The Ig Nobel Awards

0

Oddities of Science

Think science isn’t funny? Guess again.

THAT ALBERT Einstein. For a physicist, he sure had a great sense of humor. Most people have seen the posters of the guy: wild-haired, bright-eyed, sticking his tongue out at the camera. And we’ve read Einstein’s quirky quips and quotes: “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the universe.”

Really now, who’d have thought a scientist would turn out to be so funny?

Science is, after all, a dry, academic, humorless discipline, a realm of facts and figures and dangerous exploding chemicals. It’s a solemn business. Scientists, the chosen acolytes of the scientific flame, tend to be sober-minded people. Like nuns and DMV workers, they have little tolerance for tomfoolery or unrestrained silliness. Right?

Uh, wrong.

“What very few people realize,” declares Marc Abrahams, editor of the Annals of Improbable Research, in Cambridge, Mass., and the founder of the annual Ig Nobel Awards, “is that scientists are among the funniest people on the planet.”

He’s serious.

“There are a few completely humorless scientists who take themselves and their work much too seriously,” Abrahams admits, “and it is these people who give a bad reputation to everyone else. Scientists are the ones trying to solve the problems no one else can figure out. If you don’t keep a sense of humor about it, you’ll be miserable.”

We should not doubt him. Under Abrahams’ guidance, the AIR has become the world’s leading “science humor” magazine. That’s right: science humor. Staffed by writers trained in the scientific method and possessed of a wicked sense of irony, AIR is, in part, a conscious attempt to make science more inviting to an intimidated world at large. To that end, Abrahams and company scour academic journals in search of stories that reveal the wacky, eccentric underbelly of the scientific process. By reporting on scientific achievements that “cannot or should not be reproduced,” the AIR allows scientists and nonscientists to laugh out loud.

That laughter grows loudest once a year, when AIR presents the illustrious Ig Nobel Awards, handed out every October–coinciding with the announcements of the Nobel Prizes–to 10 recipients whose achievements have inspired the highest degree of jaw-dropping disbelief. This year’s winners–honored in a supremely silly ceremony that took place at Harvard University on Oct. 5–include Richard Wassersug, who published a paper titled On the Comparative Palatability of Some Dry-Season Tadpoles from Costa Rica. It involved a firsthand tadpole taste-test, and was, in fairness, a serious attempt to understand why certain tadpoles are avoided by amphibian-eating predators. Another winner, honored with the prize for literature, was the infamous Australian “Breatharian,” Jasmuheen, whose book Living on Light shares the notion that while some humans do eat food, we don’t ever really need to. This year’s Peace Prize went to the British Royal Navy, for ordering its sailors to undergo target practice in which they refrain from using live cannon shells and instead simply shout, “Bang!”

Now a 10-year-old tradition, the Ig Nobel ceremony is perhaps the strangest scientific celebration going. It certainly stands as proof positive that scientists do indeed have a sense of humor. In addition to the winner’s acceptance speeches–which, according to tradition, must conclude in less than 60 seconds to avoid interruption from Miss Sweetie Poo, an adorable 9-year-old sent out to whine, “Please stop, I’m bored. Please stop, I’m bored!”–the celebration includes the Brain Food opera (performed by actual Nobel Prize winners), the Great Intelligence Debate (a contest of 30-second speeches shouted simultaneously), and the ritual distribution of plastic bubble-wrap “Fish Brains.” As it has for the past several years, the October ceremony will be broadcast Nov. 24 (the day after Thanksgiving) at 11 a.m., on NPR’s Talk of the Nation Science Friday.

SENSE of humor notwithstanding, one has to wonder how the recipients of an Ig Nobel respond to being told they’ve just won. “There’s usually a long pause after they hear the news,” admits Abrahams. “But really, a surprising number of them are pleased about it. Most of the others are tolerant, or at least amused.” He insists that the Ig Nobels are not meant to ridicule the winners, but to honor them for having the courage to go where no one’s gone before. “A scientific achievement can seem pretty ridiculous and still have something significant to contribute. That’s the history of science. Every important breakthrough we know was once thought to be absolutely nuts,” says Abrahams. “Besides, most of our winners are just happy their work was noticed at all.”

Larry Friend, a Petaluma geologist who works for Harding ESE Inc., an environmental services firm in Marin County, says he’d consider it an honor to receive an Ig Nobel. “Any type of award, either realistic or ignominious, would be great,” he confirms. A walking-talking example of a funny scientist, Friend keeps a large file of science-related jokes and humorous essays, documents he gleefully distributes to his colleagues far and wide. “Being a scientist gets depressingly overwhelming unless you can poke fun at what you’re doing,” he says. “Scientists are treated as second-class citizens. I mean, you can make a lot more money doing other things. Here I am, among the smartest 10 percent of all people in the country, and I can’t make any money.

“Actually, that’s pretty funny when you think of it,” he adds. “Maybe I’m not that smart after all.”

Nicholas Geist, a professor of paleontology at Sonoma State University, has another theory as to why people think scientists are humorless people. It begins in elementary school, Geist hypothesizes.

“Science textbooks just suck in elementary school,” he says.

Beyond that, Geist, a longtime fan of the AIR, agrees with Abrahams, observing that “some of the funniest people in the world are scientists. “On the other hand,” he says, “some of the most self-absorbed, boring people I’ve ever met are scientists. If scientists have a bad reputation, it’s scientists’ own fault. A lot of scientists, particularly young scientists at the beginning of their careers, tend to be all ‘Science! the Search for Truth with a capital T.’

“I’ll always remember what this one old paleontologist at Oregon State once told me. ‘Good science is an internally consistent set of lies.’ ”

Now there’s a line one might expect to hear in an Ig Nobel acceptance speech.

One thing’s for sure, Einstein would probably get a chuckle out of it.

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Marijuana

Smoke Damage

How marijuana ruined my life for the better

By Stephen Kessler

SOMETIMES I wonder what I might have amounted to if I hadn’t become a pothead 30 years ago, when I was in graduate school, and pretty much remained one ever since. If not for marijuana, by now I’d probably be securely tenured in some English department and my mother would be able to brag to her friends about her son the doctor of philosophy. I’d be fluent in Academese, a respectable specialist in some form of critical theory, a teacher admired by his brightest students, a defeated imaginative writer, and a wretchedly unhappy and neurotic person. This, at least, is how I envisioned the path I was on at the time and where it must inevitably lead.

Luckily, marijuana intervened.

Getting high, for me, in 1969, at the age of 22, provided a vitally helpful perspective on the pettiness and irrelevance of an academic career to the creative vocation I felt was calling me. Following an acute psychotic episode–usefully assisted by psychedelic drugs, which triggered the explosion of all my internal conflicts and contradictions–I left the doctoral program and its generous fellowship for the full-time pursuit of my first love, poetry. This may not have been possible without a small but steady independent income that enabled me to live without a “real” job, but that financial independence was also existential in that the freedom it afforded left me no excuses for not doing what I claimed to want to do, which was to write. Smoking marijuana gave me courage, at the time, to follow my deepest imaginative instincts, not only in the actual writing of poems but in the larger arena of making decisions about my life and how I wished to live it. Contrary to conventional wisdom, my judgment felt to me more fundamentally sound when I was stoned than straight.

Encouraged by the permission I felt to write without parental or professorial approval, I set out on the slow, uncertain, and mostly thankless path of the young poet, laboring over less-than-brilliant lines, writing, revising, sending the finished works to magazines, occasionally publishing, more often collecting rejections. Through most of this artistic apprenticeship I was accompanied by the sweet smell of burning hemp, whose presence surrounding my efforts seemed to expand the atmosphere of creative possibility, enhancing my sense of heroic romance on the seas of the blank page, that heady journey into the unknown. Frequently stoned as I indulged my imagination, I knew I was learning something about poetry, about writing, and about myself.

From there it was a slippery slope into the harder stuff: translation, criticism, journalism, editing, and publishing. In the years since my earliest days as a dropout hippie poet I’ve managed to make a working life for myself in these various branches of literary practice, and while I wouldn’t presume to credit pot for anything I’ve managed to accomplish, I do believe its companionship has helped me maintain a certain equanimity amid the myriad distractions, confusions, and aggravations of the surrounding world, enabling me to focus on what matters most, or what I most enjoy. If anything, marijuana has tempered my ambition, relaxing the compulsion to overachieve and giving license to play.

IT IS THIS sense of permission–or permissiveness, as the virtue-pushers would have it–that makes the forbidden herb, for me, a useful antidote to the various societal prohibitions against, for example, “doing nothing.” Pot reinforces my instinctive Taoism. Maybe that’s why it’s considered by some to be a dangerous drug: if everyone used it, nothing would get done. But paradoxical as it may seem, it is precisely when “doing nothing” that I tend to get the most accomplished as an artist. Or the deep involvement, the timelessness, experienced in the flow of creation may feel so aimless or effortless that it might as well be nothing, except for the fact that when I resume more consciously purposeful activity I often find persuasive evidence that I was doing something after all: a written text or other crafty artifact, a rack of freshly washed dishes, a stack of firewood, a pile of paid bills whose checks were written while listening to music or some radio show.

Stoned or straight, I find these kinds of meditative activities to be a means of grounding myself in the mundane patterns and rhythms out of which imagination rises. The content, style, and quality of what I write are not, I’ve found, especially affected by whether or not I’ve been smoking, but I am aware, when high, of more intimate sensuous relations with the language, with the texture of lines and sentences, with a kind of musical understanding not always readily evident to my more rational and sober self. The mild psychosis induced by this subtle alteration of consciousness may provide a different angle of vision, or revision, that can be of use in making esthetic decisions–what works and what doesn’t, how to refine some detail, trim out the excess, or develop some incomplete idea.

Obviously such working habits are more dependent on the mind and skill of the individual than they are on what drugs he may or may not be taking. An idiot on marijuana is still an idiot, possibly more so. And one’s response to pot may vary greatly, depending on personality and circumstances. The health effects of smoking anything cannot be entirely positive, and I’ve seen enough stupid people in herbally induced stupors to be disabused of any evangelical notion of marijuana as a panacea. Like any other substance–food, tobacco, caffeine, alcohol, television–its abuse can be toxic and destructive. But unlike these ordinary and often insidious additives to daily life, pot remains not only legally prohibited but even now, at the turn of the millennium, socially stigmatized in a way that, say, coffee (a truly mind-altering substance) is not.

AMONG my friends, some smoke and some don’t, for reasons of their own–just as I don’t drink coffee because it makes my stomach jumpy–but the ones who do are just as productive in their lives and work and social contributions as are the abstainers. Anecdotally speaking, I’ve seen no correlation one way or another between marijuana use and creativity, citizenship, ethics, or character. What I have noticed when smoking with friends is a ritual affirmation of time-out, a refreshing pause in the everyday onslaught, a moment of quiet dialogue to savor, an island of sanity in the rush of events. Different people have different ways of relaxing, but those who habitually watch TV–whether in the lethargy of their own living rooms or in the noise and convivial drunkenness of a bar with ballgames blaring–seem to me far more at risk for various psychopathologies than those who routinely prefer a few tokes of pot.

While I don’t exactly take pride in my own habit, I don’t consider it a major vice. A couple of puffs in midafternoon, following a late lunch, or at the end of a longish day, in the cocktail hour, or in the evening while listening to some especially beautiful music, strikes me as an eminently civilized way of decompressing the psyche. Whenever I find myself using it more than feels healthy–when I wake up in the morning foggy-headed, or feel a strain on my respiratory system–I may take a break for a few weeks as a way to remind myself of the drug’s potentially negative effects and to refresh my appreciation of its positive ones. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone, especially children (I’m content with the knowledge that my 18-year-old daughter doesn’t use it), but neither would I discourage the curious from trying it in a conscious, responsible way.

Partner, collaborator, accomplice, friend, companion–marijuana, over the years, has woven itself gently into the pattern of my life in a way that may have prevented me from pushing myself above and beyond whatever I’ve done as a writer. Without the benign corruption of pot, who knows, I might have been a contender. Instead, up to now, in my early 50s, I’ve managed to maintain my physical and mental health, create a few works I hope may be worth saving, cultivate many lasting friendships, and contribute what I could to my communities. For someone of alternately competitive and contemplative tendencies, the path I’ve taken, accompanied by the herbal reality-check of marijuana, feels to me thus far to have been a reasonable compromise. As my father used to say, “Everything in moderation.”

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Open Mic

0

Movie Math

By C. D. Payne

HAVE YOU BEEN CATCHING UP with those old movies on Turner Classic Movies? You soon discover that in Hollywood “old” is a relevant term. For example, the other night you may have seen Faithless (1932), a Depression-era comedy in which Tallulah Bankhead and Robert Montgomery play impoverished society swells struggling to scrape up carfare. At one point Tallulah is asked her age. “Twenty-four,” she admits with modest sincerity. Yeah, right.

Miss Bankhead may have been 24 at some point in her life, but I suspect it was long before talking pictures arrived on the scene.

That same week brought us The Ambassador’s Daughter (1956), starring Olivia de Havilland as a dewy-eyed Parisian maiden resisting the advances of dashing enlisted man John Forsythe. This was 17 years after Olivia swiped Ashley Wilkes from Scarlett in Gone with the Wind and 21 years after her movie debut in The Irish in Us (1935). Two decades later, Miss de Havilland looked glamorous in her Dior wardrobe, but you may have noticed the director never moved in very close on his ingenue. Perhaps it was because she was celebrating her 40th birthday that year.

Hollywood leading men engage in age-fudging too. Take the case of Susan Slept Here (1954), in which playboy screenwriter Dick Powell suddenly finds himself married to juvenile delinquent Debbie Reynolds. Should he keep her? The problem is that the child bride is only 17, while the groom is “19 years older.” According to my pocket calculator, that would make Dick a still-youthful 36.

Yeah, right.

In fact, Dick Powell had 28 years seniority on Debbie. In 1954, she was a bubbly 22 and he was a mature 50. Can this marriage be saved? I doubt it.

A half-century later, actors are still playing fast and loose with their ages. For example, if her official biography is to be believed, former Cheers star Kirstie Alley is now four years younger than everyone else in her high school class. “That’s odd,” former classmates have commented, “she didn’t look 14 when we graduated.”

The good news is that there’s no reason why the rest of us can’t readjust our ages to Hollywood Time. According to my official biography, I am now a vigorous 34. And no, I will not be attending any high school reunions with my aging peers.

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Internet Futures

Net Gains

Is the Internet just a giant Tupperware party?

By Naomi Klein

WHEN THE TOP two executives at BMG Entertainment resigned last month, it revealed a deep schism in the way multinational companies see the Internet’s culture of sharing. Despite all the attempts to turn the Net into a giant shopping mall, the default ethos still seems to be anti-shopping: on the Internet, we may purchase things here and there, but we share ceaselessly: ideas, humor, information, and yes, music files.

So here’s the real debate as it goes down in the boardroom: Is this culture of online swapping and trading a threat to the heart of the profit motive, or is it an unprecedented profit-making opportunity, a chance to turn sharing itself into an enormously profitable sales tool?

When the five major record labels, under the umbrella of the Recording Industry Association of America, launched a lawsuit against Napster, they threw their lot decidedly into the first camp: file-sharing is theft of copyright, pure and simple, and it must be stopped.

But then, in October, something very strange happened: Bertelsmann, owner of BMG Entertainment (one of the five companies behind the RIAA lawsuit), struck a deal with Napster (hence the BMG resignations). The two companies are going to launch a file-sharing site where music fans pay a membership fee in exchange for access to BMG music. Once it’s off the ground, Bertelsmann will pull out of the lawsuit.

At the press conference, Thomas Middelhoff, chairman and chief executive of Bertelsmann, pitted himself against the suits over at Time Warner and Sony who just don’t get the Net. “This is a call for the industry to wake up,” he said.

SO WHAT’S going on? Has Bertelsmann, a $17.6 billion media conglomerate (which owns my publisher and pretty much everyone else’s) decided to join the cyber-hippies who chant that “information wants to be free”? I somehow doubt it. More likely, Bertelsmann knows what more and more corporations understand: that after many failed attempts to use the Net as a direct sales tool, it may just turn out that the process of trading information is the Net’s ultimate commercial use.

Napster defenders argue that they don’t pirate CDs, but rather swap music within an online community the way communities of friends swap mixed tapes. They get to know and trust one another’s taste and, they argue, they end up buying more music because they are exposed to more of it. They also say they have been driven to create this alternative by inflated CD prices and the hideously homogenous rotation of pop on video stations and commercial radio.

What’s taking place on sites like Napster is a high-tech version of something very old: people talking to other people directly about what they like. It used to be called “word of mouth”; in the Internet age it’s called “word of mouse.” It’s the X factor that can create a true phenomenon, like the Blair Witch Project, and which marketers can’t seem to purchase or control–witness the Blair Witch sequel.

Or can they? Trying to understand, systematize, and harness this most human of all behaviors (how and why we talk to each other) has become something of a corporate obsession. Books such as The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, The Anatomy of Buzz by Emanuel Rosen, and Unleashing the Ideavirus by Seth Godin offer quasi- scientific explanations for how ideas spread: less by advertising than by regular people who are respected by their peers. Gladwell calls them “connectors” and “mavens,” Godin calls them “sneezers,” Rosen calls them “network hubs.”

Based on this theory, a marketing school has developed that encourages companies to treat consumers as if they were journalists or celebrities: feed them free stuff and watch them do your marketing for you, gratis. Put more bluntly, turn the ultimate anti-commodity–human communication, between friends, inside communities of trust–into a commercial transaction.

This is the irony of the record industry’s crackdown on Napster. At the same time as the legal arms of record companies are pummeling file-sharing sites, their marketing arms are warmly embracing these same online communities for their “peer-on-peer” potential. They’ve been paying firms like Electric Artists to strategically circulate free music samples and video clips in the hope of turning music fans into battalions of unpaid cyber Avon Ladies.

Bertelsmann itself used these techniques of “online seeding” to launch BMG artist Christina Aguilera: ElecticArtists gave away music samples to chatty Britney Spears fans, who then bombarded their online friends with the great news: She’s been cloned!!

When Bertelsmann made a deal with Napster last week, it were betting on a future in which sharing–when carefully controlled by marketers–is the Internet’s “killer app”: a global network of online brand-babble where authentic communities used to be.

The Internet as a giant Tupperware party. Are you ready?

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

The Wide-Eyed Gourmet

Feast & Famine

By Marina Wolf

IF YOU’RE LUCKY, you’ve had some experience with hunger in your life. Not enough to stunt your growth or make you die, but just enough to put an edge on your appetite. Maybe you’re a member of a religion that imposes periodic fast days. Maybe you didn’t make enough money in college, but your scholarships counted against you at the food-stamp office.

I had all of that, plus six brothers and sisters and parents plagued by layoffs and underemployment. We got free school lunches and, during the worst months, food bank-surplus TVP for snacks. First helpings were small, and second helpings, if there were any, inevitably led to noisy skirmishes and heated charges of parental favoritism. Food, in other words, was a highly charged issue at our house, and only at Thanksgiving and Christmas could we relax, two days in one month when we would have more than barely enough. We always started those dinners with a prayer, how thankful we were for each other and blah blah blah, but it was really all about the big roasted bird in the middle of the table. When the last amen was said, we pigged out in the old style. We were a roomful of Tiny Tims getting excited about our plum pudding.

This low-level deprivation used to bother me a lot. But it’s true what they say: A bit of hunger really does make a great-tasting sauce. And I will forever appreciate the occasional feast.

Our ancestors did, too. They really knew how to get into the food, with their spit-roasted oxen and fig-stuffed titmice, followed by towers of sugar paste borne into the dining hall by sweaty kitchen slaves, who themselves were planning a gorgeous gorge with oxen leftovers after the Lord High muckety-mucks had theirs. Scholars may point to such decadent meals as a prelude to the fall of Rome or as a sign of class inequities in medieval Europe. But actually most people back in the old days, even members of the upper class, were living in a state of uncertainty when it came to their next meal. There were church restrictions and locusts and kings and barbarians taking a bigger cut.

We as a nation, on the other hand, are no longer immediately dependent on harvest or hunting. Many of us can load our grocery carts anytime. Stand at the end of a checkout counter sometime and watch our modern-day cornucopia–the conveyor belt–overflow with holiday provisions.

But we are drowning in a sea of indifferent plenty. Without the contrast, that tiny edge of everyday desire, our hyperabundance becomes just one more luxury to take for granted. Hey, there’s always one more stuffed thing, one more set of side dishes, another choice among four desserts. You can get it at any restaurant seven days a week, or even at home if you’ve just come back from the supermarket. When the festive board groans more than once or twice a year, we stop listening, and the creaking table blends into all the other holiday noise.

But there is a part of human nature that craves the contrast of hunger and humongous meals. The postmodern, well-fed American, lacking in fast days and famines, tends to find that contrast with post-holiday diets. It’s an understandable impulse that has become almost as much a ritual as the Rose Parade.

But on behalf of people everywhere who have been or are now hungry, I’d like to say to the nation: This year, spare us your collective anorexia. It’s a mockery of the real thing. Festive food–having it, sharing it–should bring you only joy.

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Keb’ Mo’

0

Blues Redux

Bluesman Keb’ Mo’ returns to his roots

By Alan Sculley

WHEN he arrived on the national blues scene with his self-titled 1994 CD, Keb’ Mo’ became immediately known for helping breathe new life into the acoustic blues style. Though it had songs that featured accompaniment from other instruments, the eponymous CD clearly established the bluesman as an artist building on what acoustic-oriented artists like Mississippi John Hurt and Taj Mahal had done before him.

Gradually, though, Keb’ Mo’ (his real name is Kevin Moore) has built on the acoustic blues foundation. And by the time of his third CD, the 1998 release Slow Down, he had expanded considerably on the acoustic sound. With the exception of the solo acoustic “I’m Telling You Now” and a cover of Robert Johnson’s “Love in Vain,” the remaining 10 songs featured full-band arrangements, with songs like “A Better Man,” “Soon As I Get Paid,” and “Muddy Water,” rocking quite convincingly.

Yet Mo’s new CD, The Door, finds the singer-songwriter taking a step back toward his roots. To be sure, there are plenty of songs with full-band accompaniment, such as the funky gospel-informed “Stand Up (and Be Strong)” and the gentle pop-tinged ballad “Come on Back.” But the new CD is perhaps more defined by songs like “Loola Loo,” “Anyway,” and the title track, which, even though they include some additional instrumentation, are centered around Mo’s vocals and his acoustic guitar.

The Door is a little closer to home,” Mo’ says. “I meant it to be very acoustic-friendly, meaning that I could play the songs solo.”

For the Philadelphia-based singer-guitarist, The Door promises to build on an impressive run that has seen both his second and third CDs capture Grammy Awards for best contemporary blues artist.

That Mo’ would succeed so impressively so fast after emerging on the national scene is remarkable, considering the meandering path he’d followed for much of his career. In 1973, he made his first inroads, at age 21, when Papa John Creach, the late violinist who recorded with Hot Tuna and Jefferson Starship, happened to stop by a rehearsal space where Mo’s current band was practicing. Creach liked what he heard and hired the group on the spot. Instead of continuing to pursue jobs as a sideman after his three-year stint with Creach, Mo’ instead signed on as a contractor and arranger of demo sessions at A&M Studios. His studio work helped him land a record deal in 1980 with a subsidiary of Casablanca Records, Chocolate City.

BUT THE sessions for the album went sour as Mo’, who was plagued by vocal problems at the time, let others take control of the recording sessions. The finished CD, Rainmaker, stiffed commercially and critically, and Mo’ returned to the Los Angeles club scene. He had a variety of gigs, some good (such as a stint in a group led by Monk Higgins that frequently had top blues stars such as Big Joe Turner and Albert Collins stop by and sit in on sets), others not nearly as noteworthy.

It wasn’t until 1990 that things started to fall into place. That’s when Mo’ was invited to play a role as a musician performing Delta blues music in a play produced by the Los Angeles Theater Center called Rabbit Foot. The role gave Mo’ the opportunity to delve further into the music of such acoustic Delta blues artists as Big Bill Broonzy and Mississippi John Hurt.

“I just could feel the realness,” Mo’ says, explaining his attraction to artists like Broonzy and Hurt. “They sang about real things. They sang about real stuff.”

After a couple of years of studying the style and exploring his own writing and performing talents, Mo’ landed a record deal with OKeh Records, a longtime blues label that was being revived by Epic Records. His career has been on a fast track ever since. And the collaborators on The Door are a good indication of just how much respect Mo’ had earned over the course of just three solo CDs.

“Blues is a genre, like country is a genre,” Mo’ says. “Songs are just the songs. I mean, you can do a blues version of ‘The Way We Were.’ All you do is just change the chords, decorate the song differently, sing it differently. I took that tip from country. Country songs have been crossing genres from country to pop to rock for years. Because they’re just songs. The song doesn’t make any difference.

“I mean, like people can take a country song and make it jazz or R&B, make it more country, bluegrass, pop-country, whatever. I’m from the school of get the song first.”

Keb’ Mo’ performs on Sunday, Nov. 26, at 7:30 p.m. Luther Burbank Center, 50 Mark West Springs Road, Santa Rosa. $27.50. 707/765-6665.

From the November 23-29, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Left Bank

0

French Twist

Chef Steven Obranovich keeps things smokin’

By Marina Wolf

“I don’t know why I’m nervous,” says Steven Obranovich over his shoulder as he leads the way into Larkspur’s Left Bank restaurant. “I guess I’m just a pessimist. Anything that can go wrong, will. I’m going to make some coffee. Do you want some?” The 32-year-old chef lives on coffee, that and Marlboro Light 100s. “Everyone smokes in the restaurant business,” he says with a shrug and continues back to the kitchen. “One place where I worked in France during my apprenticeship, there were 25 of us sitting in the locker room smoking.”

Obranovich may not get to smoke indoors as much anymore, but he still carries a lot of France in his life, visiting regularly for ideas and old china and preparing Left Bank’s popular cuisine de grand-mère (“grandmother’s cooking”). But not everything French is fabulous, as he discovered in 1995 when he joined the staff in Chicago’s Everest Room after graduating from the California Culinary Academy in 1995. At the Everest Room, old-school French traditions reigned, including the one about staying in your position until you die. Obranovich wanted to be more than fish chef, and almost managed to do so in his boss’s offer to open a restaurant in the faux Eiffel Tower in Las Vegas. He grimaces even now at the thought.

“Maybe I’m being a Bay Area snob, but why would you go to Vegas and eat at any of those places?”

Fortunately for the upwardly striving Obranovich, he landed the Left Bank position after a round of secret interviews and left the Las Vegas gig for a colleague of his at the Everest Room. “Everyone went home happy. She got to be chef at the new restaurant. And I got to come back to the Bay Area, and I don’t have to deal with the snow or the stupid, ugly people of the Midwest.”

On this note, Obranovich puts away the enormous bowlful of chanterelles that he’s been ripping up for tonight’s fish special (a salmon roulade filled with sautéed wild mushrooms) and eagerly accepts a suggestion to wait for the photographer out on the patio. He relaxes into the chair and puffs casually, but gets a little anxious again when the photographer arrives. “I’m not putting a hat on,” he mutters as he stubs out his cigarette. “I’m just letting you know. I don’t wear one.”

IN THAT tone of voice, and peering over his wire-frame glasses, Obranovich resembles a shy teenager refusing to wear a tie to class pictures. But the resemblance fades entirely when he steps behind the stove, clattering pans together for a quick lunch of bouillabaise and steamed mussels. “I actually hate fish,” he says, pulling handfuls of fish and shellfish out of a knee-level drawer and tossing them into pans sizzling with oil, garlic, and shallots. “I never eat it. But it’s the easiest thing for me to be creative with. Because I did it for four years, every single day.” He shakes the pans up and dumps them into big bowls, while the photographer tries to keep up. “You’re not seeing all my head? How’s this, is this better?” He lowers his head to make a cheesy grin over the bowl.

We take the heaping bowls of seafood back to the patio, and Obranovich ponders the question of what is la cuisine grand-mère. Obranovich’s own grandmother cooked badly, but is this the kind of food–rich seafood stews, sauerkraut fried in duck fat–that French grandmothers cook?

“Oh, yeah. I’ve been to France a whole bunch of times, and they’re pigs! They’re all svelte, none of them are fat, but they drink a lot, they smoke a lot, and they eat a lot, all day long. They eat the things that nobody else in the world can eat, and they’re fine.”

Obranovich tries to give a history of his life in five minutes. He mentions being 7 or 8 and learning to make salads and fresh foods from his mother’s Palo Alto garden. Theater was his life, even while he worked for five years as an aide for a politician. He got the idea for cooking school only when a friend jumped the lawyer track and applied to CCA. Now he can’t imagine doing anything else. In spite of the standard chef worries about food costs and critics, the last year and a half have been the best of his life.

He drains the last of his wine and then abruptly changes topic. “Well, now that I’ve had a glass of wine, do you want to know what it’s like to be a gay chef?”

Um, OK.

“Well, with the customers it’s not a big deal, with the waitstaff and owners it’s not a big deal. But with the kitchen staff you’re dealing with Latinos, the machismo and all of that. When I was coming up, when I worked in Chicago, my god, I could not believe what I had to deal with.”

Fans of food literature might recall the particularly gruesome sexual threats described in chef Anthony Bourdain’s book Kitchen Confidential, when a chef once threatened to pull a guy’s eye out and fuck him in the skull. Obranovich says the sexual tension was usually more subtle than that.

“It wasn’t malicious; it was like, let’s see how far he’ll go. There was one person who I had problems with. He was kind of my equal on the line. I was the fish chef, he was the meat chef, and it was like, OK, who’s better? So I would turn it around on him. He’d touch me, and I’d turn around and grab him there. I’d establish the boundaries. And then, you know, it basically stopped.”

SOME of that confidence seems to come from Obranovich’s 11-year relationship, an amazing record in an industry rife with marital stress. But the two seem to have reached some sort of equilibrium: the husband, as Obranovich likes to call him, is in France on a Fulbright, and anyway, Obranovich regularly works 14- to 16-hour days. “Here in America we are all renowned for being workaholics. It’s not strange for me to be so dedicated to what I do. And it’s not strange for him either, because he knows that that’s the type of person that I am, and he respects it.”

Obranovich visited his partner in France last week and came back to a moderate level of chaos, even for him: the holiday season, a new sous-chef, and a big launch party with wine.com for Left Bank’s own label of wine. So other than smoking his head off, how does he decompress?

“I go to sleep. That’s all. I don’t decompress,” Obranovich says as he takes another drag on the cigarette. “My mind is constantly going with work, constantly. When I’m driving home, I’m thinking, OK, what am I doing tomorrow? When I get home at night, I fill the coffee machine with coffee and wash my face, then I just lie there for about 10 minutes, go to sleep, wake up, and start all over again. It sounds really strange, and it sounds like it wouldn’t be fulfilling, but it is.”

Pumpkin & Duck Confit Flan with a Double Crème

Obranovish created this savory custard to accompany the release of Left Bank’s first wine, a Beaujolais. Any fall greens (such as frisée, spinach, or escarole) dressed in a vinaigrette of your choice would be suitable to complete this dish.

5 ounces heavy crean 1 ounce butter, plus extra for greasing Pinch of grated nutmeg 12 sprigs fresh chervil, finely chopped 6 sprigs tarragon, finely chopped Salt and pepper 3 eggs 12 ounces canned pumpkin 1 cup shredded duck-leg confit (available in specialty shops) 15­20 large spinach leaves

Double Créme: 16 ounces heavy cream Juice of lemon Grated nutmeg Salt and pepper

Preheat oven to 350 degrees. Grease a 1-pint soufflé dish or 8-inch cake pan. In a saucepan, heat cream, butter, nutmeg, chervil, tarragon, and salt and pepper together until butter melts. Whisk in eggs, pumpkin purée, and confit.

Carefully dip spinach leaves, one by one, into boiling water for a few seconds. Immediately remove to a bowl containing ice and water and chill. Squeeze out as much water possible, being careful not to break the leaves, and unfold onto paper towels. Arrange spinach in overlapping layers in dish or pan and pour in pumpkin mixture. Bake in middle of oven for 45 minutes or until a knife inserted comes out clean.

While flan bakes, make the double crème. Pour cream into a pot and bring to a boil, being careful not to let it boil over. Reduce heat and simmer for 15 minutes, or until cream coats back of a spoon. Add lemon juice, nutmeg, and salt and pepper.

When flan is baked, let it set for a few minutes. Unfold and serve warm, drizzled with or pooled in double crème. Serves 8 as an appetizer.

From the November 16-22, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

The Oddvillian Sideshow

0

Odd Company

Spooky vaudevillians take center stage

By Ella Lawrence

THE CROWD PEERS eagerly up at the darkened stage of the Phoenix Theatre. They know something is about to happen, but nobody’s quite sure what. Suddenly, flames shoot out from the abyss. An exotic, chiseled man in a turban and flowing pants steps center stage. He stares solemnly into the crowd for a moment–then spews a stream of fire from his mouth. The audience gasps.

Before this scorching opening act is over, the swami tosses fire back and forth between his hands, gulps down flames from a blowtorch, and lights rows of firecrackers on his forearms, standing stock still while explosives detonate on his skin.

So begins the Oddvillian Sideshow, a conglomeration of talents started in 1997 by three young performers from Sonoma: Jorg Scott, a talented trapeze artist who also serves as the show’s eloquent ringmaster; Andrew Spear, an adept physical comedian; and Tobias Weinberger, who performs as the aforementioned swami of flaming fame.

The entire show is darkly reminiscent of another era, when circus sideshows still offered access to the mysteries of the unknown, when the headless girl sent children screaming in terror, and the “unicorn” made women and men fall down and weep.

Scott calls the show a “collaboration of young, artistic energy.” At ages 16, 18, and 25, the three performers got together to turn their dream of the weird into reality, and the Oddvillian Sideshow debuted on the streets of San Francisco.

“It was a coming together, bringing all the things we’d done in our short lives and putting them in one crazy show,” says Scott, the oldest Oddvillian, who is now 28.

The group’s first performance took place in the tourist-trap atmosphere of Pier 39, and since then the sideshow has performed on the streets, at festivals, private parties, and the creative collective warehouse Cell Space in San Francisco. Every show is different, in part because Scott and his collaborators frequently bring in new guest performers.

“We’ve never really done the same show twice,” Scott says, “because the environment we’re performing in is always different.”

One reason the act is so well honed today is the Sebastiani Theatre. Built in 1934 in Sonoma, the theater is operated by Roger Rhoton, a veteran vaudeville performer himself who has worked with Spear and Weinberger since they were kids.

Rhoton has been one of the troupe’s biggest influences: “The act developed here in the theater, so I’ve been involved with them since the beginning,” he says. “They’ve worked real hard, and they’ve put together a really good show.”

The Oddvillians spend up to 10 hours a week practicing on the Sebastiani’s stage: “The screen can be raised, and it gives us the time and space to work with all of our props,” Scott says. “We like that our show is such a production!”

AND WHAT a production it is. The next act at the Phoenix show is breathtaking. The lights go off, and a long, white stretch of transparent gauze drops from the high-vaulted ceiling of the stage. A muscular figure clad in white slithers from the wings.

It’s difficult to tell if the figure is male or female: its hooded body suit is skintight, and its face is painted with black-light-sensitive spirals in electric orange, blue, and green. The figure (actually Zeina Asfour, a guest performer from Marin) leaps up and grabs a length of the white gauze, dangling by one arm in midair.

For the first time, the audience notices a DJ (Darren Treinen) and turntables just behind the glowing figure. The music has thus far been so suited to the performances that it seemed to naturally float out of the air. Now, however, a pounding bass blasts out of the speakers and a techno-remix of Sting’s “Desert Rose” perks the audience up.

The mysterious figure begins to climb up the length of gauze, twining its ankles around the fabric as it gracefully pulls its way toward the ceiling. Suddenly, the figure lets go and plummets toward the stage. The audience gasps in horror, but the intricately looped cloth catches the performer, and it hangs in perfect balance, pivoting slowly in a graceful circle.

The act continues for 15 minutes, and the audience barely breathes until Asfour bows and runs offstage.

Suddenly, a loud crackling noise fills the theater and the audience looks around, wondering if all the excitement has shorted out the circuits at the Phoenix. But no, it’s actually Electro-Boy.

The stiff, silver-clothed figure is carried like a robot onstage by the ringmaster. He’s set upright, and the ringmaster flips a breaker switch on the battery pack Electro-Boy wears on his back. The DJ speeds up the crazy electronica, and Electro-Boy begins to break dance. He hypnotizes the audience with his skill for the five minutes it takes for his battery pack to wear out. Then the ringmaster returns to tote away the now-stiff figure.

Electro-Boy is Andrew Spear, who came up with the idea for the Oddvillian Sideshow at the age of 16. He lends a wildly humorous edge to the otherwise eerie production.

IT’S QUITE A SHOW– especially considering that it’s all presided over by a ringmaster who insists he didn’t think he’d go into the performing arts.

“I never wanted to do this!” protests Scott. “I didn’t know what to do.”

He ended up following in his father’s footsteps–sort of. Rick Scott is a children’s performer who travels the globe, telling stories and playing music. He’s also recorded seven albums.

“My dad was one of my hugest influences,” Scott says. “From him I got my stage presence, my sense of being comfortable on stage.”

Part of this presence may have been cultivated during Scott’s stint at circus school (from age 11 to age 15). He went on to teach the flying trapeze on cruise ships, and now teaches it at the San Francisco School of Circus Arts.

When asked about his future goals for the troupe, Scott thinks for a moment and then replies, “I want us to have a tesla coil.”

He won’t say what he wants it for. “You’ll just have to wait and see,” he says, chuckling evilly.

Catch the Oddvillians in action at a special variety show on Dec. 18 at the Sebastiani Theatre, on the Plaza, in Sonoma. For prices and other details, call 707/996-2020 or 707/528-4222.

From the November 16-22, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

2000 Presidential Election

Unnatural disaster or act of God?

By Stephen Kessler

ANYONE disappointed last Jan. 1, when the year 2000 computer apocalypse failed to materialize and life went on in boring normality, must be thrilled by the political catastrophe of the anti-presidential election. It’s as if an asteroid hit Florida, or New Mexico, or Washington, D.C., and the resulting dust cloud has totally obscured the future of our democracy.

Nobody can say for sure which dinosaurs will be extinguished by this earthshaking event, but the psychopolitical landscape has been blasted flat. Al Gore and George W. Bush–and even that pesky upstart Ralph “Just Give Me 5 Percent” Nader–have been rendered irrelevant by the disaster of an electoral system blown to smithereens. It’s enough to make one wonder just who or what is directing this bizarre historic drama.

Until Nov. 7, I was a fundamentalist skeptic, absolutely unconvinced of the existence of any divine intelligence. The clockwork theory of theology seemed absurd; no organizing principle was more persuasive to me than the Heraclitean notion of randomness. But now I’m not so sure. Only the most perverse and all-powerful cosmic imagination, a Novelist of supreme genius and superhuman mischievousness, could have devised this infinitely twisted plot.

In light of the religious abuse we’ve been subjected to over the course of the campaign–each major candidate attempting to outdo the other with proclamations of piety–it makes sense that a disgusted Deity might be provoked to put these uppity politicians in their place. What better way to clap a lid on spiritual pride than to deprive the so-called leader of the free world (whoever that may turn out to be) of the power that flows from his constituents.

The images of Bush as an empty suit and Gore as a stiff turn out to be more true-to-life than anyone anticipated. The King of the Universe has a greater sense of humor than I gave Him credit for.

So, who on Earth has the Solomonic wisdom to split this baby in half? Such decisive leadership, I’m afraid, is absent without an absentee ballot. Still, poetic justice might be served by some deus ex machina appointing an alternate president: a triangulated chief executive equidistant from the Bushian smirk and the Goresque rictus, someone with a record free of spiritual convictions and unbesmirched by elective officialdom, a person who can find his way around Washington even in the darkness of a nuclear winter, a public servant who knows what needs to be done and is prepared to do it.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I give you he next president of the United States, Ralph “The Body Politic” Nader!

With the possible exception of Monica Lewinsky, Nader has done more than anyone else to bring this great republic to the verge of a nervous breakdown, and since the other top contenders for the highest office in the land have canceled each other out, or been canceled out by a confused electorate, it’s only fair to give the jolly Green giant a shot at the job he claims to covet. So what if he won only 3 percent of the vote?–the dude deserves to get what he deserves.

The presidency having been reduced to an even more impossible project than it was before the electoral meltdown, Nader in his uncompromising idealism is the ideal choice for such a thankless position. His cabinet alone–Phil Donohue as secretary of state, Michael Moore as secretary of labor, Susan Sarandon as secretary of sex (no presidential blowjobs on the people’s time!), among other equally qualified political veterans–would instantly inspire the confidence of a befuddled citizenry.

Unroll Ralph’s sleeping bag in the Oval Office, stick him behind the desk in his wrinkled suit, Trent Lott looking over one shoulder and Clarence Thomas over the other, and tell him: OK, wise guy, govern this.

From the November 16-22, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

‘Three Viewings’

Three Viewings.

Photograph by Michael Amsler

View to a Kill

‘Three Viewings’ gives new life to death biz

By Patrick Sullivan

IT’S BREAKING one of the last taboos left in our youth- obsessed culture to admit it, but everybody has to face the fact eventually. Sooner or later, death catches up with us all–ready or not.

Of course, most people fall into the “not” category, as demonstrated by the three characters in Jeffrey Hatcher’s Three Viewings, now at the Dreamweavers Theatre in Napa.

The three–a lovesick funeral director, a strutting thief, and a naive housewife–don’t face the end of their own lives. Instead, it’s the profound impact death has upon the living that lies at the heart of this play.

If this all sounds like a total downer, you’re in for a bit of a surprise. It’s not just that Three Viewings has the courage to broach the difficult subject of death. Hatcher’s witty play–divided into three monologues, all set in the same Midwestern funeral parlor–is also unafraid to look the Reaper in the eye and laugh in his bony face.

And the audience was certainly chuckling right along on the opening weekend. It’s no easy task for one actor to carry a third of a play on his or her own. But under the capable direction of Debbie Baumann, the cast managed–with a few minor stumbles–to mine both the rich humor and the deep pathos present in Hatcher’s work.

Joe Lewis brings a commanding presence to the stage in the role of Emil, a funeral director hopelessly in love with a woman who attends all his funerals for business reasons. Torn between prudence and desire, Emil experiences every casual touch from his beloved as a “detonation to the skin.” He longs to confess his love, but he fears “a howl of derision and 20 years of averted glances.” The humorous side of Emil’s predicament comes through loud and clear in Lewis’ hilarious performance. But the actor manages the transition to tragedy too lightly: his reaction to devastating news is so understated that it strains belief.

Victoria Field does a commendable job in the demanding role of Mac, a demented but sexy woman who earns “a high five figures” by going to funerals so she can steal jewelry off the corpses. Packing more venom than your average cobra, Mac slithers through her monologue, spitting out insults and wisecracks about the absurd ways our society deals with death.

Drawn back home (where she’s known as “the bipolar, bisexual drug addict”) by the death of a wealthy relative, Mac confronts her past–which reveals her to be far more complicated than appearances suggest.

But the shining star of this cast is unquestionably Gwennyth Trice, who finishes off the play in the uproariously funny role of Virginia, a naive housewife whose husband’s death reveals that the couple’s finances were built on debtor’s quicksand.

Every time she checks her answering machine, she gets another ugly surprise. It turns out she now owes big money to the bank, to her brother-in-law, and–ominously–to the mob-run Smith Trucking (“They own no trucks,” Virginia explains, “and there has never been a Mr. Smith”), which loaned her husband half a million at 50 percent. “I am not a financier,” she remarks, “but even I know this is not a good rate.”

Trice’s nearly note-perfect performance provides a suitable ending to this play, which offers more laughs than most comedies–and yet manages to send an audience out of the theater with plenty to think about.

‘Three Viewings’ continues Nov. 17­18 at The Dreamweavers Theatre, 1637 Imola Ave., Napa. Tickets are $12. For details, call 707/255-LIVE.

From the November 16-22, 2000 issue of the Northern California Bohemian.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

The Ig Nobel Awards

Oddities of Science Think science isn't funny? Guess again. THAT ALBERT Einstein. For a physicist, he sure had a great sense of humor. Most people have seen the posters of the guy: wild-haired, bright-eyed, sticking his tongue out at the camera. And we've read Einstein's quirky quips and quotes: "Two things...

Marijuana

Smoke Damage How marijuana ruined my life for the better By Stephen Kessler SOMETIMES I wonder what I might have amounted to if I hadn't become a pothead 30 years ago, when I was in graduate school, and pretty much remained one ever since. If not for marijuana, by now I'd...

Open Mic

Movie Math By C. D. Payne HAVE YOU BEEN CATCHING UP with those old movies on Turner Classic Movies? You soon discover that in Hollywood "old" is a relevant term. For example, the other night you may have seen Faithless (1932), a Depression-era comedy in which Tallulah Bankhead and Robert Montgomery play impoverished society swells...

Internet Futures

Net Gains Is the Internet just a giant Tupperware party? By Naomi Klein WHEN THE TOP two executives at BMG Entertainment resigned last month, it revealed a deep schism in the way multinational companies see the Internet's culture of sharing. Despite all the attempts to turn the Net into a...

The Wide-Eyed Gourmet

Feast & Famine By Marina Wolf IF YOU'RE LUCKY, you've had some experience with hunger in your life. Not enough to stunt your growth or make you die, but just enough to put an edge on your appetite. Maybe you're a member of a religion that imposes periodic fast days. Maybe you didn't make enough...

Keb’ Mo’

Blues Redux Bluesman Keb' Mo' returns to his roots By Alan Sculley WHEN he arrived on the national blues scene with his self-titled 1994 CD, Keb' Mo' became immediately known for helping breathe new life into the acoustic blues style. Though it had songs that featured accompaniment from...

Left Bank

French Twist Chef Steven Obranovich keeps things smokin' By Marina Wolf "I don't know why I'm nervous," says Steven Obranovich over his shoulder as he leads the way into Larkspur's Left Bank restaurant. "I guess I'm just a pessimist. Anything that can go wrong, will. I'm going to make some coffee....

The Oddvillian Sideshow

Odd Company Spooky vaudevillians take center stage By Ella Lawrence THE CROWD PEERS eagerly up at the darkened stage of the Phoenix Theatre. They know something is about to happen, but nobody's quite sure what. Suddenly, flames shoot out from the abyss. An exotic, chiseled man in a turban and flowing...

2000 Presidential Election

Unnatural disaster or act of God? By Stephen Kessler ANYONE disappointed last Jan. 1, when the year 2000 computer apocalypse failed to materialize and life went on in boring normality, must be thrilled by the political catastrophe of the anti-presidential election. It's as if an asteroid hit Florida, or New Mexico, or Washington, D.C.,...

‘Three Viewings’

Three Viewings. Photograph by Michael Amsler View to a Kill 'Three Viewings' gives new life to death biz By Patrick Sullivan IT'S BREAKING one of the last taboos left in our youth- obsessed culture to admit it, but everybody has to face the fact eventually. Sooner or later,...
11,084FansLike
4,606FollowersFollow
6,928FollowersFollow