Your humble correspondent will be watching Saturday Night Live this evening with great interest. Why? Because despite the Occupy Wall Street protests taking place at Zuccotti Park just blocks away from the studio for over a month, SNL has had only one indirect sketch on that situation despite the overwhelming comedy gold being offered up. Yes, last week SNL had a sketch about Mayor Michael Bloomberg reacting to the OWS protests but it was more of a dig at the mayor than anything else. What makes this really strange is that OWS protests are constantly delivering up an hilarious comedy harvest whether it is the creepy “human echo” at the Occupy Atlanta Protest which kept Congressman John Lewis from speaking or trust fund baby Edward T. Hall III performing a Drama Queen denunciation of wealthy Wall Street yacht owners. These inadvertent comedy videos are quite easy to find on YouTube such as this video (also seen below the fold) posted this morning by the appropriately self-named “f—edupchuck” whom, for reasons of delicacy, I shall refer to as “upchuck.” One positive thing to say about “upchuck” is that he has enough fashion sensibility to know that when you loudly curse out capitalism, a pair of designer Ray Ban Classic Aviator sunglasses, which sell for $139 at Neiman Marcus , is an obligatory eyewear accessory. Also note the many OWS souvenir vendors at Zuccotti Park, one of whom attempted to sell a $10 pin to upchuck. When you are done counting the number of new North Face parkas in that “anti-capitalist” crowd stand by for some incredible comedy gold at the 3:30 mark when upchuck delivers a command perfomance of his OWS dance. So while SNL continues rehashing GOP Presidential Debate skits, the real comedy can be found on YouTube provided by many of the OWS protesters themselves. They may be ignored by the networks but to the folks online, the OWS protests are a treasure trove of YouTube comedy.
Continue reading …It’s decades since Tom Waits had a drink and his music has just got weirder and better. With his 17th album out, he heads for his local roadhouse (for coffee) and talks about songwriting, hard living and his fear of phones “I used to think that all great recordings happened at about 3am,” Tom Waits is telling me, in the conspiratorial, wasted and wounded voice that still seems made for those early hours. “So my first studio experiences, I wanted to be recording after the bars closed. I just thought that’s when it all happened. And it worked for me for a while, I guess. But I don’t believe that so much any more. I realise now there’s more than one way to sneak up on a herd of cattle…” Waits is sitting in the back room of a roadhouse near his home town of Santa Rosa, where the industrialised farmscape north of San Francisco starts becoming wine country. Like him, the Washoe House is something of a revered and ramshackle institution. Just about every visitor since Ulysses S Grant – who reportedly made a speech from the balcony in a state of undress after an amorous encounter on the way upstairs – has pinned a dollar bill to the ceiling, and no one has ever been desperate enough to take one down. Country music is playing on a jukebox to which Waits, ever alert, has one ear cocked, like a dog in front of a fire. A couple of times he will break off from talking to grunt a snatch of some cowboy melody. On the table in front of him is the book he is reading, Crow Planet , about how corvids are “very much smarter than you might imagine”, a cup of black coffee (he gave up booze a long while ago, having got his share in early) and a notebook in which he keeps his ideas for songs (He occasionally reads from it at random: “Here’s one: ‘It’s good to be 40 feet tall on a billboard or something but not when your wife’s dying of cancer and you just knocked up the babysitter.’ Another ‘I wish I was a component of water and I could go off in the sun and just dry out…’). He gives the impression of being in a state both of constant startled awareness, and vague puzzlement at the world. Some of this has to do with his hair, which seems to have led a long and interesting life of its own. Unusually, he is not wearing a hat. We are talking about his latest record, Bad As Me , his 18th, and his newfangled habit, at 61, of getting to the studio early in the morning. “These days I want to be there before anyone has had a musical thought,” he says. “If you are making a record you are the one saying ‘action’, and you are the one saying ‘cut’ and you have to be sure that the most interesting thing is not going on outside the frame. I try to pay attention to what people are doing the moment they come into the room. If they are just goofing around before we begin that may be the best thing they do all day. I have to be waiting.” Since the musicians on Bad As Me include such legends as Keith Richards, the bass player Flea (of the Red Hot Chili Peppers), and the extravagantly gifted Marc Ribot you can see why Waits might want to be on his toes. One of the tracks on the album finds him duetting with Richards. “I’m the last leaf on the tree” they croak fabulously in unison and you are half convinced that the end times might be upon us. In this sense you could be tempted to think that this is a glimpse of late-period Tom Waits, the home straight. The fact is, though, he has always liked the idea of being last man standing. If there has been a constant theme of his career – which has taken in two Grammy awards, scene-stealing acting roles for the likes of Robert Altman and Terry Gilliam, an Oscar nomination and a unique gift for performance that made his rare live shows just about the hottest ticket in any town – it is the constant sense of imminent dereliction. His first album, Closing Time , made when he was 24, already saw him adopting the broken-down voice of a survivor of all that life and love might throw at him. The hats he has taken on and off since as a performer, late-night barfly, all American hobo, fairground huckster, have all suggested several lifetimes of hard-won experience. Now he is finally approaching the age he has always imagined himself to be, I wonder if it feels like he hoped it would? He gives his guttural half-laugh. “It’s the usual story. When I was younger I wanted to be older,” he says, “now I am older I am not quite so sure.” The album is the latest in his heroic one-man attempt to include the whole history of American song in his own voice – now bellowing like a deranged Louis Armstrong, now essaying a Marvin Gaye falsetto, now groaning like Lead Belly, always very much himself. Waits likes to divide his repertoire into “grand weepers and grim reapers” or “bawlers and brawlers”; Bad As Me is no exception to this. It starts with the most convincing runaway train you’ve ever heard, Waits shovelling coal insanely, and then shifts gears between desperate, defeated ballads and the kind of “rumpus” you imagine from the party scene of Where the Wild Things Are . (“Anyone who has ever played a piano,” Waits likes to say, “would really like to hear how it sounds when dropped from a 12th-floor window.” His music satisfies that curiosity.) The band are required to do more than keep up. “It’s like Charlemagne or one of those old guys said,” he notes. “You want soldiers who, when they get to a river after a long march, don’t start rooting for their canteen in their pack, but just dive right in.” It seems beside the point to ask Waits whether he feels a keener sense of mortality. Death has never been far from his thoughts as a songwriter (“I guess it’s a pretty popular subject among those of us still breathing,” he says.) But he signs off Bad As Me with a chilling little coda – “What’s it like when you die?” – imagining the eternal hangover in increasingly baroque similes. Is that the kind of thing that keeps him awake at nights? “Well, I guess,” he says. “But that song started out just as a riff, taking triple rhymes, batting them back and forth. ‘Like a jail door closing, like a male whore dozing…’ And so on.” The free association lets him access some strange truths he believes. The other place that Waits has always gone to look for those surprises is in his own voice. Does its scalded range still shock even him from time to time? “I’d like to think so,” he says. “Jimmy Stewart said he stopped making movies because he didn’t like the way he looked on screen anymore. I’m more the guy who says I look like hell but I’m going to see where it gets me.” What started out for Waits as a stage act – the ultimate raddled crooner – became a compulsive caricature and is now a kind of larger-than-life persona that he can slip in and out of as he likes. Looking back though, I wonder why, as a kid growing up in southern California, he was so keen to advance his years? “Probably because I knew I was going to have to be my own father,” he says. “There was a need for maturity and guidance from somewhere and I was going to have to provide it for myself – even if it meant putting on an overcoat and a hat and looking in a mirror and squinting a bit. It’s pretty usual for a kid from a broken home.” That latter fact has always seemed the most salient scrap of knowledge about Tom Waits’s much mythologised background (“I was conceived one night in April 1949 at the Crossroads Motel in La Verne, amidst the broken bottle of Four Roses, the smouldering Lucky Strike, half a tuna salad sandwich…” and so on). When he was 10 or 11, his father – a Spanish teacher who used to drive his son from suburban Los Angeles over the Mexican border for haircuts and to listen to mariachi bands – walked out and didn’t come back. Waits became, he told one interviewer, immediately fixated with dads. He would go around to his friends’ houses not to see them but so he could hang out with their old man. At 12, he carried his grandfather’s walking stick and wore a trilby (the hats have never gone away) and he would clear his throat and ask his friends’ fathers stuff like: “So how long you been at Aetna, Bob?” It was a natural progression to extend his search for adult wisdom to music, he suggests. I recall how he once described his childhood as “kneeling by a jukebox, praying to Ray Charles”. Did they ever meet? “I never got to know Ray, no,” he says. “But I did shake his hand at an airport once, which was a very profound moment for me. He was surrounded by a cadre of very scary-looking people. It was like a president was in town, everyone on walkie-talkies, but for some reason I just walked though and grabbed Ray’s hand. It felt like the biggest thing I ever held, just this huge hand. And I squeezed it and just said, ‘Thanks, Ray, thanks for everything.’” He pauses, looks aslant. “It wasn’t so profound for him, I guess, but it wasn’t meant to be.” Though Waits has never been a mainstream star like Charles, few performers attract more ardent disciples. Do people come up and grab his hand for the same reason now? “There are a few people who want to let you know,” he says. “And that’s maybe profound for them, I guess. But the odd thing about this life is always that you spend half your time trying to get people to listen to you and the rest of the time trying to get them to leave you the fuck alone.” Over the years, Waits has developed more effective strategies for deflecting invasive attention than most. His attitude to autobiography is summed up in the lines from “Tango Till They’re Sore” on his seminal album Rain Dogs : “I’ll tell you all my secrets but I lie about my past…” He has always appeared to work on the basis that if you make the yarns entertaining enough, why would anyone want to know the truth? There have been a couple of attempts at biography, notably Barney Hoskyns’s indefatigable Lowside of the Road , but Waits guards his privacy with his life. Interviewers seeking facts have occasionally crashed and burned. In response to the bland questions of an Australian TV host, Don Lane, Waits infamously spent the first few minutes of live TV distractedly looking for an ashtray. When he looked up he noted the interviewer’s discomfort. “What’s up, Don, you are starting to sweat?” There are one or two moments in our conversation when my attempts at cod psychology are greeted with an amused sneer. “Ah I get it, you’re observing me, you’re the Observer ,” but they don’t last too long. (I also work for the Guardian , I point out. “Ah, so you’re looking out for me, that’s OK then.”) Waits’s original stage persona was born out of a similar sense of self-protective mythology. He suggests he feels a kinship with clowns, citing the Mexican hero Cantinflas as the performer he feels most sympathy with. Though he is capable of great pathos, nothing is ever quite in earnest in his music. Even his love songs carry the gruff awareness of their mechanics with them; he was compared with Kurt Weill before he knew Weill’s music or Brecht’s philosophy, but he had stumbled into the same theatrical territory. To begin with, Waits had set about living the life his songs tended to describe. While performing in clubs, he dossed for a long while in cheap motels and flop houses in LA and occasionally lived out of the back of his ’55 Buick. In some of this, he acknowledges, he was again trying on his dad’s wayward life for size. He exorcised that ghost pretty much in his two-act musical Franks Wild Years in 1987 in which the eponymous hero torches the family home (Waits’s dad was named Jesse Frank Waits, after the outlaw James brothers). The hard-living had reached its inevitable dead end. “There ain’t nothing funny about being a drunk,” he observed, looking back. “You know, I was really starting to believe there was something amusing and wonderfully American about a drunk. I ended up telling myself to cut that shit out.” The opportunity to do so came when he met his wife, Kathleen Brennan, in 1980 on the set of Francis Ford Coppola’s One from the Heart . He was writing the music, she was helping to edit the script. They were married at 1am a couple of months later at the 24-hour Always Forever Yours Wedding Chapel in LA. His life was immediately transformed. They moved out up to the farm in Santa Rosa; he changed record labels in order to protect his musical freedom and to avoid the pressure to have hits; they began writing songs together and they raised three children. Brennan is even more private than her husband, but he leaves you with little doubt she has been his soulmate as well as his muse. “My wife doesn’t want me to say how long we’ve been married,” he suggests. “Or, better, she likes me to say that she was basically a child bride. You know, ‘They said it was wrong, but we didn’t listen’; ‘I told her I’d wait until she was old enough’, that kind of thing.” Brennan encouraged Waits to express the more dislocated sound he had wanted and which has given his career its adventurous longevity. “I think everyone has irreconcilable musical differences,” he says. “You know when you throw a party, you think people will show up and no one will like each other. It’s like that with music – parts of your musical psyche have never met other parts. You wonder if you should get them together. I used to think it was good to keep them apart. Now I kind of throw them in and see what happens.” The first collaboration with his wife, the critically acclaimed, triumphantly discordant, Swordfishtrombones , was Waits’s turning point and he has never stopped reinventing. To begin with, on a very basic level, Brennan opened him up to new influences, he suggests. “Her record collection and her library were both impressive compared to mine. When I met her most of my records were kind of stuck together with cheese and hair and oil and stuff. She had hers not only still in the cases but still in the little paper sleeve too. That in itself was something of a revelation.” Since then, they have shared pretty much everything, (“She washes, I dry,” is how Waits describes their songwriting technique). The family firm has been extended by the presence of their middle son, Casey, playing drums on the last couple of albums. In one maudlin lament on the new record, Waits sings in time-honoured fashion: “I gave it all up for the stage.” The great thing about this heartfelt sob, though, is that it is delivered in the full knowledge that he successfully avoided the fate he describes. Has contentment ever felt an enemy to his creativity? He pauses, laughs. “Right when you asked that the jukebox played ‘I’d like to settle down but they won’t let me.’ Merle Haggard. It’s always a bit like that. People don’t want you to be satisfied if you are a musician. And the scope for songs isn’t that great. Most songs that aren’t jump-rope songs, or lullabies, are cautionary tales or goodbye songs and road songs…” Given the insistently improvised and homemade texture of his music, it is tempting to think Waits spends a good deal of his time out here in the sticks tinkering with farm machinery in his yard or fixing his truck. One inspiration for his music is Harry Partch , an American pioneer of the 40s and 50s, who not only invented his own instruments but created his own notation too. Waits’s music still allows the possibility of “hitting a cabinet hard with a two by four” just for the hell of it. He distrusts digitalisation. “Music has generally involved a lot of awkward contraptions, a certain amount of heavy lifting,” he says. “The idea that it will just be a sort of vapour that you listen to out of speakers the size of a dime alarms me. It’s like injecting yourself. Or eating alone.” He is, he says, equally wary of the ease of search and shuffle. “They have removed the struggle to find anything. And therefore there is no genuine sense of discovery. Struggle is the first thing we know getting along the birth canal, out in the world. It’s pretty basic. Book store owners and record store owners used to be oracles, in that way; you’d go in this dusty old place and they might point you toward something that would change your life. All that’s gone.” Does he ever stray online? “No,” he says. “But then I’m one of those guys that is still a bit afraid of the telephone, its implications for conversation. I still wonder if the jukebox might be the death of live music.” If he feels out of kilter, he says, it’s maybe in his genes. He was leafing through a musical dictionary the other day and he came across a definition for “waits” – “They were these guys who went door to door, carolling, bringing you the news, telling you the time. I was strangely reassured by that.” He takes comfort, too, in the fact that the future is not uniformly distributed. “If I want to walk out in the desert and heat up a can of beans on a fire, I still can. In those movies like Gattaca or whatever, the space age stuff is always all there is. But in the world there is never just one way of living. It’s more like a big junkyard. Put it this way: I’m not afraid I’m going to end up on a space station in aluminium-foil underwear.” Music itself is the closest he gets to time travel. He gestures toward the jukebox: “The studio is torn down, all the people who played on it are dead, the instruments have been sold off. But you are listening to a moment that happened in time 60 years ago and you are hearing it just as sharp as when it was made. That remains an amazing thing to me.” Photographs have the same ghostly quality for him. He pulls out a little camera to prove the point. “You used to be able to see the pictures of America’s 10 most wanted men in the post office, but they stopped that. I keep them on here, instead.” He flips the pictures of fugitive murderers and terrorists. “Just in case, you know.” Does he wake up paranoid or grateful? He gathers up his crow book, finishes his coffee, pockets his song ideas. “I don’t know. As Bob Dylan says, ‘Fear and Hope: always sounds like a comedy team to me…’” Tom Waits Keith Richards Red Hot Chili Peppers Robert Altman Terry Gilliam Ray Charles Francis Ford Coppola Tim Adams guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …It’s decades since Tom Waits had a drink and his music has just got weirder and better. With his 17th album out, he heads for his local roadhouse (for coffee) and talks about songwriting, hard living and his fear of phones “I used to think that all great recordings happened at about 3am,” Tom Waits is telling me, in the conspiratorial, wasted and wounded voice that still seems made for those early hours. “So my first studio experiences, I wanted to be recording after the bars closed. I just thought that’s when it all happened. And it worked for me for a while, I guess. But I don’t believe that so much any more. I realise now there’s more than one way to sneak up on a herd of cattle…” Waits is sitting in the back room of a roadhouse near his home town of Santa Rosa, where the industrialised farmscape north of San Francisco starts becoming wine country. Like him, the Washoe House is something of a revered and ramshackle institution. Just about every visitor since Ulysses S Grant – who reportedly made a speech from the balcony in a state of undress after an amorous encounter on the way upstairs – has pinned a dollar bill to the ceiling, and no one has ever been desperate enough to take one down. Country music is playing on a jukebox to which Waits, ever alert, has one ear cocked, like a dog in front of a fire. A couple of times he will break off from talking to grunt a snatch of some cowboy melody. On the table in front of him is the book he is reading, Crow Planet , about how corvids are “very much smarter than you might imagine”, a cup of black coffee (he gave up booze a long while ago, having got his share in early) and a notebook in which he keeps his ideas for songs (He occasionally reads from it at random: “Here’s one: ‘It’s good to be 40 feet tall on a billboard or something but not when your wife’s dying of cancer and you just knocked up the babysitter.’ Another ‘I wish I was a component of water and I could go off in the sun and just dry out…’). He gives the impression of being in a state both of constant startled awareness, and vague puzzlement at the world. Some of this has to do with his hair, which seems to have led a long and interesting life of its own. Unusually, he is not wearing a hat. We are talking about his latest record, Bad As Me , his 18th, and his newfangled habit, at 61, of getting to the studio early in the morning. “These days I want to be there before anyone has had a musical thought,” he says. “If you are making a record you are the one saying ‘action’, and you are the one saying ‘cut’ and you have to be sure that the most interesting thing is not going on outside the frame. I try to pay attention to what people are doing the moment they come into the room. If they are just goofing around before we begin that may be the best thing they do all day. I have to be waiting.” Since the musicians on Bad As Me include such legends as Keith Richards, the bass player Flea (of the Red Hot Chili Peppers), and the extravagantly gifted Marc Ribot you can see why Waits might want to be on his toes. One of the tracks on the album finds him duetting with Richards. “I’m the last leaf on the tree” they croak fabulously in unison and you are half convinced that the end times might be upon us. In this sense you could be tempted to think that this is a glimpse of late-period Tom Waits, the home straight. The fact is, though, he has always liked the idea of being last man standing. If there has been a constant theme of his career – which has taken in two Grammy awards, scene-stealing acting roles for the likes of Robert Altman and Terry Gilliam, an Oscar nomination and a unique gift for performance that made his rare live shows just about the hottest ticket in any town – it is the constant sense of imminent dereliction. His first album, Closing Time , made when he was 24, already saw him adopting the broken-down voice of a survivor of all that life and love might throw at him. The hats he has taken on and off since as a performer, late-night barfly, all American hobo, fairground huckster, have all suggested several lifetimes of hard-won experience. Now he is finally approaching the age he has always imagined himself to be, I wonder if it feels like he hoped it would? He gives his guttural half-laugh. “It’s the usual story. When I was younger I wanted to be older,” he says, “now I am older I am not quite so sure.” The album is the latest in his heroic one-man attempt to include the whole history of American song in his own voice – now bellowing like a deranged Louis Armstrong, now essaying a Marvin Gaye falsetto, now groaning like Lead Belly, always very much himself. Waits likes to divide his repertoire into “grand weepers and grim reapers” or “bawlers and brawlers”; Bad As Me is no exception to this. It starts with the most convincing runaway train you’ve ever heard, Waits shovelling coal insanely, and then shifts gears between desperate, defeated ballads and the kind of “rumpus” you imagine from the party scene of Where the Wild Things Are . (“Anyone who has ever played a piano,” Waits likes to say, “would really like to hear how it sounds when dropped from a 12th-floor window.” His music satisfies that curiosity.) The band are required to do more than keep up. “It’s like Charlemagne or one of those old guys said,” he notes. “You want soldiers who, when they get to a river after a long march, don’t start rooting for their canteen in their pack, but just dive right in.” It seems beside the point to ask Waits whether he feels a keener sense of mortality. Death has never been far from his thoughts as a songwriter (“I guess it’s a pretty popular subject among those of us still breathing,” he says.) But he signs off Bad As Me with a chilling little coda – “What’s it like when you die?” – imagining the eternal hangover in increasingly baroque similes. Is that the kind of thing that keeps him awake at nights? “Well, I guess,” he says. “But that song started out just as a riff, taking triple rhymes, batting them back and forth. ‘Like a jail door closing, like a male whore dozing…’ And so on.” The free association lets him access some strange truths he believes. The other place that Waits has always gone to look for those surprises is in his own voice. Does its scalded range still shock even him from time to time? “I’d like to think so,” he says. “Jimmy Stewart said he stopped making movies because he didn’t like the way he looked on screen anymore. I’m more the guy who says I look like hell but I’m going to see where it gets me.” What started out for Waits as a stage act – the ultimate raddled crooner – became a compulsive caricature and is now a kind of larger-than-life persona that he can slip in and out of as he likes. Looking back though, I wonder why, as a kid growing up in southern California, he was so keen to advance his years? “Probably because I knew I was going to have to be my own father,” he says. “There was a need for maturity and guidance from somewhere and I was going to have to provide it for myself – even if it meant putting on an overcoat and a hat and looking in a mirror and squinting a bit. It’s pretty usual for a kid from a broken home.” That latter fact has always seemed the most salient scrap of knowledge about Tom Waits’s much mythologised background (“I was conceived one night in April 1949 at the Crossroads Motel in La Verne, amidst the broken bottle of Four Roses, the smouldering Lucky Strike, half a tuna salad sandwich…” and so on). When he was 10 or 11, his father – a Spanish teacher who used to drive his son from suburban Los Angeles over the Mexican border for haircuts and to listen to mariachi bands – walked out and didn’t come back. Waits became, he told one interviewer, immediately fixated with dads. He would go around to his friends’ houses not to see them but so he could hang out with their old man. At 12, he carried his grandfather’s walking stick and wore a trilby (the hats have never gone away) and he would clear his throat and ask his friends’ fathers stuff like: “So how long you been at Aetna, Bob?” It was a natural progression to extend his search for adult wisdom to music, he suggests. I recall how he once described his childhood as “kneeling by a jukebox, praying to Ray Charles”. Did they ever meet? “I never got to know Ray, no,” he says. “But I did shake his hand at an airport once, which was a very profound moment for me. He was surrounded by a cadre of very scary-looking people. It was like a president was in town, everyone on walkie-talkies, but for some reason I just walked though and grabbed Ray’s hand. It felt like the biggest thing I ever held, just this huge hand. And I squeezed it and just said, ‘Thanks, Ray, thanks for everything.’” He pauses, looks aslant. “It wasn’t so profound for him, I guess, but it wasn’t meant to be.” Though Waits has never been a mainstream star like Charles, few performers attract more ardent disciples. Do people come up and grab his hand for the same reason now? “There are a few people who want to let you know,” he says. “And that’s maybe profound for them, I guess. But the odd thing about this life is always that you spend half your time trying to get people to listen to you and the rest of the time trying to get them to leave you the fuck alone.” Over the years, Waits has developed more effective strategies for deflecting invasive attention than most. His attitude to autobiography is summed up in the lines from “Tango Till They’re Sore” on his seminal album Rain Dogs : “I’ll tell you all my secrets but I lie about my past…” He has always appeared to work on the basis that if you make the yarns entertaining enough, why would anyone want to know the truth? There have been a couple of attempts at biography, notably Barney Hoskyns’s indefatigable Lowside of the Road , but Waits guards his privacy with his life. Interviewers seeking facts have occasionally crashed and burned. In response to the bland questions of an Australian TV host, Don Lane, Waits infamously spent the first few minutes of live TV distractedly looking for an ashtray. When he looked up he noted the interviewer’s discomfort. “What’s up, Don, you are starting to sweat?” There are one or two moments in our conversation when my attempts at cod psychology are greeted with an amused sneer. “Ah I get it, you’re observing me, you’re the Observer ,” but they don’t last too long. (I also work for the Guardian , I point out. “Ah, so you’re looking out for me, that’s OK then.”) Waits’s original stage persona was born out of a similar sense of self-protective mythology. He suggests he feels a kinship with clowns, citing the Mexican hero Cantinflas as the performer he feels most sympathy with. Though he is capable of great pathos, nothing is ever quite in earnest in his music. Even his love songs carry the gruff awareness of their mechanics with them; he was compared with Kurt Weill before he knew Weill’s music or Brecht’s philosophy, but he had stumbled into the same theatrical territory. To begin with, Waits had set about living the life his songs tended to describe. While performing in clubs, he dossed for a long while in cheap motels and flop houses in LA and occasionally lived out of the back of his ’55 Buick. In some of this, he acknowledges, he was again trying on his dad’s wayward life for size. He exorcised that ghost pretty much in his two-act musical Franks Wild Years in 1987 in which the eponymous hero torches the family home (Waits’s dad was named Jesse Frank Waits, after the outlaw James brothers). The hard-living had reached its inevitable dead end. “There ain’t nothing funny about being a drunk,” he observed, looking back. “You know, I was really starting to believe there was something amusing and wonderfully American about a drunk. I ended up telling myself to cut that shit out.” The opportunity to do so came when he met his wife, Kathleen Brennan, in 1980 on the set of Francis Ford Coppola’s One from the Heart . He was writing the music, she was helping to edit the script. They were married at 1am a couple of months later at the 24-hour Always Forever Yours Wedding Chapel in LA. His life was immediately transformed. They moved out up to the farm in Santa Rosa; he changed record labels in order to protect his musical freedom and to avoid the pressure to have hits; they began writing songs together and they raised three children. Brennan is even more private than her husband, but he leaves you with little doubt she has been his soulmate as well as his muse. “My wife doesn’t want me to say how long we’ve been married,” he suggests. “Or, better, she likes me to say that she was basically a child bride. You know, ‘They said it was wrong, but we didn’t listen’; ‘I told her I’d wait until she was old enough’, that kind of thing.” Brennan encouraged Waits to express the more dislocated sound he had wanted and which has given his career its adventurous longevity. “I think everyone has irreconcilable musical differences,” he says. “You know when you throw a party, you think people will show up and no one will like each other. It’s like that with music – parts of your musical psyche have never met other parts. You wonder if you should get them together. I used to think it was good to keep them apart. Now I kind of throw them in and see what happens.” The first collaboration with his wife, the critically acclaimed, triumphantly discordant, Swordfishtrombones , was Waits’s turning point and he has never stopped reinventing. To begin with, on a very basic level, Brennan opened him up to new influences, he suggests. “Her record collection and her library were both impressive compared to mine. When I met her most of my records were kind of stuck together with cheese and hair and oil and stuff. She had hers not only still in the cases but still in the little paper sleeve too. That in itself was something of a revelation.” Since then, they have shared pretty much everything, (“She washes, I dry,” is how Waits describes their songwriting technique). The family firm has been extended by the presence of their middle son, Casey, playing drums on the last couple of albums. In one maudlin lament on the new record, Waits sings in time-honoured fashion: “I gave it all up for the stage.” The great thing about this heartfelt sob, though, is that it is delivered in the full knowledge that he successfully avoided the fate he describes. Has contentment ever felt an enemy to his creativity? He pauses, laughs. “Right when you asked that the jukebox played ‘I’d like to settle down but they won’t let me.’ Merle Haggard. It’s always a bit like that. People don’t want you to be satisfied if you are a musician. And the scope for songs isn’t that great. Most songs that aren’t jump-rope songs, or lullabies, are cautionary tales or goodbye songs and road songs…” Given the insistently improvised and homemade texture of his music, it is tempting to think Waits spends a good deal of his time out here in the sticks tinkering with farm machinery in his yard or fixing his truck. One inspiration for his music is Harry Partch , an American pioneer of the 40s and 50s, who not only invented his own instruments but created his own notation too. Waits’s music still allows the possibility of “hitting a cabinet hard with a two by four” just for the hell of it. He distrusts digitalisation. “Music has generally involved a lot of awkward contraptions, a certain amount of heavy lifting,” he says. “The idea that it will just be a sort of vapour that you listen to out of speakers the size of a dime alarms me. It’s like injecting yourself. Or eating alone.” He is, he says, equally wary of the ease of search and shuffle. “They have removed the struggle to find anything. And therefore there is no genuine sense of discovery. Struggle is the first thing we know getting along the birth canal, out in the world. It’s pretty basic. Book store owners and record store owners used to be oracles, in that way; you’d go in this dusty old place and they might point you toward something that would change your life. All that’s gone.” Does he ever stray online? “No,” he says. “But then I’m one of those guys that is still a bit afraid of the telephone, its implications for conversation. I still wonder if the jukebox might be the death of live music.” If he feels out of kilter, he says, it’s maybe in his genes. He was leafing through a musical dictionary the other day and he came across a definition for “waits” – “They were these guys who went door to door, carolling, bringing you the news, telling you the time. I was strangely reassured by that.” He takes comfort, too, in the fact that the future is not uniformly distributed. “If I want to walk out in the desert and heat up a can of beans on a fire, I still can. In those movies like Gattaca or whatever, the space age stuff is always all there is. But in the world there is never just one way of living. It’s more like a big junkyard. Put it this way: I’m not afraid I’m going to end up on a space station in aluminium-foil underwear.” Music itself is the closest he gets to time travel. He gestures toward the jukebox: “The studio is torn down, all the people who played on it are dead, the instruments have been sold off. But you are listening to a moment that happened in time 60 years ago and you are hearing it just as sharp as when it was made. That remains an amazing thing to me.” Photographs have the same ghostly quality for him. He pulls out a little camera to prove the point. “You used to be able to see the pictures of America’s 10 most wanted men in the post office, but they stopped that. I keep them on here, instead.” He flips the pictures of fugitive murderers and terrorists. “Just in case, you know.” Does he wake up paranoid or grateful? He gathers up his crow book, finishes his coffee, pockets his song ideas. “I don’t know. As Bob Dylan says, ‘Fear and Hope: always sounds like a comedy team to me…’” Tom Waits Keith Richards Red Hot Chili Peppers Robert Altman Terry Gilliam Ray Charles Francis Ford Coppola Tim Adams guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …enlarge Senator Jeff Sessions is very, very, very worried about fraud, waste and abuse within the Federal food stamp program (SNAP). So worried he has introduced an amendment to cut funds to the program because he’s certain there are just a bunch of poor deadbeats out there taking advantage of the Feds’ largesse. From his press release Friday : Consider the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP”—the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the largest item in Agriculture Department’s budget. Spending on food stamps has surged over the last decade. It’s nearly doubled since President Obama took office. And in the appropriations bill before us this week, Senate Democrats propose another increase that would quadruple food stamp spending from what it was in 2001. Eleven million more Americans are on food stamps now than when President Obama first took office. The size of the benefit has increased 31 percent since 2008. When the food stamp program was expanded nationally in the 1970s, food stamps were used by 2 percent of the population. At the beginning of the last decade, they were used by 6 percent of the population. Today that figure has risen to 13 percent—one in eight Americans. This seven-fold increase in food stamp usage demands honest examination. It’s time to look under the hood. Gosh, that couldn’t be because this crappy economy has fattened the wallets of rich folks while millions are unemployed and desperate to feed their families while still paying the rent, could it? As an experiment, I went to the USDA website and put in a hypothetical family of 4 earning $1500 per month. Estimated benefits were about $490 per month for that family of four with no children under the age of five. The estimated income was unemployment benefits for the 2 adults and rent of $1,000 per month. The UI estimate was high; the rent was on the low end. $490 per month won’t stretch over that family without some serious sacrifice. It’s not like these folks would be out eating filet mignon every night. So what, exactly, does Senator Sessions see as the flagrant abuse? Well, he singled out a couple of weird examples of people who, on first blush, shouldn’t be eligible. For instance, in one state they’ve included information for a pregnancy hotline on the food stamp application. If you use the hotline you automatically become eligible for food stamps. In many states, all that is needed to become food stamp eligible is to be mailed a brochure by the government—again, regardless of assets. The amendment I am filing today would eliminate categorical eligibility. Only those who are eligible under the food stamp program’s requirements would be able to receive benefits. Is it too much to ask of an applicant for a benefit worth thousands of dollars to file an application under oath that assures that the person is really in need—and qualifies under law—to receive a benefit paid for by the taxpayers? Gosh, that’s terrible. I guess that’s a product of each state having administrative authority over each state’s program — something conservatives are supposed to love. As for automatic eligibility, I could only find documentation saying if someone was eligible for SSI or TANF, automatic eligibility in SNAP was available. Again, these are hardly millionaires, you know? Fortunately, Sessions’ amendment failed in the Senate, which led him to a second tirade in the Senate well: This program is not being run honestly, effectively, or fairly. It is deeply disappointing and extremely telling that the Democrat-led Senate voted down even this modest effort to address the almost shameless mishandling of taxpayer funds. We’re in a fiscal crisis that is already killing jobs, and these bills just increase spending—and destroy confidence—that much more. It’s time for President Obama to adopt the ‘Solyndra Rule.’ Before the president puts forward a single tax-hike proposal he must first put all of his effort into stripping the egregious spending waste from every corner of the federal budget.” The only fiscal crisis that’s killing jobs is the one where there are no jobs, so there are less consumers to buy things, so there are less things made. I guess that’s too complicated for Senator Sessions, though. [h/t ThinkProgress Economy ]
Continue reading …enlarge Senator Jeff Sessions is very, very, very worried about fraud, waste and abuse within the Federal food stamp program (SNAP). So worried he has introduced an amendment to cut funds to the program because he’s certain there are just a bunch of poor deadbeats out there taking advantage of the Feds’ largesse. From his press release Friday : Consider the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP”—the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the largest item in Agriculture Department’s budget. Spending on food stamps has surged over the last decade. It’s nearly doubled since President Obama took office. And in the appropriations bill before us this week, Senate Democrats propose another increase that would quadruple food stamp spending from what it was in 2001. Eleven million more Americans are on food stamps now than when President Obama first took office. The size of the benefit has increased 31 percent since 2008. When the food stamp program was expanded nationally in the 1970s, food stamps were used by 2 percent of the population. At the beginning of the last decade, they were used by 6 percent of the population. Today that figure has risen to 13 percent—one in eight Americans. This seven-fold increase in food stamp usage demands honest examination. It’s time to look under the hood. Gosh, that couldn’t be because this crappy economy has fattened the wallets of rich folks while millions are unemployed and desperate to feed their families while still paying the rent, could it? As an experiment, I went to the USDA website and put in a hypothetical family of 4 earning $1500 per month. Estimated benefits were about $490 per month for that family of four with no children under the age of five. The estimated income was unemployment benefits for the 2 adults and rent of $1,000 per month. The UI estimate was high; the rent was on the low end. $490 per month won’t stretch over that family without some serious sacrifice. It’s not like these folks would be out eating filet mignon every night. So what, exactly, does Senator Sessions see as the flagrant abuse? Well, he singled out a couple of weird examples of people who, on first blush, shouldn’t be eligible. For instance, in one state they’ve included information for a pregnancy hotline on the food stamp application. If you use the hotline you automatically become eligible for food stamps. In many states, all that is needed to become food stamp eligible is to be mailed a brochure by the government—again, regardless of assets. The amendment I am filing today would eliminate categorical eligibility. Only those who are eligible under the food stamp program’s requirements would be able to receive benefits. Is it too much to ask of an applicant for a benefit worth thousands of dollars to file an application under oath that assures that the person is really in need—and qualifies under law—to receive a benefit paid for by the taxpayers? Gosh, that’s terrible. I guess that’s a product of each state having administrative authority over each state’s program — something conservatives are supposed to love. As for automatic eligibility, I could only find documentation saying if someone was eligible for SSI or TANF, automatic eligibility in SNAP was available. Again, these are hardly millionaires, you know? Fortunately, Sessions’ amendment failed in the Senate, which led him to a second tirade in the Senate well: This program is not being run honestly, effectively, or fairly. It is deeply disappointing and extremely telling that the Democrat-led Senate voted down even this modest effort to address the almost shameless mishandling of taxpayer funds. We’re in a fiscal crisis that is already killing jobs, and these bills just increase spending—and destroy confidence—that much more. It’s time for President Obama to adopt the ‘Solyndra Rule.’ Before the president puts forward a single tax-hike proposal he must first put all of his effort into stripping the egregious spending waste from every corner of the federal budget.” The only fiscal crisis that’s killing jobs is the one where there are no jobs, so there are less consumers to buy things, so there are less things made. I guess that’s too complicated for Senator Sessions, though. [h/t ThinkProgress Economy ]
Continue reading …The death of the two-year-old run over as passersby ignored her is symptomatic of a deepening moral crisis Shame on us Chinese! Last Thursday a two-year-old girl was run over twice , about 100 metres from her home in a hardware market district of Foshan, a prosperous city in southern China. As she lay on the ground, writhing in pain, before being hit by the second vehicle, 18 people, on their bicycles, in cars or on foot, passed by but chose to ignore her. Among them a young woman with her own child. Finally, a 58-year-old female rubbish collector came to the girl’s rescue, but it was too late. By the time she was brought to the hospital, the girl Yueyue, (whose name translates as Little Joy), was brain dead. She was declared dead early on Friday morning. She was a good girl, full of life, her mother said a few days ago in an interview. She said she had just brought Yueyue back from her kindergarten. She popped out to collect the dry clothes and returned to find Yueyue gone – probably trying to look for her elder brother. It might have been a different story if one of the 18 people had lent Yueyue a hand. None even bothered to call for emergency services. Later, when interviewed by a journalist, one of the passersby, a middle-aged man riding a scooter, said with an uncomfortable smile on his face: “That wasn’t my child. Why should I bother?” Before giving himself up to the police, the driver of the second vehicle, a van, told the media why he had run away. “If she is dead, I may pay only about 20,000 yuan (£2,000). But if she is injured, it may cost me hundreds of thousands of yuan.” What’s wrong with these people? How could they be so cold-hearted? The horrific scene was caught by a surveillance camera and has been watched by millions of viewers since it was posted on Youku, China’s equivalent of YouTube. This is only the latest incident where tragedy has struck as a result of the callous inactivity of onlookers. Last month an 88-year-old man fell over face down at the entrance of a vegetable market near his home. For almost 90 minutes, he was ignored by people in the busy market. After his daughter found him and called an ambulance, the old man died “because of a respiratory tract clogged by a nosebleed”. If anyone had turned him over, he might have survived. Both cases, the death of Yueyue in particular, have provoked much public outrage and a nationwide discussion about morality in today’s China. From Shanghai, someone with the cybername 60sunsetred wrote: “The Chinese people have arrived at their most morality-free moment!” There was plenty of condemnation of the cold-heartedness of the passersby. But, astonishingly, a large percentage of posters said they understood why the onlookers did not lend a helping hand. Some admitted they would do the same – for fear of getting into trouble and fear of facing another “Nanjing judge”. Let me explain the story of the muddle-headed Nanjing judge. In 2006, in the capital of Jiangsu province, a young man named Peng Yu helped an old woman who had fallen on the street and took her to a hospital and waited to see if the old woman was all right. Later, however, the woman and her family accused Peng of causing her fall. A judge decided in favour of the woman, based on the assumption that “Peng must be at fault. Otherwise why would he want to help?”, saying that Peng acted against “common sense”. The outcry from the public in support of Peng forced the court to adjust its verdict and resulted in Peng paying 10% of the costs instead of the total. Since that incident Peng has become a national cautionary tale: the Good Samaritan being framed by the beneficiary of their compassion. It’s true that in China you can get into trouble when you try to help. Weeks ago I spotted an accident on the fourth ring road in Beijing as I returned home one night. A man was hit by a “black car”, an “illegal taxi”, and his face was all bloody. Watched over by a crowd, the injured man behaved aggressively towards the driver. I got off my scooter. As I tried to pull the two men apart, I was struck myself. When I asked if anyone had reported this to the police, the driver said no. I couldn’t believe that people just stared as if enjoying a free show, without doing anything. I called the helpline and the policemen turned up soon after. The fundamental problem, in my view, lies in one word that describes a state of mind: shaoguanxianshi , meaning don’t get involved if it’s not your business. In our culture, there’s a lack of willingness to show compassion to strangers. We are brought up to show kindness to people in our network of guanxi , family and friends and business associates, but not particularly to strangers, especially if such kindness may potentially damage your interest. Fei Xiaotong, China’s first sociologist, described Chinese people’s moral and ethical characteristics in his book, From the Soil , in the middle of the last century. He pointed out that selfishness is the most serious shortcoming of the Chinese. “When we think of selfishness, we think of the proverb ‘Each person should sweep the snow from his own doorsteps and should not fret about the frost on his neighbour’s roof,’” wrote Fei. He offered the example of how the Chinese of that period threw rubbish out of their windows without the slightest public concern. Things are much the same today. Under Mao, citizens were forced to behave themselves in both public and private spheres. Every March, people were obliged to go into the street to do good deeds: cleaning buses, fixing bicycles and offering haircuts. Now relaxed social control and commercialisation over the past three decades have led people to behave more selfishly again. People are enjoying, and sometimes abusing, the vast personal freedoms that didn’t exist before. To start with, it is now safe to be “naughty”. Back in the early 1980s, when I worked at a rocket factory in Nanjing, one of my colleagues, a married man, was caught having an affair with an unmarried woman. He was given a three-year sentence in a labour camp and the girl was disgraced. In today’s society, having extramarital affairs or keeping an ernai – second wife or concubine – is as common as “cow hair”, as the Chinese would say. For a novel I am writing on prostitution, I have interviewed many prostitutes and ernai . Many see their profession as a way to gather wealth quickly, feeling few moral qualms. China’s moral crisis doesn’t just manifest itself in personal life but also in business practice and many other areas. The high-profile “poisoned milk powder” case and the scandal of using “gutter oil” as cooking oil have shocked and disgusted people around the world. Last year an article, “Why have Chinese lost their sense of morality?”, in which the author tried to find an explanation, was widely read. He reasoned that China has introduced the concept of a market economy from the west but failed to import the corresponding ethics, while the traditional moral principles of China no longer fit the market economy model. There’s a lot of sense in that. I believe that the lack of a value system is also deepening the moral crisis. Before Mao, the indifference towards others once so accurately described by Fei existed but was mitigated by a traditional moral and religious system. That system was then almost destroyed by the communists, especially during the 10 mad years of the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. Nowadays communism, the ideology that dominated Chinese people’s lives like a religion, has also more or less collapsed. As a result, there’s a spiritual vacuum that cannot be filled by the mere opportunity of money-making. To drag China out of its moral crisis will be a long battle. The pressing question is how to make people act in cases of emergency and the solution is law. After the “Nanjing case”, there have been discussions about introducing a law that imposes a “duty of rescue” as exists in many European countries. I am all for it, because that’s probably the only way to propel action for a people who do not see a moral obligation in rescuing others. The Yueyue incident revealed an ugly side of China. I hope the entire nation will take the opportunity to take a hard look at ourselves and ask ourselves what’s wrong with society. There’s at least hope in the action of the rubbish collector who rushed to Yueyue’s side without hesitation. China’s economy is galloping like a horse without a rein and its position in the world is rising. We Chinese have every reason to feel proud about what we’ve achieved. Now we demand respect. But how can we possibly win respect and play the role of a world leader if this is a nation with 1.4 billion cold hearts? China Ethics Lijia Zhang guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rising energy bills will put millions at risk from ‘fuel poverty gap’ Two hundred people, most of them elderly, will die in Britain of cold-related diseases every day this winter, according to calculations by Britain’s leading advocacy group for old people, Age UK. “The fact that these ‘excess’ deaths occur in winter makes it clear that they are due directly to cold,” the organisation’s research manager, Philip Rossall, said. “And the fact that other, colder countries have lower excess winter deaths means that there is no reason that they are not preventable.” Age UK’s special adviser for policy, Mervyn Kohler, asked: “Why is this not a national scandal?” There were 26,156 excess winter deaths during 2009-10, with figures for 2010-11 to be published next month. “There is no reason to suppose that the worsening trend will not continue,” said Kohler. The charity’s figure of 200 deaths a day follows sharp price hikes by energy companies, credited with driving inflation to its highest level in 20 years. At the same time, a report by Britain’s leading academic expert on poverty and inequality, Professor John Hills of the London School of Economics, found a deepening “fuel poverty gap” . David Cameron hosted the “big six” energy companies at Downing Street to discuss the impact of soaring heating bills. He later urged consumers to insulate their homes properly and to “shop around” for deals. In his report, Hills found that 2,700 people among the 4.8 million in England and Wales living in fuel poverty (defined as spending more than 10% of income on heat and light) died in the winter of 2008-09 as a direct result – a steady increase for the third year running. But Age UK’s briefing paper makes a distinction between deaths directly due to fuel poverty and what the charity calls “excess winter deaths” – resulting from illnesses caused or exacerbated by cold. “The way to measure the problem is excess winter deaths,” said Rossall. “These are deaths caused by the impact on health of cold. Of course, we see a warning light with a report saying that 2,700 people are dying in fuel poverty. But what we are saying is that this is not the only relevant figure. It doesn’t measure the scale of the problem.” Which is, according to the document, that “among older people, the effects of cold housing were evident in terms of higher mortality risk, physical health and mental health”. Of the 200 a day who die, Rossall said, “more than 90% are over 65, because they are more vulnerable and less able to cope with winter”. The briefing paper reported: “Deaths from hypothermia are rare, but cold weather and poor heating can contribute to deaths caused by circulatory diseases (responsible for 41% of all recorded deaths by natural causes) and by respiratory diseases (13%).” It continued: “Heart and circulatory diseases are the largest causes of mortality in adults over 65 (England and Wales), and are particularly affected by winter temperatures.” Diet can be affected, said Rossall, as elderly people are obliged to make a choice between heat and food. Kohler added: “Cold is the difference. And unless cold is prevented, the deaths will rise.” The only way to prevent this, he said, was to stay warm, “and obviously if you increase the price, you ration the heat.” The report sets the UK’s appalling record in a European context: “Most dramatically, the UK has a higher rate of ‘excess winter deaths’ than other countries with colder climates.” It added: “From 1997-98, on average 18% of the UK’s winter deaths were excess, compared to the 10-12% in typically colder countries such as Finland, Sweden and Norway.” The figure for Germany and the Netherlands was 11%. “Sweden, Germany, Finland – these are the countries to emulate,” said Kohler. “Partly because local government is organised in a way that is more powerful and civic in its awareness of the impact of cold, and housing stock is very much better built and insulated. Although energy prices per unit are 50% higher in Sweden than in the UK, the average bill is 30% lower.” Regulation of tenancy was tighter in those countries, said Rossall, especially in the private rental sector – “and that is where the biggest problem is”. “The cost of heating an adequately sized house is estimated to be £1,300 a year,” said Kohler. “So if you are on pension credit of £7,000, you are very fuel-poor indeed.” He added that the prime minister’s recommendation for consumers to shop around was “inappropriate for many elderly people – it presumes either internet access people don’t have and hours waiting on the phone for people who cannot be understood”. Rossall added: “We are talking about people who become confused, people with dementia, vulnerable people.” “Most of our elderly people now live in poverty,” said Kohler, and one in six of the British population is now an elderly person living alone. Older people Poverty Social exclusion Energy industry Energy bills Ed Vulliamy guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rising energy bills will put millions at risk from ‘fuel poverty gap’ Two hundred people, most of them elderly, will die in Britain of cold-related diseases every day this winter, according to calculations by Britain’s leading advocacy group for old people, Age UK. “The fact that these ‘excess’ deaths occur in winter makes it clear that they are due directly to cold,” the organisation’s research manager, Philip Rossall, said. “And the fact that other, colder countries have lower excess winter deaths means that there is no reason that they are not preventable.” Age UK’s special adviser for policy, Mervyn Kohler, asked: “Why is this not a national scandal?” There were 26,156 excess winter deaths during 2009-10, with figures for 2010-11 to be published next month. “There is no reason to suppose that the worsening trend will not continue,” said Kohler. The charity’s figure of 200 deaths a day follows sharp price hikes by energy companies, credited with driving inflation to its highest level in 20 years. At the same time, a report by Britain’s leading academic expert on poverty and inequality, Professor John Hills of the London School of Economics, found a deepening “fuel poverty gap” . David Cameron hosted the “big six” energy companies at Downing Street to discuss the impact of soaring heating bills. He later urged consumers to insulate their homes properly and to “shop around” for deals. In his report, Hills found that 2,700 people among the 4.8 million in England and Wales living in fuel poverty (defined as spending more than 10% of income on heat and light) died in the winter of 2008-09 as a direct result – a steady increase for the third year running. But Age UK’s briefing paper makes a distinction between deaths directly due to fuel poverty and what the charity calls “excess winter deaths” – resulting from illnesses caused or exacerbated by cold. “The way to measure the problem is excess winter deaths,” said Rossall. “These are deaths caused by the impact on health of cold. Of course, we see a warning light with a report saying that 2,700 people are dying in fuel poverty. But what we are saying is that this is not the only relevant figure. It doesn’t measure the scale of the problem.” Which is, according to the document, that “among older people, the effects of cold housing were evident in terms of higher mortality risk, physical health and mental health”. Of the 200 a day who die, Rossall said, “more than 90% are over 65, because they are more vulnerable and less able to cope with winter”. The briefing paper reported: “Deaths from hypothermia are rare, but cold weather and poor heating can contribute to deaths caused by circulatory diseases (responsible for 41% of all recorded deaths by natural causes) and by respiratory diseases (13%).” It continued: “Heart and circulatory diseases are the largest causes of mortality in adults over 65 (England and Wales), and are particularly affected by winter temperatures.” Diet can be affected, said Rossall, as elderly people are obliged to make a choice between heat and food. Kohler added: “Cold is the difference. And unless cold is prevented, the deaths will rise.” The only way to prevent this, he said, was to stay warm, “and obviously if you increase the price, you ration the heat.” The report sets the UK’s appalling record in a European context: “Most dramatically, the UK has a higher rate of ‘excess winter deaths’ than other countries with colder climates.” It added: “From 1997-98, on average 18% of the UK’s winter deaths were excess, compared to the 10-12% in typically colder countries such as Finland, Sweden and Norway.” The figure for Germany and the Netherlands was 11%. “Sweden, Germany, Finland – these are the countries to emulate,” said Kohler. “Partly because local government is organised in a way that is more powerful and civic in its awareness of the impact of cold, and housing stock is very much better built and insulated. Although energy prices per unit are 50% higher in Sweden than in the UK, the average bill is 30% lower.” Regulation of tenancy was tighter in those countries, said Rossall, especially in the private rental sector – “and that is where the biggest problem is”. “The cost of heating an adequately sized house is estimated to be £1,300 a year,” said Kohler. “So if you are on pension credit of £7,000, you are very fuel-poor indeed.” He added that the prime minister’s recommendation for consumers to shop around was “inappropriate for many elderly people – it presumes either internet access people don’t have and hours waiting on the phone for people who cannot be understood”. Rossall added: “We are talking about people who become confused, people with dementia, vulnerable people.” “Most of our elderly people now live in poverty,” said Kohler, and one in six of the British population is now an elderly person living alone. Older people Poverty Social exclusion Energy industry Energy bills Ed Vulliamy guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Nearly 7 billion people now inhabit planet but projections that number will double this century have shocked academics The United Nations will warn this week that the world’s population could more than double to 15 billion by the end of this century, putting a catastrophic strain on the planet’s resources unless urgent action is taken to curb growth rates, the Observer can reveal. That figure is likely to shock many experts as it is far higher than many current estimates. A previous UN estimate had expected the world to have more than 10 billion people by 2100; currently, there are nearly 7 billion. The new figure is contained in a landmark study by the United Nations Population Fund (Unfpa) that will be released this week. The report – The State of World Population 2011 – is being compiled to mark the expected moment this month when somewhere on Earth a person will be born who will
Continue reading …Nearly 7 billion people now inhabit planet but projections that number will double this century have shocked academics The United Nations will warn this week that the world’s population could more than double to 15 billion by the end of this century, putting a catastrophic strain on the planet’s resources unless urgent action is taken to curb growth rates, the Observer can reveal. That figure is likely to shock many experts as it is far higher than many current estimates. A previous UN estimate had expected the world to have more than 10 billion people by 2100; currently, there are nearly 7 billion. The new figure is contained in a landmark study by the United Nations Population Fund (Unfpa) that will be released this week. The report – The State of World Population 2011 – is being compiled to mark the expected moment this month when somewhere on Earth a person will be born who will
Continue reading …