Monday 28 February 2011

Album Review: Valhalla Dancehall - British Sea Power


****
Valhalla - (Norse mythology) the hall in which the souls of heros slain in battle were received by Odin

With Valhalla Dancehall, British Sea Power have succeeded in demonstrating both their virtuosity and ingenuity.

Who's In Control opens the album with a rallying call to arms, wishing protest "was sexy on a Saturday night" and proudly questioning the status quo.

Georgie Ray is inspired by a combination of George Orwell and Ray Bradbury dystopian nightmare and boasts the most joyously piercing guitar solo heard in many a moon; the song's message captured perfectly in the passage, "Before the language gets perfected to a solitary grunt/Can we still sing electric on the sun?" - Wonderful.

Stunde Null, the German language equivalent for 'hour zero' - and more specifically used to refer to the fall of the Nazi's Third Reich - clears the decks with a raucous cacophony of guitar and, whether intentional or otherwise, acts as a portent symbol of the forthcoming change in the album's approach.

From here on in, British Sea Power are determined to harness every single weapon in their armoury. Mongk-II is all woozy vocals coming on like a long, lost rock standard; Baby is a delicate slow burner with a plinky, plonk piano motif; single Living Is So Easy boasts memorable opening gambit, "Oh my God did she look cute/At the Dame Vera clay pigeon shoot", a line so distinctively British Sea Power that it only serves to underline their unique idiosyncratic genius.

As masterful as this band undoubtedly are, it's hard not to feel a little disoriented by it all - and that's before the dual epics of Cleaning Out The Rooms (another ode to starting afresh) and Once More Now have come to pass. As a result, quick fire nuggets such as the magnesium burn Thin Black Sail and the astronomical Observe The Skies seem to unjustly lose their impact.

It's a minor criticism however. Rather we should all be grateful for a band, and an album, of such range, reference and riotousness. Odin would no doubt approve.

Wednesday 16 February 2011

"There's no such thing as Cameron's Big Society"

Having watched Johann Hari and others debating the Big Society on Channel 4's ever improving 10 O'Clock Live, I can't help but think, that in the battle between right and left, and indeed, right and wrong, both camps are missing some important points.

The raw concept, as described by Cameron, is fundamentally infallible. Who, in their right mind, could deny the worth of encouraging those in the local community to volunteer more frequently, to take ownership of local services and, ultimately, take more responsibility for the environment and the people around them?

Indeed, charities, associations, schools etc. rely on the free time and goodwill of those in their local community, without whom they simply wouldn't survive. Go to any school Summer FĂȘte or witness the Salvation Army providing free hot food and entertainment on a troubled local council estate and you'll see many volunteers who are the very definition of 'Big Society'.

Those on the left who attack the actual principle risk appearing to throw their toys out of the pram for the sake of it, or worse, could be rightly accused of hypocrisy. Surely socialists are in favour of many of the ideas encapsulated by Cameron's supposed mission?

The crux of the argument against therefore, is not in the 'what' but in the 'how' and 'why'. You've also got to ask yourself should Governments be espousing such a principle as policy? Surely Cameron is stating the obvious in his plea for Britain to volunteer more? Government shouldn't be preaching to us on a solely moral level but empowering us to be able to support each other in practical ways.

I'm yet to read or hear of a successful practical example of Cameron's vision and, frankly, how would we judge whether it's down to his good leadership regardless? The new PM has been quite clever in that respect, the Big Society's success, or otherwise, is pretty hard to measure.

It's clever too in its apparent diametric opposition to Thatcher's infamous quote 'there's no such thing as society'. In terms of image, Cameron wants to distance himself from Thatcher in an attempt to re-brand his party as 'compassionate' and it could be argued that he has been successful in doing so.

Of course, when you read between the lines, it becomes clear there's not much difference at all. Tuition fees have risen, public service spending has been cut drastically, plans to restructure the NHS look to be threatening equal standard of care for all etc. etc. ad nauseum.

Conservatives would argue that the UK's current financial debt means cuts are essential and that we are, after all, 'all in this together', but it's increasingly difficult not to feel the Big Society, and the need to address the debt itself, is merely a convenient cover for Cameron's real purpose in stripping back. Indeed, there is suggestion that only increased government spending leads to increased volunteering and that the belief people will step forward willingly despite cuts is, quite simply, wrong.

When bankers, whose misdemeanors, lest we forget, have put us in this precarious position, are still able to award themselves enormous bonuses, is it any wonder we find ourselves questioning the significance of over half of Conservative party funding coming from City financiers?

Either way, we shouldn't confuse a policy with a concept - which is all Cameron's 'Big Society' appears to be. Judge the coalition on policies alone, policies which suggest Cameron's Conservatives are interested in anything but the welfare of wider society.