The BBC has announced that it's "Sound of 2011" is a young lady called Jessie J. The fact that J's career is owned by Universal, the largest record company in the world, rings alarm bells. I am not suggesting that the BBC is in Universal's pocket, but they simply would not have noticed J if she had been on a true independent label. Having said that, she sounds mildly interesting in a Ms Dynamite kind of way and I predict her career will follow a similar trajectory - mild critical acclaim, a couple of hits, universally ignored second album, followed by occasional reality TV appearances.
But there is something quite depressing about this award. We are asked to view singers like J (and Dynamite, Lily Allen, Rumer, etc etc etc) as true artists striking a blow for female empowerment. But scratch the surface and you inevitably find some middle-aged male musician billed as a "co-writer"/mentor. This isn't an exclusively female phenomena - the same applied to Robbie Williams/Guy Chambers - but the record industry has clearly seen it is onto a good thing with young female "singer-songwriters".
The real shame is that there must be great female artists out there who ARE in charge of their music in the same way as forerunners such as Bic Runga, Tori Amos, Kate Bush & Carly Simon. It would be wonderful to hear that the BBC's "Sound of 2012" is a young woman otherwise unheralded by the industry, and who is producing her own music from scratch. Sadly the reality is that the next 'next big thing' will be another record company mannequin. So much for 'Girl Power'.
Monday, 10 January 2011
Tuesday, 4 January 2011
The Choice Is Yours
A jolly little piece on the BBC today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12075931 proves a great advert for Islam. Of course, like any supernatural belief system, Islam is almost certainly wrong in its fundamental tenets - God, life after death, a timeless and universal moral code and so on. Well, OK, let's not split hairs - it is wrong.
But apart from this failing (which some like myself may see as a fatal flaw) perhaps it has much to offer in the way of personal fulfilment. As convert-to-Islam Aisha says "now I don't have to prove myself to anybody out there... when I became Muslim, I sort of calmed down... And I'm more happy than I was - I'm proud of who I am, I've got a certain identity."
Well, good for you. It was your choice and it appears to have worked out well for you. I'll assume you aren't speaking with forked-tongue and that this is a heartfelt assessment of your state of mind. I honestly have little reason to doubt it. Of course, there is the psychological angle that when one adopts a set of beliefs (for example that Gary Numan is the greatest muscial artist alive today or that Islam is the route to personal fulfilment) it is extremely hard to abandon those beliefs. I am also mindful that it may be difficult for someone who has been embraced by a community (as Aisha apparently has - she lives with her Bangladeshi husband and in-laws) to appear to turn on that community by professing unhappiness (I'm assuming Mr Aisha et famille are also muslims). Having said that, I do assume that Aisha's statements are broadly truthful.
Sure, one persons testimony does not prove a case, as those of a scientific bent are well aware (as an aside, most muslims do not truly understand that - Muhammed's little book anyone? - but that is not the point here). However, Aisha makes a strong case that we should not ignore. Perhaps Islam, and religion in general, does have the power to make certain people happier. Presumably people who's grasp of reality is a little challenged, but there are plenty of those around, so why gripe?
But getting to my point, finally, isn't it wonderful that our socity gave Aisha the freedom to choose to become a muslim? And how wonderful that she will be free in future to choose not to be a muslim any more, should she have a change of heart.
Indeed, even the Koran apparently says - 'there is no compulsion in religion'. Unfortunately, that verse goes on to say that 'truth stands out clearly from falsehood' and some nutters seem to have taken this as a nod that no right-minded person could possibly give abandon Islam and therefore there is nothing wrong with killing them. Hopefully this would not deter Aisha is she wished to renounce Islam at a later date.
“Sharia schools say that they will kill the ones who leave Islam. In the West people get threatened, thrown out of their family, beaten up,” [http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2007/09/renounce-islam.html].
"Apostasy, or renouncing the faith, is one of the gravest sins in Islam and a very sensitive issue in Malaysia where the Islamic courts have rarely allowed such renunciations and have also jailed apostates." [http://puteri.us/2008/05/08/siti-fatimah-tan-allowed-to-renounce-islam/]
"In Islam, apostasy is called ridda (turning back) and it is considered by Muslims to be a profound insult to God, which deserves harsh punishment. The nature of the punishment, however, provokes passionate debate between scholars, with most believing that it should attract the death penalty for men and life imprisonment for women.
Apostasy is punishable by death in a number of countries, including Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan. In other parts of the world they can be shunned by family and friends." [http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/06/uk-new-group-for-those-who-renounce-islam.html]
Strangely the BBC failed to mention these minor points. I would have thought they were fairly fundamental when discussing (encouraging?) conversion to Islam.
But, never mind, hurrah for Aisha! She goes on: "I wanted to stay at home studying on the internet or reading books." Hmm. I wonder what sort of books. Maybe some of the scientific ones that I picked up recently that prove beyond any scientific doubt (science doesn't do that, but never mind) that God caused the Big Bang and that evolution is a lie. Ah, you can't beat a good bit of book learnin'.
To conclude, another muslim, Sarah, says: "British converts have a vital role to play in explaining two sides - Britain's Muslim and non-Muslim communities - to each other.
'[Converts have] authentically belonged to two traditions and should act as a conduit to show each side that we share far more than we differ.' " Right, at this point I will give up the sarcasm and just state the bald facts. Muslims do not see both sides. They are right and you are wrong. Have a conversation with a practising muslim and see just how open they are to different points of view. I'll give you a clue - they aren't.
But that's religion for you.
Footnote - I appreciate that I am open to allegations of hypocrisy here. I say that Muslims will not consider both sides of an argument and yet I state as fact that they are wrong. Ah, but you see I have evidence and rational argument on my side. And that evidence and argument could be the subject for a later post? Damn Dawkins et al for getting there first!
But apart from this failing (which some like myself may see as a fatal flaw) perhaps it has much to offer in the way of personal fulfilment. As convert-to-Islam Aisha says "now I don't have to prove myself to anybody out there... when I became Muslim, I sort of calmed down... And I'm more happy than I was - I'm proud of who I am, I've got a certain identity."
Well, good for you. It was your choice and it appears to have worked out well for you. I'll assume you aren't speaking with forked-tongue and that this is a heartfelt assessment of your state of mind. I honestly have little reason to doubt it. Of course, there is the psychological angle that when one adopts a set of beliefs (for example that Gary Numan is the greatest muscial artist alive today or that Islam is the route to personal fulfilment) it is extremely hard to abandon those beliefs. I am also mindful that it may be difficult for someone who has been embraced by a community (as Aisha apparently has - she lives with her Bangladeshi husband and in-laws) to appear to turn on that community by professing unhappiness (I'm assuming Mr Aisha et famille are also muslims). Having said that, I do assume that Aisha's statements are broadly truthful.
Sure, one persons testimony does not prove a case, as those of a scientific bent are well aware (as an aside, most muslims do not truly understand that - Muhammed's little book anyone? - but that is not the point here). However, Aisha makes a strong case that we should not ignore. Perhaps Islam, and religion in general, does have the power to make certain people happier. Presumably people who's grasp of reality is a little challenged, but there are plenty of those around, so why gripe?
But getting to my point, finally, isn't it wonderful that our socity gave Aisha the freedom to choose to become a muslim? And how wonderful that she will be free in future to choose not to be a muslim any more, should she have a change of heart.
Indeed, even the Koran apparently says - 'there is no compulsion in religion'. Unfortunately, that verse goes on to say that 'truth stands out clearly from falsehood' and some nutters seem to have taken this as a nod that no right-minded person could possibly give abandon Islam and therefore there is nothing wrong with killing them. Hopefully this would not deter Aisha is she wished to renounce Islam at a later date.
“Sharia schools say that they will kill the ones who leave Islam. In the West people get threatened, thrown out of their family, beaten up,” [http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2007/09/renounce-islam.html].
"Apostasy, or renouncing the faith, is one of the gravest sins in Islam and a very sensitive issue in Malaysia where the Islamic courts have rarely allowed such renunciations and have also jailed apostates." [http://puteri.us/2008/05/08/siti-fatimah-tan-allowed-to-renounce-islam/]
"In Islam, apostasy is called ridda (turning back) and it is considered by Muslims to be a profound insult to God, which deserves harsh punishment. The nature of the punishment, however, provokes passionate debate between scholars, with most believing that it should attract the death penalty for men and life imprisonment for women.
Apostasy is punishable by death in a number of countries, including Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan. In other parts of the world they can be shunned by family and friends." [http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/06/uk-new-group-for-those-who-renounce-islam.html]
Strangely the BBC failed to mention these minor points. I would have thought they were fairly fundamental when discussing (encouraging?) conversion to Islam.
But, never mind, hurrah for Aisha! She goes on: "I wanted to stay at home studying on the internet or reading books." Hmm. I wonder what sort of books. Maybe some of the scientific ones that I picked up recently that prove beyond any scientific doubt (science doesn't do that, but never mind) that God caused the Big Bang and that evolution is a lie. Ah, you can't beat a good bit of book learnin'.
To conclude, another muslim, Sarah, says: "British converts have a vital role to play in explaining two sides - Britain's Muslim and non-Muslim communities - to each other.
'[Converts have] authentically belonged to two traditions and should act as a conduit to show each side that we share far more than we differ.' " Right, at this point I will give up the sarcasm and just state the bald facts. Muslims do not see both sides. They are right and you are wrong. Have a conversation with a practising muslim and see just how open they are to different points of view. I'll give you a clue - they aren't.
But that's religion for you.
Footnote - I appreciate that I am open to allegations of hypocrisy here. I say that Muslims will not consider both sides of an argument and yet I state as fact that they are wrong. Ah, but you see I have evidence and rational argument on my side. And that evidence and argument could be the subject for a later post? Damn Dawkins et al for getting there first!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)