SPECIAL REEASE: MORNING KOFI
Wake up! It's time for the morning prep talk. The routine update on this country's anxious hips and ready lips to launch into (yipee!) another war. Some things never change...especially stupid things. I'm not convinced that we should be asking the question of whether or not one Sadaam Hussein is a madman. Likening him to the pariah of the 30s and 40s - one Adolf the Insane doesn't help much either. Since when has America had an international bleeding heart for starving or medically deprived children...at least to the point of planning (make that imminently contemplating) the unleashing of (watch out) a massive attack, presumably with weapons of mass destruction! It's sickly funny that the word game continues to be played and we toss around ready made references to justify almost any and everything we do or plan to do. The waters are tested, the surveys are promulgated, the Dial 800 networks are put in place and the deadly beat either goes on or gets ready to go on.

Sadaam Hussein comes from a l-o-n-g line of political dictators. He was not the first of this troubled century and the just-about-here next century won't be rid of such men either. I know far too little - make that next to nothing - about the inner workings of Iraq as a nation. But I can also say the same about Canada or Italy or Jordan or Zambia. What I do know is that war is (always) hell; and that even if it is only military personnel who lose their lives, the terror remains. So-called modern technology offers no assurance to reasonable or sensitive people who know that smart bombs - here we go again with the wonder of words - are only as smart as the idiots who build them. That says a lot. And what in the world is a "surgical strike"? It that when a surgeon swings and misses? Then, this "take him out" stuff. Nice way to talk! It doesn't get much more lofty than that. Usually we look forward to taking someone out - like a loved one to dinner or a child for a hike or a parent to a play. But here again, the logic of the linguists has us by the you know what. So...Secretary General Kofi Annan becomes the savior of the planet. Not! He is much too astute a man to understand his own role with the United Nations as well as the special purpose of this trip. But his journey has been placed in another light by dark minds. Someone said "It's up to him to keep the United States from launching an attack." Can you seriously believe that? Enough! DOWN FRONT! is solidly convinced that an attack on Iraq would be a very serious mistake. The anticipated/planned outcomes are indices of political (backed by military) myopia. America is not necessarily viewed as the 20th Century Moral Poster Child; but the country is, all the same, not devoid of people who, for whatever reason, know better. "Read my empty mind" Bush, "Babbling Ronnie" and "Watch out for incoming golf balls" Ford are not so surprisingly silent. Only ever smiling Jimmie Carter has gone public with some sound advice. With or without the little liver pills, Carter is right! Billy Boy is wrong.

MORNING KOFI - PART 2
Human pride is interesting and likewise dangerous. It has been with ye olde human family since...and is not scheduled to go away. So this still-adventurous country wants so very badly to resolve its differences with Iraq in the classic American way. International Butt-Kicking. The troop ships are poised and...it's a tired party line. Annan has done the impossible (at least in some quarters) by getting Sadaam Hussein to agree to enough details that there is no imminent danger of bombs falling from the sky. He is to be heartily congratulated [and DOWN FRONT! will send him congratulatory correspondence.] Meantime, the restlessness continues. One interesting pot shot: Less than neutral new talkeing head Peter Jennings suggested that Annan had ruffled diplomatic feathers by running American foreign policy! Now, what kind of crap is that? Annan doesn't work for the US government and has no standing allegiance to what this country does or plans to do vis a vis the rest of the world. As I understand it, his allegiance is to the principles of the United Nations which includes but isn't limited to this country! In making this stupid observation Jennings deferred to that paragon of objective reporting and demeanor, Sam Donaldson. The latter was surprisingly wiser and said there was no evidence of "he took our cookies" complaints on Capitol Hill. On a more practical level, Annan succeeded because he did not take the "do this or else" position. According to the LA Times, he is a dapper man who doesn't raise his voice. He is also a Black man...which hasn't been thrown into the mix of speculative discussion. But DOWN FRONT! suggests that Hussein is tired of listening to and dodging the insults of white males and Marilyn Albright. To sit down and chat with a hued humanist was a new twist. And the results - even with renewed threats - speak loudly for themselves. If Annan is guilty of anything, it is the literal and figurative infusion of a more humane way of dealing with a head of state who, quite obviously, won't be bullied. There are those who will say it is a cop out, a backing away, a tail-between-the-legs retreat. Yada yada yada. Even if that's true, so friggin' what!! It sure beats bomb-dropping and the ugly prospect of prisoners of war - on either side. Is it the "American Way?" Clearly not in this instance. But that's the only way it could have been in order to preclude an unleashing of the American arsenal. This month's issue of DOWN FRONT! is pleased, proud and downright ecstatic to be in Kofi's Korner!!!

THE MUSIC THAT MAKES ME DANCE
It is no less a jazz super star than Nancy Wilson who has the tune, "His Is the Only Music That Makes Me Dance." The words and the tune are good and it's one of my favorites. In the old days, we danced to the music and when the words were catchy, we chanted them...not always completely aware of what the lyrics meant. There were records [it was the pre- cassette tape and CD days] that were considered raunchy or perhaps suggestive might have been a better label. But 'twas nothing even close to what is passed off now to the listening and entertainment-hungry audience. And I am not talking about the easy targeted rap lyrics. The latter can be readily and accurately viewed as the sexual bravado of libido-heavy young folks. Presumably they draw from their own experiences or fantasies to "come up with" the seemingly endless stream of "nasty stuff" which characterizes much of their gangsta music [And we know that not all rap is gangsta rap.] Anyway, let's look at a few not so noble musical role model songs emanating from an older and incorrectly assumed wiser generation of lyricists. Here are the examples: 1. "Me and Mrs. Jones" - Well, what about us? "We got a thing goin' on." And just to show that crossing the line is not done in total ignorance or innocence, we get this admission - "We both know that it's wrong, but it's much too strong to let it go now." And in order that the liaison not come to (public or spousal attention)..."We gotta be extra careful..." Nuff said. 2. "If Loving You Is Wrong" - This one calls for another kind of reflection. There is again the understanding that all's not well or right with one's dubious activity. The complete title says it all: If loving you is wrong, I don't wanna be right. Now that is truly a gas. Many times one "does wrong" without presumably knowing the right way. Or - if we stretch our permissive imaginations - one forgets, however temporarily or conveniently. But to say "I don't wanna be [that is, do] right, is indeed problematic. And finally there is this behavioristic gem: 3. "If You Can't Be With the One You Love, Love the One You're With" - Well now, how 'bout that! No holds barred, no restrictions, no outa bounds or off limits. "Loving" is a matter of convenience or, better yet, accessibility. Wherever one might be, and whoever just (again conveniently) happens to be around... 4. Is there any rhyme or reason to it all? Well, musically speaking there is perhaps ample "rhyme." As for reason, that's another story or another song. Yet within the Black community there is a real sense of fairness, of perhaps universal justice that is best summed up with the expression, "What goes around, comes around." But since our topic here is music, we can appropriately end this interlude by referencing one more title. And the "winner" is "Who's Making Love to Your Old Lady While You Are Out Making Love?" A musical legacy for civil behavior? Hopefully not! #

A FREUDIAN NON-SLIP
If I haven't made this point in an earlier DOWN FRONT! I know that I've done so countless times in the classroom. It has to do with what Sigmund the Sagacious once labeled one's Angle of Vision. Freud posited that the latter consists of 1) one's life experience, 2) one's values and 3) what one reads. For my own purposes as well as that of the students, I have updated Freud's 3rd item to include "...and what one watches." After all, what would contemporary life be without movies and videos and television? Well, right now there is a big argument going on up Frisco way re what books (high) school children should be required to read. Specifically, there is a likely-to-pass regulation that something like 60% of the books will be by non-white authors. A local commentator crookedly observed that race was overcoming excellence. See how insidious deep-seated feeling of superiority really are? The clear message here is that in giving serious consideration to books written by non-whites one is by definition sacrificing literary excellence!! The accompanying assumption being that before any question was raised about the required texts, students were certainly being exposed to the best that required readings can offer, viz., built-in white excellence. Gimme a DOWN FRONT! friggin' break!!!

AND THE WINNER IS
The Emmys are coming to town again. There are so dog gone many awards galas, I can't keep up. And the standards used to decide the award are anybody's guess. The Best Picture of the Year. All knowing fingers and toes seem to point straight at "Titanic." It remains a BIG picture having cost big bucks and raking in even bigger ones internationally as well as domestically. How good a story it is is a matter left to those who saw it [I didn't and probably won't] and those of the Academy of Motion Pictures who are responsible for the voting. Anyway, what happened to "Amistad"? Now that was a good picture! Then again, was it? We are back to this same issue of what standards one uses to decide "good." Telling an important (make that crucial) historical story is part yet not all of the answer. Now, the sinking of the Titanic was an important piece of history. But cynically viewed, what was that all about? Ironically, the same kind of inbred folly that said the Hindenburg was great because it was big; and it probably was some of both until the Lakehurst, N.J. disaster. It is really questionable if false pride and poor seamanship combined with poor planning make for cinematic - or any other kind of - greatness; but such is the Hollywood Way. Ironically the love of a poor man for a rich woman is far more marketable and has more entertainment appeal than the love of a dark-skinned people in chains for their own freedom.

Next Time: Seen On Screen

#