­ment to égal­ité could per­mit no such favoritism.) It was the press­ing need for revised and updat­ed text­books that spurred the mem­bers of Bour­ba­ki to their col­lab­o­ra­tive­ly pseu­do­ny­mous, indi­vid­u­al­ly anony­mous work.

“Yet instead of writ­ing text­books,” explains Quan­ta’s Kevin Hart­nett, “they end­ed up cre­at­ing some­thing com­plete­ly nov­el: free-stand­ing books that explained advanced math­e­mat­ics with­out ref­er­ence to any out­side sources.” The most dis­tinc­tive fea­ture of this already unusu­al project “was the writ­ing style: rig­or­ous, for­mal and stripped to the log­i­cal studs. The books spelled out math­e­mat­i­cal the­o­rems from the ground up with­out skip­ping any steps — exhibit­ing an unusu­al degree of thor­ough­ness among math­e­mati­cians.”  Not that Bour­ba­ki lacked play­ful­ness: “In fan­ci­ful and pun-filled nar­ra­tives shared among one anoth­er and allud­ed to in out­ward-fac­ing writ­ing,” adds Barany, “Bourbaki’s col­lab­o­ra­tors embed­ded him in an elab­o­rate math­e­mat­i­cal-polit­i­cal uni­verse filled with the abstruse ter­mi­nol­o­gy and con­cepts of mod­ern the­o­ries.”

You can get an ani­mat­ed intro­duc­tion to Bour­ba­ki, which sur­vives even today as a still-pres­ti­gious and at least nom­i­nal­ly secret math­e­mat­i­cal soci­ety, in the TED-Ed les­son above. In the decades after the group’s found­ing, writes les­son author Pratik Aghor, “Bour­rbak­i’s pub­li­ca­tions became stan­dard ref­er­ences, and the group’s mem­bers took their prank as seri­ous­ly as their work.” Their com­mit­ment to the front was total: “they sent telegrams in Bour­bak­i’s name, announced his daugh­ter’s wed­ding, and pub­licly insult­ed any­one who doubt­ed his exis­tence. In 1968, when they could no longer main­tain the ruse, the group end­ed their joke the only way they could: they print­ed Bour­bak­i’s obit­u­ary, com­plete with math­e­mat­i­cal puns.” And if you laugh at the math­e­mat­i­cal pun with which Aghor ends the les­son, you may car­ry a bit of Bour­bak­i’s spir­it with­in your­self as well.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Beau­ti­ful Equa­tions: Doc­u­men­tary Explores the Beau­ty of Ein­stein & Newton’s Great Equa­tions

The Math­e­mat­ics Behind Origa­mi, the Ancient Japan­ese Art of Paper Fold­ing

The Unex­pect­ed Math Behind Van Gogh’s Star­ry Night

Can You Solve These Ani­mat­ed Brain Teasers from TED-Ed?

The Map of Math­e­mat­ics: Ani­ma­tion Shows How All the Dif­fer­ent Fields in Math Fit Togeth­er

Why the World’s Best Math­e­mati­cians Are Hoard­ing Japan­ese Chalk

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities, the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

Watch Blondie Perform a Classic Concert During The Breakout Year: “Dreamin,” “One Way Or Another,” “Heart of Glass” & More (1979)

When Blondie took the stage at Con­ven­tion Hall in Asbury Park, NJ in 1979, the audi­ence knew the band as a vehi­cle for for­mer Play­boy bun­ny-turned-punk-singer Deb­bie Har­ry. “Deb­bie put on that sexy per­sona with kind of a wink, say­ing ‘This is what you want from me, I’ll kind of give it to you, but I’m also going to give you what I want to give you,’’” says biog­ra­ph­er Cathay Che. “The Blondie char­ac­ter,” as Har­ry called her onstage per­sona, “embod­ied female sex­u­al­i­ty as part threat, part unat­tain­able goal, part par­o­dy,” as Ann Pow­ers writes at The New York Times.

Cast in the role of sex­u­al­ized object since her ear­ly teen years, she had also per­formed in bands since the late 60s, and had sur­vived sex­u­al assault and a near abduc­tion in New York City in the 70s. She was a world-weary per­former in con­trol of her image, but the char­ac­ter drew so much focus from Blondie the band that oth­er mem­bers got a bit defen­sive. “I remem­ber the tour Blondie was doing in April 1978,” punk pho­tog­ra­ph­er There­sa Kereakes writes:

All the posters, t‑shirts, and but­tons you saw were black with hot pink writ­ing that pro­claimed: BLONDIE IS A GROUP! Excla­ma­tion point. No one knew dur­ing that tour in April 1978 — not the band, not their fans, and prob­a­bly not their hope­ful record com­pa­ny — that the record Blondie would release in just six months would be the one to break them into the stratos­phere. They went from Plas­tic Let­ters to Par­al­lel Lines and from the DIY scene to the big time.

Blondie was most def­i­nite­ly a group. By 1979, they had grown into a for­mi­da­ble six-piece, adding gui­tarist Frank Infante and bassist Nigel Har­ri­son to the orig­i­nal line­up of Har­ry, Chris Stein, Jim­my Destri, and Clem Burke. On the cusp of major main­stream suc­cess, they had also hit a peak in terms of musi­cian­ship and song­writ­ing — pow­er­house drum­mer Burke hold­ing the machin­ery togeth­er while each mem­ber played a vital part.

The focus on Har­ry didn’t only detract from her male band mem­bers. “Ms. Har­ry must have felt a bit like… the object of some­one else’s prof­itable fan­ta­sy” at times,” writes Pow­ers, trapped in the role of punk-rock Mar­i­lyn Mon­roe. As key­board play­er Destri put it, “no one real­ly paid atten­tion to Debbie’s singing style and how great a writer she was, because they couldn’t get past the image,”

They would pay atten­tion after Par­al­lel Lines and fol­low-ups Eat to the Beat and Autoamer­i­can. Songs like “Dream­ing,” revamped dis­co hit “Heart of Glass,” and dance­floor clas­sics “Call Me” and “Rap­ture” made Har­ry an inter­na­tion­al super­star and left the rest of the band dis­en­chant­ed. Before law­suits and long­stand­ing resent­ments broke them up, Blondie was an incred­i­ble live band. See them prove it in the full show at the top, the first set of the night. They played a sec­ond, dupli­cate set lat­er, adding Marc Bolan’s “Bang a Gong” at the end of the night. See them tear through it just above and see a full setlist with time­stamps on YouTube.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

How Blondie’s Deb­bie Har­ry Learned to Deal With Super­fi­cial, Demean­ing Inter­view­ers

Watch Blondie’s Deb­bie Har­ry Per­form “Rain­bow Con­nec­tion” with Ker­mit the Frog on The Mup­pet Show (1981)

Blondie Plays CBGB in the Mid-70s in Two Vin­tage Clips

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

A Billion Years of Tectonic-Plate Movement in 40 Seconds: A Quick Glimpse of How Our World Took Shape

We all remem­ber learn­ing about tec­ton­ic plates in our school sci­ence class­es. Or at least we do if we went to school in the 1960s or lat­er, that being when the the­o­ry of plate tec­ton­ics — which holds, broad­ly speak­ing, that the Earth­’s sur­face com­pris­es slow­ly mov­ing slabs of rock — gained wide accep­tance. But most every­one alive today will have been taught about Pangea. An impli­ca­tion of Alfred Wegen­er’s the­o­ry of “con­ti­nen­tal drift,” first pro­posed in the 1910s, that the sin­gle gigan­tic land­mass once dom­i­nat­ed the plan­et.

Despite its renown, how­ev­er, Pangea makes only a brief appear­ance in the ani­ma­tion of Earth­’s his­to­ry above. Geo­log­i­cal sci­en­tists now cat­e­go­rize it as just one of sev­er­al “super­con­ti­nents” that plate tec­ton­ics has gath­ered togeth­er and bro­ken up over hun­dreds and hun­dreds of mil­len­nia. Oth­ers include Kenor­land, in exis­tence about 2.6 bil­lion years ago, and Rodinia, 900 mil­lion years ago; Pangea, the most recent of the bunch, came apart around 175 mil­lion years ago. You can see the process in action in the video, which com­press­es a bil­lion years of geo­log­i­cal his­to­ry into a mere 40 sec­onds.

At the speed of 25 mil­lion years per sec­ond, and with out­lines drawn in, the move­ment of Earth­’s tec­ton­ic plates becomes clear­ly under­stand­able — more so, per­haps, than you found it back in school. “On a human timescale, things move in cen­time­ters per year, but as we can see from the ani­ma­tion, the con­ti­nents have been every­where in time,” as Michael Tet­ley, co-author of the paper “Extend­ing full-plate tec­ton­ic mod­els into deep time,” put it to Euronews. Antarc­ti­ca, which “we see as a cold, icy inhos­pitable place today, actu­al­ly was once quite a nice hol­i­day des­ti­na­tion at the equa­tor.”

Cli­mate-change trends sug­gest that we could be vaca­tion­ing in Antarc­ti­ca again before long — a trou­bling devel­op­ment in oth­er ways, of course, not least because it under­scores the imper­ma­nence of Earth­’s cur­rent arrange­ment, the one we know so well. “Our plan­et is unique in the way that it hosts life,” says Diet­mar Müller, anoth­er of the paper’s authors. “But this is only pos­si­ble because geo­log­i­cal process­es, like plate tec­ton­ics, pro­vide a plan­e­tary life-sup­port sys­tem.” Earth won’t always look like it does today, in oth­er words, but it’s thanks to the fact that it does­n’t look like it did a bil­lion years ago that we hap­pen to be here, able to study it at all.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Plate Tec­ton­ic Evo­lu­tion of the Earth Over 500 Mil­lion Years: Ani­mat­ed Video Takes You from Pangea, to 250 Mil­lion Years in the Future

A Map Shows Where Today’s Coun­tries Would Be Locat­ed on Pangea

Paper Ani­ma­tion Tells Curi­ous Sto­ry of How a Mete­o­rol­o­gist The­o­rized Pan­gaea & Con­ti­nen­tal Drift (1910)

What Earth Will Look Like 100 Mil­lion Years from Now

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities, the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

 

Hear Louis Armstrong’s Last Reel-to-Reel Tape, Made Hours Before His Death (1971)

When Louis Arm­strong first record­ed “Hel­lo, Dol­ly!”, in 1963, he “found the song trite and life­less,” says his biog­ra­ph­er Lau­rence Bergreen, a sur­pris­ing fact since it became one of his sig­na­ture tunes. “Arm­strong had trans­formed the song, infus­ing it with irre­press­ible spir­it and swing,” Marc Sil­ver writes at NPR. He did so all the way to the end of his life, play­ing “Hel­lo, Dol­ly!” after accept­ing an award at the Nation­al Press Club in one of his final per­for­mances on Jan­u­ary 29, 1971. “He sang in a voice more grav­el­ly than ever” and per­formed despite the fact that he “was under doctor’s orders not to break out his trum­pet” after a heart attack that near­ly felled the jazz giant. He died five months lat­er on the morn­ing of July 6th.

Arm­strong spent July 5th, 1971, his final night, at home, relax­ing and record­ing reel-to-reel tapes in his den at his home in Coro­na, Queens. Trans­fer­ring his music to tape and mak­ing cov­ers with his own col­lage art had been a decades-long hob­by for Arm­strong, a life­long archivist and mem­oirist. “

It appears,” the Louis Arm­strong House notes, “his [tape] num­ber­ing sys­tem got well into the 400s.” In 2009, Arm­strong House Archivist Ricky Ric­car­di ran across an odd­i­ty, an unnum­bered tape with no art on the cov­er. The only iden­ti­fy­ing infor­ma­tion came from a note on the box in Arm­strong’s wife’s Lucille’s hand­writ­ing, “Last Tape record­ed by Pops. 7/5/71.”

As Ric­car­di explains in a post here (from a longer series on the last two years of Arm­strong tapes), it would take five more years before he dis­cov­ered the con­tents of the final Arm­strong tape — an audio doc­u­ment of the LPs Satch­mo lis­tened to just hours before his death.

“Final­ly,” Ric­car­di writes, “around 11 a.m. on an ear­ly Feb­ru­ary day [in 2013], I was ready. I explained to my vol­un­teer, Har­vey Fish­er, what was about to hap­pen. I went into the stacks, grabbed the tape, sat at the tape deck and loaded the tape onto the hub. I hit ‘Play’ and held my breath as it start­ed spin­ning.” What came out was “Lis­ten to the Mock­ing­bird” from Armstrong’s 1952 col­lab­o­ra­tion with Gor­don Jenk­ins, Satch­mo in Style.

“I felt tears in my eyes while dub­bing it,” Ric­car­di writes. After record­ing this song, Arm­strong flipped the record over, record­ed the sec­ond side, then went on to record the entire 2‑LP set of Satch­mo at Sym­pho­ny Hall, “prob­a­bly with fond mem­o­ries of the musi­cians and friends on that album who were no longer liv­ing.” Final­ly, Arm­strong put on his first, 1956 col­lab­o­ra­tion with Ella Fitzger­ald, an album, writer and musi­cian Tom Maxwell argues, that made a “cul­tur­al leap [in] the mid­dle of that tumul­tuous cen­tu­ry, that two black per­form­ers could be con­sid­ered the best inter­preters of white show tunes, and that the extem­po­ra­ne­ous heart of jazz could ele­vate the whole to icon­ic sta­tus, deseg­re­gat­ing Amer­i­can pop­u­lar cul­ture in just eleven songs.”

After the final song, “Louis left his den and head­ed down the hall­way to his bed­room,” Ric­car­di writes, where, Lucille says, he “was feel­ing frisky and tried to ini­ti­ate ‘the vonce.’ She declined, fear­ing for his health. He went to sleep. About 5:30 in the morn­ing of July 6, Louis Arm­strong passed away in his sleep…. Can you think of a bet­ter way to go out?” It was a peace­ful end to a hard life lived in devo­tion to spread­ing his musi­cal joy. You can hear a playlist com­piled by Ric­car­di of most of the music from Armstrong’s 1969–1971 tapes above. It starts with “Hel­lo Dol­ly!” and ends with the last song on Ella and Louis, and on Armstrong’s final reel-to-reel tape, the last song he ever heard: “April in Paris.”

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Only Known Footage of Louis Arm­strong in a Record­ing Stu­dio: Watch the Recent­ly-Dis­cov­ered Film (1959)

Louis Arm­strong Remem­bers How He Sur­vived the 1918 Flu Epi­dem­ic in New Orleans

When Louis Arm­strong Stopped a Civ­il War in The Con­go (1960)

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness.

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.