newyorker--2020-02-17--The Weinstein Trial and the Myth of the Perfect Victim

On February 10th , in the New York State Supreme Court building , at the trial of the former Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein , Claudia Salinas , a witness for the defense , took the stand .
Salinas is a slender woman in her mid-thirties , and her understatedly glamorous appearance—a low , sleek ponytail , a stylish tweed jacket , ballet-style flats—contrasted sharply with the courtroom ’ s public-sector dumpiness .
When asked by the defense attorney Damon Cheronis to state her employment , Salinas , who was subpoenaed in the case , identified herself as a social-media influencer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Her Instagram account , on which she appears to promote a variety of brands by modelling their wares , has a follower count of nearly three hundred thousand people . )
She is also a onetime acquaintance of the model , aspiring actress , and screenwriter Lauren Young ’ s .
In testimony the week prior , Young claimed that , in 2013 , after meeting Weinstein for drinks during Oscars week at the Montage Hotel in Beverly Hills , purportedly in order to discuss her career aspirations , Weinstein trapped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hotel ’ s suites , unzipped her dress , and groped her breasts while masturbating , releasing her and rushing out the door , naked , only after he ejaculated .
( Young ’ s accusation is not part of the New York indictment against Weinstein but is rather meant to bolster the prosecution ’ s case , which focusses on rape and sexual-assault allegations brought by two other accusers , Mimi Haleyi and Jessica Mann .
Weinstein has denied all allegations of sexual misconduct and has pleaded not guilty in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Young also alleged that Salinas , whom she had met only once before , at an Oscars party the previous year , had essentially acted as a procurer for Weinstein , setting up the Montage drinks date and then accompanying the producer and model to the suite , where , ostensibly in cahoots with Weinstein , she shut the bathroom door behind them , enabling the alleged assault to take place .
In his exchange with Salinas , Cheronis , whose boyishly preppy looks and cunning manner brought to mind a debate-team captain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out to dismantle Young ’ s version of events .
No , Salinas told him , she didn ’ t recognize pictures of the Montage suite in which Young ’ s assault allegedly took place ; no , she had never seen Harvey Weinstein naked , nor had she ever closed a bathroom door on him or anyone else , much less Young , who , besides , she did not recall emerging from a bathroom with her white dress unzipped and bunched around her elbows , as Young had claimed .
Nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested , had anything to do with this type of gruesome incident .
She had met the producer in the early two-thousands while dining at Cipriani , one of his New York haunts , where a mutual acquaintance introduced them .
Weinstein , hearing that she was a dancer , helped connect her to an audition for the Weinstein Company movie “ Dirty Dancing : Havana Nights ” —a role that she booked .
In the years since , Salinas claimed , she had been a successful working actress and dancer , able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistance , mostly in commercials for major brands in both the English and Spanish markets .
She was never on Weinstein ’ s payroll , nor had she ever had a sexual relationship with him .
He was simply one of her industry contacts , whom she would see three or four times a year , often at parties or events around the time of the Golden Globes and the Oscars .
In her cross-examination , conducted by Assistant District Attorney Meghan Hast , Salinas continued to deny that she had anything to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room .
“ I remember meeting for a drink , ” she said .
“ That ’ s all I remember .
I remember it was at the Montage.
” What did seem to shift , though , was the seemingly cut-and-dried nature of the influencer ’ s relationship with Weinstein .
Not strictly professional , nor on its face sexual or even especially social , the association between the two seemed to exist in the kind of dim , miasmic space in which each of these zones bleeds into the others , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unpredictable .
Over the years , Salinas sought out Weinstein ’ s assistance in relation to business ventures and professional connections .
( The fact that these overtures didn ’ t lead to anything appeared still to sting : “ I was a little frustrated with him , ” she said testily at one point , seemingly almost in spite of herself .
“ I wanted to keep a professional relationship , but I didn ’ t get any professional help at all !
” ) Weinstein proved more reliable , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Globes party invitations , which Salinas e-mailed him about several times a year .
She acknowledged that , at the beginning of the relationship , when she was nineteen and the producer was nearly fifty , he was “ flirty ” with her .
( “ He hit on you , ” Hast said bluntly . )
But she had clarified to Weinstein that she wasn ’ t interested in a sexual relationship .
Under Hast ’ s pressing , Salinas admitted that , when Weinstein agreed to invite her to awards-season parties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring your better-looking friends ” along , and to “ tell them good things ” about him—a request that she saw as an “ innocent gesture.
” Asked by Hast if , since she herself wasn ’ t interested in pursuing a sexual dalliance with Weinstein , she managed to stay in his good graces by selecting especially attractive girlfriends to take along to the Hollywood events he invited her to , Salinas responded , in a no-duh tone , “ All my friends are good-looking.
” We often discuss professional life as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life , but , in fact , women are often forced to negotiate the blurry space between the two , especially in Hollywood , where sexual appeal is effectively a professional requirement .
The night before Salinas ’ s appearance in court , the Academy Awards had taken place in Los Angeles , and there was something instructive to me in witnessing the two events in such quick succession .
Clearly , there was much to distinguish Hollywood ’ s glitz-fest from the grim proceedings of the People of New York v. Harvey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , had entered its fourth week .
But , sitting at the trial , which I had attended intermittently since its opening , I found myself thinking of the beautiful actresses who took the stand , one by one , as the shadow doubles of those posing on the red carpet of a Hollywood awards show .
The latter had seemingly bested the system , ascending to its highest point , while the former had fallen victim to it .
But most of these women , with lesser or greater success , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had had to learn how to operate in a world in which the line between the professional and the sexual was hazy , and in which transactionality—sometimes overt , sometimes almost unconscious—was the rule rather than the exception .
They were good-looking , as were all their friends , which meant that they could , perhaps , get things from men—who were surely more powerful than they , if likely not as good-looking—but they were then often expected to give something in return .
This could mean as relatively little as trading some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an arm squeeze for an Oscar-party invite .
But it could also mean the expectation of sexual favors , which , if not freely offered , might be coerced .
Having to continually contend with this economy of sexual exchange makes women distinctly vulnerable , and , throughout the trial , it struck me , repeatedly , what a high-risk proposition it was to be an attractive young actress looking to break into the entertainment industry .
That several of the incidents recounted in the trial took place around Oscars week is telling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many prize equines at a racetrack , employ trainers and stylists and nutritionists and dermatologists to ready themselves for the red carpet , still-striving aspirants mill about town , hoping to be asked to parties where their good looks could perhaps help them make valuable connections .
The prosecution , in its own way , took part in the fantasy that a clear , unimpeachable line could separate the sexual and the professional .
Throughout the trial , prosecution lawyers attempted to present the accusers as fitting , as closely as possible , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some matched this image more easily .
After the alleged rape of the actress Annabella Sciorra , or the alleged assault of Lauren Young , the victims largely avoided contact with Weinstein and displayed signs of distress , according to witnesses who knew them at the time .
The actress Rosie Perez told the jury that Sciorra , a longtime friend of hers , was “ talking in this very strange whisper of a voice , as if she was hiding from someone , ” before Sciorra broke down in tears and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Weinstein .

On February 10th, in the New York State Supreme Court building, at the trial of the former Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, Claudia Salinas, a witness for the defense, took the stand. Salinas is a slender woman in her mid-thirties, and her understatedly glamorous appearance—a low, sleek ponytail, a stylish tweed jacket, ballet-style flats—contrasted sharply with the courtroom’s public-sector dumpiness. When asked by the defense attorney Damon Cheronis to state her employment, Salinas, who was subpoenaed in the case, identified herself as a social-media influencer, a dancer, and an actress. (Her Instagram account, on which she appears to promote a variety of brands by modelling their wares, has a follower count of nearly three hundred thousand people.) She is also a onetime acquaintance of the model, aspiring actress, and screenwriter Lauren Young. In testimony the week prior, Young claimed that, in 2013, after meeting Weinstein for drinks during Oscars week at the Montage Hotel in Beverly Hills, purportedly in order to discuss her career aspirations, Weinstein trapped her in a bathroom in one of the hotel’s suites, unzipped her dress, and groped her breasts while masturbating, releasing her and rushing out the door, naked, only after he ejaculated. (Young’s accusation is not part of the New York indictment against Weinstein but is rather meant to bolster the prosecution’s case, which focusses on rape and sexual-assault allegations brought by two other accusers, Mimi Haleyi and Jessica Mann. Weinstein has denied all allegations of sexual misconduct and has pleaded not guilty in the case.) In her testimony, Young also alleged that Salinas, whom she had met only once before, at an Oscars party the previous year, had essentially acted as a procurer for Weinstein, setting up the Montage drinks date and then accompanying the producer and model to the suite, where, ostensibly in cahoots with Weinstein, she shut the bathroom door behind them, enabling the alleged assault to take place.
In his exchange with Salinas, Cheronis, whose boyishly preppy looks and cunning manner brought to mind a debate-team captain in an eighties teen movie, set out to dismantle Young’s version of events. No, Salinas told him, she didn’t recognize pictures of the Montage suite in which Young’s assault allegedly took place; no, she had never seen Harvey Weinstein naked, nor had she ever closed a bathroom door on him or anyone else, much less Young, who, besides, she did not recall emerging from a bathroom with her white dress unzipped and bunched around her elbows, as Young had claimed. Nothing about her relationship with Weinstein, Salinas suggested, had anything to do with this type of gruesome incident. She had met the producer in the early two-thousands while dining at Cipriani, one of his New York haunts, where a mutual acquaintance introduced them. Weinstein, hearing that she was a dancer, helped connect her to an audition for the Weinstein Company movie “Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights”—a role that she booked. In the years since, Salinas claimed, she had been a successful working actress and dancer, able to secure jobs without Weinstein’s assistance, mostly in commercials for major brands in both the English and Spanish markets. She was never on Weinstein’s payroll, nor had she ever had a sexual relationship with him. He was simply one of her industry contacts, whom she would see three or four times a year, often at parties or events around the time of the Golden Globes and the Oscars.
In her cross-examination, conducted by Assistant District Attorney Meghan Hast, Salinas continued to deny that she had anything to do with entrapping Young in the hotel room. “I remember meeting for a drink,” she said. “That’s all I remember. I remember it was at the Montage.” What did seem to shift, though, was the seemingly cut-and-dried nature of the influencer’s relationship with Weinstein. Not strictly professional, nor on its face sexual or even especially social, the association between the two seemed to exist in the kind of dim, miasmic space in which each of these zones bleeds into the others, and where rules are vague and outcomes unpredictable. Over the years, Salinas sought out Weinstein’s assistance in relation to business ventures and professional connections. (The fact that these overtures didn’t lead to anything appeared still to sting: “I was a little frustrated with him,” she said testily at one point, seemingly almost in spite of herself. “I wanted to keep a professional relationship, but I didn’t get any professional help at all!”) Weinstein proved more reliable, however, as a source for Oscars and Golden Globes party invitations, which Salinas e-mailed him about several times a year. She acknowledged that, at the beginning of the relationship, when she was nineteen and the producer was nearly fifty, he was “flirty” with her. (“He hit on you,” Hast said bluntly.) But she had clarified to Weinstein that she wasn’t interested in a sexual relationship. Under Hast’s pressing, Salinas admitted that, when Weinstein agreed to invite her to awards-season parties, he would ask her to “bring your better-looking friends” along, and to “tell them good things” about him—a request that she saw as an “innocent gesture.” Asked by Hast if, since she herself wasn’t interested in pursuing a sexual dalliance with Weinstein, she managed to stay in his good graces by selecting especially attractive girlfriends to take along to the Hollywood events he invited her to, Salinas responded, in a no-duh tone, “All my friends are good-looking.”
We often discuss professional life as if it were completely distinct from sexual life, but, in fact, women are often forced to negotiate the blurry space between the two, especially in Hollywood, where sexual appeal is effectively a professional requirement. The night before Salinas’s appearance in court, the Academy Awards had taken place in Los Angeles, and there was something instructive to me in witnessing the two events in such quick succession. Clearly, there was much to distinguish Hollywood’s glitz-fest from the grim proceedings of the People of New York v. Harvey Weinstein, which, by February 10th, had entered its fourth week. But, sitting at the trial, which I had attended intermittently since its opening, I found myself thinking of the beautiful actresses who took the stand, one by one, as the shadow doubles of those posing on the red carpet of a Hollywood awards show. The latter had seemingly bested the system, ascending to its highest point, while the former had fallen victim to it. But most of these women, with lesser or greater success, and to lesser or greater traumatic effect, had had to learn how to operate in a world in which the line between the professional and the sexual was hazy, and in which transactionality—sometimes overt, sometimes almost unconscious—was the rule rather than the exception. They were good-looking, as were all their friends, which meant that they could, perhaps, get things from men—who were surely more powerful than they, if likely not as good-looking—but they were then often expected to give something in return. This could mean as relatively little as trading some light flattery or a meaningful glance or an arm squeeze for an Oscar-party invite. But it could also mean the expectation of sexual favors, which, if not freely offered, might be coerced. Having to continually contend with this economy of sexual exchange makes women distinctly vulnerable, and, throughout the trial, it struck me, repeatedly, what a high-risk proposition it was to be an attractive young actress looking to break into the entertainment industry. That several of the incidents recounted in the trial took place around Oscars week is telling: while A-list actresses, like so many prize equines at a racetrack, employ trainers and stylists and nutritionists and dermatologists to ready themselves for the red carpet, still-striving aspirants mill about town, hoping to be asked to parties where their good looks could perhaps help them make valuable connections.
The prosecution, in its own way, took part in the fantasy that a clear, unimpeachable line could separate the sexual and the professional. Throughout the trial, prosecution lawyers attempted to present the accusers as fitting, as closely as possible, the mythical notion of the perfect victim. Some matched this image more easily. After the alleged rape of the actress Annabella Sciorra, or the alleged assault of Lauren Young, the victims largely avoided contact with Weinstein and displayed signs of distress, according to witnesses who knew them at the time. The actress Rosie Perez told the jury that Sciorra, a longtime friend of hers, was “talking in this very strange whisper of a voice, as if she was hiding from someone,” before Sciorra broke down in tears and told her she had been raped by Weinstein.
This strategy extended to the prosecution’s main witnesses. On January 31st, Mann, a slim, thirty-four-year-old brunette and one of the primary accusers in the trial, took the stand. Mann, an aspiring actress, had met Weinstein at a party in the Hollywood Hills, in 2013. During direct examination, she broke down in sobs several times while describing how, that year—weeks after she begrudgingly agreed to give the producer a massage at the Peninsula Hotel in Beverly Hills, where they had met to discuss her professional aspirations—the producer forced oral sex on her at the Montage, and, on a later trip to New York, raped her at a DoubleTree hotel in midtown. She explained that she found him intimidating, not just physically and psychologically but also financially and professionally. Mann, who, for a period, was struggling to such an extent that she lived out of her car, often heard Weinstein taking calls from the Clintons, for whom he was fund-raising. “It intimidated me, because when you’re raising that much money for that powerful a person and you can call them on the phone, they’re not going to deal with someone crying rape,” she said. In the prosecution’s opening statement, Hast tried to convey a sense of Mann’s innocence in the face of Weinstein’s worldly sway. She emphasized Mann’s devout Christian background, her beginnings on a “small dairy farm in Washington State,” and her apparent ignorance of the producer’s powerful position in the movie industry when she first met him.
But, of course, women are not perfect victims: they can be canny and may try to work a deeply skewed system to their advantage if they can, with whatever sliver of agency they have. The fact that the prosecution portrayed Mann simplistically allowed the defense to poke holes in her narrative. Defense lawyers fastened onto the fact that, after the aspiring actress’s alleged rape by the producer, the two continued to occasionally have consensual sex and were outwardly on friendly terms. (Talita Maia, Mann’s former friend and roommate, claimed that Mann did not seem especially upset after two incidents in which she alleges that she had been assaulted.) During cross-examination, the defense attorney Donna Rotunno suggested that the aspiring actress knew exactly what Weinstein was expecting of her and was willing to take part in the transaction in order to advance her career. Throughout the trial, Rotunno employed a harsh, blunt-edged form of victim blaming. In a recent interview with Megan Twohey on the Times’s “The Daily” podcast, the lawyer chastised women who don’t “take precautions” in their relationships with men, leaving themselves vulnerable to sexual assault. “You make a choice to go into their home at the end of the day, what do you think could potentially happen?” she asked.


newyorker--2020-02-17--Makaya McCraven’s Superb Reimagining of Gil-Scott Heron

“ He was a renaissance man , ” the late Gil Scott-Heron once said , of Langston Hughes .
“ He wrote songs ; he wrote poetry ; he wrote columns ; he wrote essays .
And as a writer myself , I knew that you couldn ’ t use just one form and get every idea across.
” This spirit animated Scott-Heron ’ s career , and it allowed him to loom , in the cultural consciousness , as something more than just a musician or a poet .
The same energy informs a few recent reimaginings of Scott-Heron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m New Here , ” which was released by XL Recordings in 2010 .
In 2011 , the British rave-music revivalist Jamie xx recorded “ We ’ re New Here , ” splicing Scott-Heron ’ s words and rearranging them into a meditative dance record .
Some of Jamie xx ’ s remix , in turn , was used by Drake and Rihanna , as the seed for “ Take Care , ” the pair ’ s mournful Top Forty hit .
Scott-Heron , who died in 2011 , resisted appeals to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ track one got the sense that he could compete with any hit musician of today ’ s generation .
The latest artist to remake “ I ’ m New Here ” is Makaya McCraven , a jazz drummer and producer from Chicago .
Whereas Jamie xx ’ s take was spacious , even anxious , McCraven adds a shagginess to Scott-Heron ’ s album , layering in live instrumentation and old jazz recordings that his parents produced .
Much of “ I ’ m New Here ” ’ s original power flowed from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ album to explore his addictions and family history .
McCraven gives those elements a new frame , returning again and again to the theme of matriarchy .
“ Womenfolk raised me , and I was full grown before I knew I came from a broken home , ” Scott-Heron says on the opener , “ Special Tribute - ( Broken Home Pt .
1 ) , ” repudiating the stigma of single parenthood .
Scott-Heron spoke often of his all-knowing mother and grandmother , and in McCraven ’ s hands those figures emerge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You can ’ t help but think that Scott-Heron would have been pleased with how McCraven fulfills the Hughes credo—that art and writing are never finished , and that both can continually deepen our perspective .

“He was a renaissance man,” the late Gil Scott-Heron once said, of Langston Hughes. “He wrote songs; he wrote poetry; he wrote columns; he wrote essays. And as a writer myself, I knew that you couldn’t use just one form and get every idea across.” This spirit animated Scott-Heron’s career, and it allowed him to loom, in the cultural consciousness, as something more than just a musician or a poet. The same energy informs a few recent reimaginings of Scott-Heron’s final album, “I’m New Here,” which was released by XL Recordings in 2010. In 2011, the British rave-music revivalist Jamie xx recorded “We’re New Here,” splicing Scott-Heron’s words and rearranging them into a meditative dance record. Some of Jamie xx’s remix, in turn, was used by Drake and Rihanna, as the seed for “Take Care,” the pair’s mournful Top Forty hit. Scott-Heron, who died in 2011, resisted appeals to commercialism, but in listening to that track one got the sense that he could compete with any hit musician of today’s generation.
The latest artist to remake “I’m New Here” is Makaya McCraven, a jazz drummer and producer from Chicago. Whereas Jamie xx’s take was spacious, even anxious, McCraven adds a shagginess to Scott-Heron’s album, layering in live instrumentation and old jazz recordings that his parents produced. Much of “I’m New Here” ’s original power flowed from its confessional side; Scott-Heron used the album to explore his addictions and family history. McCraven gives those elements a new frame, returning again and again to the theme of matriarchy. “Womenfolk raised me, and I was full grown before I knew I came from a broken home,” Scott-Heron says on the opener, “Special Tribute - (Broken Home Pt. 1),” repudiating the stigma of single parenthood. Scott-Heron spoke often of his all-knowing mother and grandmother, and in McCraven’s hands those figures emerge in the foreground while political ruminations recede. You can’t help but think that Scott-Heron would have been pleased with how McCraven fulfills the Hughes credo—that art and writing are never finished, and that both can continually deepen our perspective.


newyorker--2020-02-17--“Love Is Blind” Is Offensive to Human Dignity, Which Is Key to Its Success

Before the emergence of “ The Bachelor ” as a venerable schlock-culture institution , before the advent of any sort of matrimonial reality show that might inspire a satire like “ Unreal , ” before the special-event salaciousness and spectacular moral violence of “ Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire ?
, ” there was the syndicated sensation “ Blind Date.
” My roommate and I would nightly feast to this program , which was hosted by the affable and precise Roger Lodge , over pizza , on a Zenith decked with rabbit ears .
Between 1999 and 2006 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fourteen hundred and forty episodes .
There were two segments to each episode ; there were two complete strangers on a date in each segment .
This was an anthology of pitched woo and swapped spit , performed in honest and vulgar American manners , by tender pioneers in the burgeoning craft of onscreen self-commodification .
As I recall , a typical date might involve the players practicing watercolors , or more likely body painting , then breaking both bread and codes of tasteful conduct over dinner , and then repairing to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the screen would burble with graphics—cartoonish thought bubbles , chyron-height color commentary , subtext translated in subtitles—which shaped each date into a pulp narrative by way of commenting on it .
Heckling the daters with annotations , the show managed to talk its trash and have it , too .
In November , a revival of “ Blind Date ” débuted , with the comedian Nikki Glaser as its presenter and voice-over jester .
The series , reëntering a changed world , is thirsty to stay contemporary .
The daters are far more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they know how to act natural on camera , or how to act unnatural in a way that comes naturally .
There is an emphasis on matchups that are all-inclusive , queer-friendly , body-positive .
A press release says that the next airing will feature “ the first out transgender woman in ‘ Blind Date ’ history , ” and I expect the show to treat her with the same amount of respect as everyone else , which is not very much .
I flipped on an episode at random and found myself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ) on her rendezvous with David ( “ 47 , hotel manager ” ) .
When producers nudge her to explain why she wanted to be on the show , Chelsea says , “ I ’ m on a blind date today because Patty from ‘ Millionaire Matchmaker ’ wouldn ’ t call me back.
” Glaser and the graphics team go to work mocking her as a bimbo and him as a man-bunned creep .
“ David is bringing a full-on dirty-old-man vibe and , against all odds , Chelsea seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Love makes no effing sense.
” “ Love Is Blind , ” on Netflix , is the logical flowering of a “ Blind Date ” model in a “ Bachelor ” world .
An instant classic among quickie-wedding reality shows , it ’ s like “ The Dating Game ” —the foundational Chuck Barris text of sight-unseen matchmaking—extrapolated into a conceptual space that combines vibes from “ 90 Day Fiancé , ” on TLC , and “ The Lobster , ” by Yorgos Lanthimos .
The hook of “ Love Is Blind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the course of about a business week , each without knowing what the other looks like , then meet face to face , then get married about four weeks later .
It enhanced my appreciation of “ Love Is Blind ” to learn that its creators also make “ Married at First Sight , ” on Lifetime .
On that one , a matchmaking panel ( a relationship expert , a sociologist , a pastor brandishing marriage-counselling credentials ) sets up heterosexual couples to be introduced at the altar ; eight weeks later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to divorce .
It ’ s a reliable recipe for cart-before-the-horse disasters .
When I read that “ Married at First Sight ” reports a seventy-two-per-cent divorce rate , I admired the figure as impressively low .
The premise of “ Love Is Blind ” is promoted as a utopian innovation .
“ Your relationship will begin by forming an intimate bond with nothing to distract you , ” a co-host , Nick Lachey , says .
No social-media stalking , no Hinge-avatar superficiality .
The contestants join Nick and his lovely wife @ @ @ @ @ @ @ setup as an “ experiment , ” and to the set as a “ facility ” ; the program ’ s forebears seem to include not only “ Big Brother ” but also B. F. Skinner .
At the core of the facility are two rows of small rooms called “ pods , ” which are paired off at partitions , through which strangers share their hopes and dreams and pleasant banalities .
The skylight of each pod is in the shape of a long octagon , the silhouette of an emerald-cut engagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we gaze through the skylights like a God who somewhat regrets having wrought humanity and yet is about to binge the whole season .
Six couples emerge from the pods and embark on a getting-to-know-you jaunt to Cancún , in advance of setting up house in a suitably bland apartment complex in Atlanta .
The stars are Cameron and Lauren .
Cameron is a white guy in a navy suit .
His field is computer science , so he sounds persuasive when dimplishly discussing how the experiment removes confounding variables from the mating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose work as a “ content creator ” requires a colorful assortment of bodycon dresses .
She voices the kind of sanity and self-awareness that makes the show palatable and even interesting , as when expressing incredulity at the whole thing .
The scene of the big reveal , in which he is visibly nervous about what she will look like and she is visibly smoking hot , is deftly edited .
Cameron and Lauren worry about facing challenges as an interracial couple , a theme that the show approaches with respect and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” spends much effort teasing Cameron ’ s first meeting with Lauren ’ s father , as if some charged moment might transpire .
The old man merely gives Cameron a protective inspection , like Spencer Tracy frisking Sidney Poitier with gruffness .
There ’ s an amazing tonal volatility to “ Love Is Blind.
” Slabs of crass exploitation abut moments of deep sentiment .
There are touching scenes of human vulnerability and harrowing sequences of people lying to themselves at length .
Vast idiocies of human behavior provoke moments of thoughtful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show magnifies universal quirks of human behavior into light comic grotesques .
Some of these fiancés , who do adore saying the word “ fiancé , ” are openly immersed in on-the-job training for reality-TV stardom .
At various moments , the show warrants comparison to an unfortunate improv exercise , a better “ S.N.L.
” sketch , a decent bikini comedy , a Cassavetes screaming match , a treasure trove of raw anthropological data , and a cry for help .
The errors of production and execution , as when producers force @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cold day , are bracing .
The sixth episode features the greatest moment in the moving-picture history of wholesale-priced Merlot : Jessica , a regional manager , readjusts her grudging snuggle with fiancé Mark , a fitness instructor to whom she is not attracted , so that she can her share her glass of wine with her golden retriever .
The season finale includes a shot of a bride sprinting down a country road in her gown , booking it like a track star , tresses and train rippling as she flees .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ morally offensive to human dignity is key to its artistic success .
One sees the clear potential to build it into a significant franchise .
I ’ m imagining future seasons , and a “ Black Mirror ” crossover episode , and an expansion of the formula into a speed-dating service whereby single people , dating blind , grope for meaning in the darkness .

Before the emergence of “The Bachelor” as a venerable schlock-culture institution, before the advent of any sort of matrimonial reality show that might inspire a satire like “Unreal,” before the special-event salaciousness and spectacular moral violence of “Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?,” there was the syndicated sensation “Blind Date.” My roommate and I would nightly feast to this program, which was hosted by the affable and precise Roger Lodge, over pizza, on a Zenith decked with rabbit ears.
Between 1999 and 2006, the original “Blind Date” secreted fourteen hundred and forty episodes. There were two segments to each episode; there were two complete strangers on a date in each segment. This was an anthology of pitched woo and swapped spit, performed in honest and vulgar American manners, by tender pioneers in the burgeoning craft of onscreen self-commodification. As I recall, a typical date might involve the players practicing watercolors, or more likely body painting, then breaking both bread and codes of tasteful conduct over dinner, and then repairing to the hot tub. All the while, the screen would burble with graphics—cartoonish thought bubbles, chyron-height color commentary, subtext translated in subtitles—which shaped each date into a pulp narrative by way of commenting on it. Heckling the daters with annotations, the show managed to talk its trash and have it, too.
In November, a revival of “Blind Date” débuted, with the comedian Nikki Glaser as its presenter and voice-over jester. The series, reëntering a changed world, is thirsty to stay contemporary. The daters are far more polished than their generational elders, because they know how to act natural on camera, or how to act unnatural in a way that comes naturally. There is an emphasis on matchups that are all-inclusive, queer-friendly, body-positive. A press release says that the next airing will feature “the first out transgender woman in ‘Blind Date’ history,” and I expect the show to treat her with the same amount of respect as everyone else, which is not very much. I flipped on an episode at random and found myself chaperoning Chelsea (“30, realtor”) on her rendezvous with David (“47, hotel manager”). When producers nudge her to explain why she wanted to be on the show, Chelsea says, “I’m on a blind date today because Patty from ‘Millionaire Matchmaker’ wouldn’t call me back.” Glaser and the graphics team go to work mocking her as a bimbo and him as a man-bunned creep. “David is bringing a full-on dirty-old-man vibe, and, against all odds, Chelsea seems into it,” Glaser says. “Love makes no effing sense.”
“Love Is Blind,” on Netflix, is the logical flowering of a “Blind Date” model in a “Bachelor” world. An instant classic among quickie-wedding reality shows, it’s like “The Dating Game”—the foundational Chuck Barris text of sight-unseen matchmaking—extrapolated into a conceptual space that combines vibes from “90 Day Fiancé,” on TLC, and “The Lobster,” by Yorgos Lanthimos. The hook of “Love Is Blind” is that these contestants court over the course of about a business week, each without knowing what the other looks like, then meet face to face, then get married about four weeks later. It enhanced my appreciation of “Love Is Blind” to learn that its creators also make “Married at First Sight,” on Lifetime. On that one, a matchmaking panel (a relationship expert, a sociologist, a pastor brandishing marriage-counselling credentials) sets up heterosexual couples to be introduced at the altar; eight weeks later, the couples decide whether or not to divorce. It’s a reliable recipe for cart-before-the-horse disasters. When I read that “Married at First Sight” reports a seventy-two-per-cent divorce rate, I admired the figure as impressively low.
The premise of “Love Is Blind” is promoted as a utopian innovation. “Your relationship will begin by forming an intimate bond with nothing to distract you,” a co-host, Nick Lachey, says. No social-media stalking, no Hinge-avatar superficiality. The contestants join Nick and his lovely wife, Vanessa, in referring to the setup as an “experiment,” and to the set as a “facility”; the program’s forebears seem to include not only “Big Brother” but also B. F. Skinner.
At the core of the facility are two rows of small rooms called “pods,” which are paired off at partitions, through which strangers share their hopes and dreams and pleasant banalities. The skylight of each pod is in the shape of a long octagon, the silhouette of an emerald-cut engagement ring. In the overhead view, we gaze through the skylights like a God who somewhat regrets having wrought humanity and yet is about to binge the whole season.
Six couples emerge from the pods and embark on a getting-to-know-you jaunt to Cancún, in advance of setting up house in a suitably bland apartment complex in Atlanta. The stars are Cameron and Lauren. Cameron is a white guy in a navy suit. His field is computer science, so he sounds persuasive when dimplishly discussing how the experiment removes confounding variables from the mating game. Lauren is a black woman whose work as a “content creator” requires a colorful assortment of bodycon dresses. She voices the kind of sanity and self-awareness that makes the show palatable and even interesting, as when expressing incredulity at the whole thing. The scene of the big reveal, in which he is visibly nervous about what she will look like and she is visibly smoking hot, is deftly edited. Cameron and Lauren worry about facing challenges as an interracial couple, a theme that the show approaches with respect and without seriousness. “Love Is Blind” spends much effort teasing Cameron’s first meeting with Lauren’s father, as if some charged moment might transpire. The old man merely gives Cameron a protective inspection, like Spencer Tracy frisking Sidney Poitier with gruffness.
There’s an amazing tonal volatility to “Love Is Blind.” Slabs of crass exploitation abut moments of deep sentiment. There are touching scenes of human vulnerability and harrowing sequences of people lying to themselves at length. Vast idiocies of human behavior provoke moments of thoughtful reflection. The warped glass of the show magnifies universal quirks of human behavior into light comic grotesques. Some of these fiancés, who do adore saying the word “fiancé,” are openly immersed in on-the-job training for reality-TV stardom. At various moments, the show warrants comparison to an unfortunate improv exercise, a better “S.N.L.” sketch, a decent bikini comedy, a Cassavetes screaming match, a treasure trove of raw anthropological data, and a cry for help. The errors of production and execution, as when producers force these people to picnic on an unseasonably cold day, are bracing. The sixth episode features the greatest moment in the moving-picture history of wholesale-priced Merlot: Jessica, a regional manager, readjusts her grudging snuggle with fiancé Mark, a fitness instructor to whom she is not attracted, so that she can her share her glass of wine with her golden retriever. The season finale includes a shot of a bride sprinting down a country road in her gown, booking it like a track star, tresses and train rippling as she flees.
That “Love Is Blind” is morally offensive to human dignity is key to its artistic success. One sees the clear potential to build it into a significant franchise. I’m imagining future seasons, and a “Black Mirror” crossover episode, and an expansion of the formula into a speed-dating service whereby single people, dating blind, grope for meaning in the darkness.


newyorker--2020-02-17--A Nun’s Journey in the Amazon

A Nun’s Journey in the Amazon

Jean Bellini is a nun who believes that God made us free , and that we ’ ve used our freedom poorly .
We ’ ve used it to create colonialism , capitalism , and other systems that exploit the poor and reward the rich ; we ’ ve used it to build a world in which some people have too much and others have nothing .
Now , we ’ re in a fix .
When terrible things happen , Bellini sometimes hears people say that they might turn out all right , “ God willing.
” She thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ burden on God .
He made us free , and it ’ s not His job to save us .
Bellini does believe that God gives everyone a vocation .
Hers is to help others help themselves .
In 1976 , when she was thirty-three , she decided to move from upstate New York to Brazil , where her Rochester-based congregation had a small outpost .
She had learned that Brazil ’ s military dictatorship had decided to make room for all kinds of commercial enterprises in the Amazon rain forest : a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rubber plantation for Goodyear .
The problem was that lots of people , from indigenous groups to squatting farmers , already lived in the Amazon .
They were being kicked off their land and the forest was being destroyed .
When Catholicism arrived in Brazil , in 1500 , it was cruel to the people it found there .
Portuguese colonists claimed a religious imprimatur , baptizing the people they enslaved to sell the forest for parts .
“ From the moment Columbus set foot in the New World cross and sword had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalist Penny Lernoux wrote , in her book “ Cry of the People ” ; by the time Brazil declared independence from Portugal , in 1822 , the Latin American Church was “ the most conservative political force on the continent.
” In 1964 , when Brazil ’ s military took power , the nation ’ s bishops greeted the generals warmly .
“ Look behind a dictator ; there stands a bishop , ” Lernoux wrote .
And yet , when Bellini arrived , she encountered a fractured Brazilian Church that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revising its thinking .
The Pastoral Land Commission ( C.P.T . )
, a new Catholic group founded by bishops , was organizing Brazil ’ s landless to claim the land denied to them ; its mission was to document all land conflicts and , where it could , offer guidance .
The C.P.T.
’ s job did not end when , in 1985 , Brazil ’ s military dictatorship concluded and gave way to a succession of flawed democratic governments .
In the fall of 2018 , voters elected President Jair Bolsonaro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pillage the Amazon .
About a million square miles of the forest fall within Brazilian territory ; as Jon Lee Anderson wrote recently , in this magazine , its “ destruction has become a kind of perverse political goal ” for Bolsonaro .
He has weakened regulatory agencies , sought new legislation to prioritize mining and drilling , and accused environmentalists of neocolonialism .
Indigenous people , he has said , are a “ chicken pox ” upon the rain forest .
This rhetoric has invited profiteers to break the law ; since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many set by prospectors , have deforested and devastated the Amazon .
The C.P.T .
documented thirty deaths in disputes over land rights last year .
It has started running security workshops , advising volunteers who work in conflict environments to communicate on the encrypted messaging service Signal and choose their car mechanics carefully .
The situation is so dire that , this past fall , a hundred and eighty-five bishops met for twenty-one days , at the Vatican , for a synod on the Amazon region ; there , they declared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ requirement of faith.
” The Church , in 2020 , is determined to be non-colonial .
The communities who call the forest home , the bishops wrote , “ know how to take care of the Amazon , how to love and protect it , ” and it is the Church ’ s job “ to accompany them , to walk with them , and not to impose on them a particular way of being.
” On a Sunday morning in August , Bellini , who is seventy-six , was in her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a rolling suitcase for a flight to the Amazon .
She is about five feet tall , with curly white hair and an unlined , narrow face .
She is now an executive at the C.P.T.
, which had just hired new staff in Manaus , the capital of Brazil ’ s Amazonas State .
In 2018 , there were more than a thousand conflicts over land in Brazil , almost half of them in the Amazon ; the C.P.T .
has a staff , most of them volunteers , of about seven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only a single employee in Manaus .
Bellini was going there to see how the new hires were doing .
She chose three pillows for her bad back : one for the plane and two for the twin bed in which she ’ d be sleeping , at a local seminary .
Then she went to the kitchen to fix some breakfast .
Bellini lives with Sister Maureen Finn and Sister Joana Mendes , who belong to her congregation , the Sisters of St. Joseph of Rochester .
The congregation , which has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ house in 2012 .
It has solar panels , a prayer room strung with paper cranes , and a small library containing books by Latin America ’ s liberation theologians and the Dalai Lama .
The women find themselves talking a lot about Bolsonaro .
“ He said a really disgusting thing yesterday , ” Finn said , opening a newspaper on the kitchen table .
“ I can ’ t even repeat it.
” “ It was that people should pollute less by shitting less , ” Bellini said .
She took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of yogurt mixed with milk—an experiment in making the pricier product go further .
On Sundays , Bellini attends mass at Our Lady of the Earth , an octagonal church named for a symbolic champion of Brazil ’ s rural poor , represented in images as a chin-up , dark-skinned woman who looks nothing like classical depictions of the Virgin Mary .
We parked in front of a nail salon , crossed the street , and slid into the second row of pews .
A man played guitar as the congregants clapped and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peppy , Bellini tapped her foot .
Then the priest stepped down from the altar to give his homily , in Portuguese .
Afterward , in the car , Bellini summarized what the priest had said : God won ’ t help you , so help one another ; you might not see the results of your work before you die , but it ’ s meaningful anyway , because the people born after you matter just as much as you do .
This was a creed of which Bellini approved .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and stores were closed ; the red-and-gold signs for the Assemblies of God—the Pentecostal denomination into which Bolsonaro was baptized before his Presidential run , although he remains a Catholic—stood out against abandoned construction sites and squat , concrete buildings .
In recent years , Brazilian Catholicism has been in decline , and Pentecostalism ascendant .
“ They focus on ‘ Our condition is sinful , and we need redemption , ’ ” Bellini argued , of the Assemblies of God .
Wearing sunglasses over her regular glasses , she shifted gears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon after Bolsonaro took office and started cutting social services , an acquaintance who attended the Assemblies of God suggested that the resulting hardships , and also the Amazon fires and displaced families , were “ signs of the end of times.
” “ ‘ Follow these rules and you ’ re saved , ’ ” Bellini went on , summarizing the Assemblies ’ outlook .
“ It keeps the poor in their place.
” If she had her way , those who have been denied their share of the Earth will see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s plan .
They will join together and create the just and equal world that God desires .
From the left , a car without the right of way merged suddenly into our lane , cutting us off .
Bellini whistled in frustration and gave it a hard stare .

Jean Bellini is a nun who believes that God made us free, and that we’ve used our freedom poorly. We’ve used it to create colonialism, capitalism, and other systems that exploit the poor and reward the rich; we’ve used it to build a world in which some people have too much and others have nothing. Now, we’re in a fix. When terrible things happen, Bellini sometimes hears people say that they might turn out all right, “God willing.” She thinks, I wouldn’t put that burden on God. He made us free, and it’s not His job to save us.
Bellini does believe that God gives everyone a vocation. Hers is to help others help themselves. In 1976, when she was thirty-three, she decided to move from upstate New York to Brazil, where her Rochester-based congregation had a small outpost. She had learned that Brazil’s military dictatorship had decided to make room for all kinds of commercial enterprises in the Amazon rain forest: a cattle ranch owned by Volkswagen, a rubber plantation for Goodyear. The problem was that lots of people, from indigenous groups to squatting farmers, already lived in the Amazon. They were being kicked off their land and the forest was being destroyed.
When Catholicism arrived in Brazil, in 1500, it was cruel to the people it found there. Portuguese colonists claimed a religious imprimatur, baptizing the people they enslaved to sell the forest for parts. “From the moment Columbus set foot in the New World cross and sword had been indistinguishable,” the Catholic investigative journalist Penny Lernoux wrote, in her book “Cry of the People”; by the time Brazil declared independence from Portugal, in 1822, the Latin American Church was “the most conservative political force on the continent.” In 1964, when Brazil’s military took power, the nation’s bishops greeted the generals warmly. “Look behind a dictator; there stands a bishop,” Lernoux wrote.
And yet, when Bellini arrived, she encountered a fractured Brazilian Church that was, in many of its parishes, revising its thinking. The Pastoral Land Commission (C.P.T.), a new Catholic group founded by bishops, was organizing Brazil’s landless to claim the land denied to them; its mission was to document all land conflicts and, where it could, offer guidance. The C.P.T.’s job did not end when, in 1985, Brazil’s military dictatorship concluded and gave way to a succession of flawed democratic governments. In the fall of 2018, voters elected President Jair Bolsonaro, a populist ex-military politician determined to pillage the Amazon. About a million square miles of the forest fall within Brazilian territory; as Jon Lee Anderson wrote recently, in this magazine, its “destruction has become a kind of perverse political goal” for Bolsonaro. He has weakened regulatory agencies, sought new legislation to prioritize mining and drilling, and accused environmentalists of neocolonialism. Indigenous people, he has said, are a “chicken pox” upon the rain forest.
This rhetoric has invited profiteers to break the law; since Bolsonaro took office, thousands of fires, many set by prospectors, have deforested and devastated the Amazon. The C.P.T. documented thirty deaths in disputes over land rights last year. It has started running security workshops, advising volunteers who work in conflict environments to communicate on the encrypted messaging service Signal and choose their car mechanics carefully. The situation is so dire that, this past fall, a hundred and eighty-five bishops met for twenty-one days, at the Vatican, for a synod on the Amazon region; there, they declared that supporting its displaced people is a “requirement of faith.” The Church, in 2020, is determined to be non-colonial. The communities who call the forest home, the bishops wrote, “know how to take care of the Amazon, how to love and protect it,” and it is the Church’s job “to accompany them, to walk with them, and not to impose on them a particular way of being.”
On a Sunday morning in August, Bellini, who is seventy-six, was in her bedroom in Goiânia, Brazil, packing a rolling suitcase for a flight to the Amazon. She is about five feet tall, with curly white hair and an unlined, narrow face. She is now an executive at the C.P.T., which had just hired new staff in Manaus, the capital of Brazil’s Amazonas State. In 2018, there were more than a thousand conflicts over land in Brazil, almost half of them in the Amazon; the C.P.T. has a staff, most of them volunteers, of about seven hundred, but until recently it had only a single employee in Manaus. Bellini was going there to see how the new hires were doing. She chose three pillows for her bad back: one for the plane and two for the twin bed in which she’d be sleeping, at a local seminary. Then she went to the kitchen to fix some breakfast.
Bellini lives with Sister Maureen Finn and Sister Joana Mendes, who belong to her congregation, the Sisters of St. Joseph of Rochester. The congregation, which has nine women in Brazil, built the house in 2012. It has solar panels, a prayer room strung with paper cranes, and a small library containing books by Latin America’s liberation theologians and the Dalai Lama. The women find themselves talking a lot about Bolsonaro.
“He said a really disgusting thing yesterday,” Finn said, opening a newspaper on the kitchen table. “I can’t even repeat it.”
“It was that people should pollute less by shitting less,” Bellini said. She took out of the refrigerator a big dish of yogurt mixed with milk—an experiment in making the pricier product go further.
On Sundays, Bellini attends mass at Our Lady of the Earth, an octagonal church named for a symbolic champion of Brazil’s rural poor, represented in images as a chin-up, dark-skinned woman who looks nothing like classical depictions of the Virgin Mary. We parked in front of a nail salon, crossed the street, and slid into the second row of pews. A man played guitar as the congregants clapped and swayed; when the music got really peppy, Bellini tapped her foot. Then the priest stepped down from the altar to give his homily, in Portuguese.
Afterward, in the car, Bellini summarized what the priest had said: God won’t help you, so help one another; you might not see the results of your work before you die, but it’s meaningful anyway, because the people born after you matter just as much as you do. This was a creed of which Bellini approved. It was Father’s Day in Brazil, and stores were closed; the red-and-gold signs for the Assemblies of God—the Pentecostal denomination into which Bolsonaro was baptized before his Presidential run, although he remains a Catholic—stood out against abandoned construction sites and squat, concrete buildings. In recent years, Brazilian Catholicism has been in decline, and Pentecostalism ascendant. “They focus on ‘Our condition is sinful, and we need redemption,’ ” Bellini argued, of the Assemblies of God. Wearing sunglasses over her regular glasses, she shifted gears with effort. She recounted how, soon after Bolsonaro took office and started cutting social services, an acquaintance who attended the Assemblies of God suggested that the resulting hardships, and also the Amazon fires and displaced families, were “signs of the end of times.”
“ ‘Follow these rules and you’re saved,’ ” Bellini went on, summarizing the Assemblies’ outlook. “It keeps the poor in their place.” If she had her way, those who have been denied their share of the Earth will see that this situation is not God’s plan. They will join together and create the just and equal world that God desires. From the left, a car without the right of way merged suddenly into our lane, cutting us off. Bellini whistled in frustration and gave it a hard stare.
The land at Kilometre 152 of Highway BR-174 is rococo in its greenness and relentlessly damp. The governor of Amazonas State granted the first title to it in the summer of 1970. At that time, the forest north of Manaus was home to the Waimiri-Atroari indigenous people. The Brazilian state, under army leadership, decided to remove them, so that others could use it more profitably; in subsequent conflicts with the government, tribe members died by the thousands. But the new owner of the parcel didn’t actually live on it; neither did the next one, or the next, or the next, or the next. It remained forested and undeveloped. In 1999, a man named Valdomiro Machado and a few companions arrived there in a motorized canoe. The place seemed like it might make a good home. Machado and the other men sent for their families to join them, and they settled by the water, calling the area Terra Santa.
The six families, all farmers of small lands and from different Brazilian states, had met at an Assemblies of God church just outside Manaus, where they’d stopped while looking for new agricultural land. In Terra Santa, the group cut into the forest just enough to build little houses, sow collard greens and zucchini plants, and, eventually, keep some cattle. As the shade receded, so did the mosquitoes. They built their own Assemblies of God church. When no one came to kick them off the land, more squatters showed up. Soon, forty or so families lived there.
One of the new arrivals was a man named João. In 2008, three years after João moved in, he announced to his fellow-squatters that he had acquired the legal title to Terra Santa. Machado had a plot next to the water; it was, he thought, both convenient and especially beautiful. For the plot, Machado says, João offered him about fifteen thousand U.S. dollars and a used truck, both of which Machado declined. Next, João got a court order to evict him. Not long afterward, he turned up with some cops and a bulldozer, which destroyed Machado’s home, where he had raised seven children. (João says that Machado and other neighbors rejected his offer to give them free titles to their plots.) Machado, who is seventy-three, left Terra Santa for Manaus, where he lives off his pension. Some of his neighbors followed him to the city; João acquired their land, opening a lumber mill in Terra Santa and, later, a construction business in Manaus.


newyorker--2020-02-16--Andy Gill and Gang of Four’s Glorious and Dangerous Noise

For the first two minutes of Frank Ocean ’ s “ Futura Free , ” a slow , half-drowned beat runs beneath Ocean ’ s voice and piano .
It ’ s taken from Gang of Four ’ s “ Love Like Anthrax , ” recorded in 1979 for the band ’ s début album , “ Entertainment !
” The sample comes from the point in the song right after Andy Gill toggles a two-note alarm on his guitar .
His tone softens and lifts up to make room for the entrance of Dave Allen ’ s bass and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s guitar has been groaning and screeching , like a fender pulled across a bollard , for ninety seconds , but with deliberation , as if his noise were fulfilling a single purpose .
The rhythm section starts playing a figure that sounds like dance music with some bits removed , spinning off its center like a dryer full of wet bath mats .
The song is bright and awake and not like any music that came before it , not really .
All three instruments are there in the Frank Ocean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only hear the drums .
“ I couldn ’ t hear our bit but pretend that I do when anybody asks , ” Burnham told me a few days after Gill died , from a respiratory illness , in London , on February 1st .
“ I love Frank Ocean.
” It is proper that one of the most recent appearances of Gang of Four ’ s music is in a song by Frank Ocean , someone who has melted and reshaped what a pop star can do and say .
Ocean inverted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Gang of Four inverted the idea of what a guitar band with a vocalist might do .
Should a singer talk about feelings or theories ?
What are electric instruments for ?
Why is music amplified ?
Why do songs have so many notes ?
Why would four people go into a room and play together ?
Gill ’ s spoken-word part of “ Love Like Anthrax ” —one of two simultaneous vocals , inspired by the split-screen dual narrative of Jean-Luc Godard ’ s film “ Numéro Deux ” —gives us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cultural moment and how Gang of Four reimagined it in 1979 .
“ I don ’ t think we ’ re saying there ’ s anything wrong with love , ” Gill says in the song .
“ We just don ’ t think that what goes on between two people should be shrouded with mystery.
” The day after Gill died , I spoke to the Gang of Four singer and lyricist Jon King .
“ ‘ Anthrax ’ was a breakthrough , ” he said .
“ We felt able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We had discovered a sound.
” If a Frank Ocean fan , or anyone who doesn ’ t know Gang of Four , plays “ Anthrax , ” they will find the essence of Gill , in a performance as important as any other from that time .
Eulogizing music is another form of death , so put the song on at a high volume and wait for the nearest person to complain .
Feedback isn ’ t particularly novel now , and it was hardly new in 1979 , but “ Anthrax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is still astonishing .
The song begins with just a guitar , feeding back enthusiastically for a minute with no nods toward a song or any obvious musical frame .
It ’ s a happy and glorious and dangerous noise , and once the rest of the band leaps in it disappears .
When Gill ’ s guitar returns , it ’ s no more normative .
He just keeps squealing .
It ’ s a fabulous guitar song with no guitar part .
How ’ s that for minimalism ?
Gill presented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ principle for Gang of Four , in an interview with Mary Harron for the British weekly Melody Maker , in May of 1979 .
“ Our attitudes have always been to strip down to the bare essentials , or try to , ” he said .
“ Most New Wave groups had a lot of sound textures going on simultaneously .
What we ’ re more interested in is being able to listen to a Gang of Four song and hear every single element—bass , drums , vocals , guitar—separate and equally dominant.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ any distance , involves more than a little technical modification .
King told me about the band ’ s collective desire to get away from the “ fatness ” of valve amps like those made by Marshall , which were popular with English bands in the seventies .
Gill used transistor amplifiers made by another English company , Carlsbro , which lent a cold clarity and nakedness to his playing .
“ That was very much one of Andy ’ s things , ” King said .
“ It ’ s very difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the thing.
” That thing was very much up for grabs in 1978 , when what is widely called the post-punk period was gathering steam in England .
Inspired by the self-starters of punk , the second wave of bands had a double remit : love the past and sound nothing like it .
The critic Greil Marcus , in the liner notes of “ A Brief History of the Twentieth Century , ” Gang of Four ’ s first compilation album , describes this moment : “ The Gang of Four acted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a picture of an individual who had discovered that ordinary life—the gestures of affection and resentment one made every day , the catchphrases one spoke every day as if one had invented them—is in fact sold and bought as grease for shopping and silence for the accumulation of capital and passivity.
” The band ’ s musical influences were not obscure : Allen loved the Meters ; Burnham praised the work of Simon Kirke , the drummer for Free ; and all the surviving members of Gang of Four mentioned Parliament and Funkadelic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nation Under a Groove , ” King said , “ You just lay down a groove and then you come in and out with something or other.
” This describes , precisely , one of the ideas behind “ Anthrax , ” mapped out on paper by Gill and King in 1977 , when they occupied “ adjacent rooms in a shitty house ” while attending the University of Leeds .
Two major inspirations for Gill specifically were Jimi Hendrix—especially his work on “ Voodoo Child ( Slight Return ) , ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ endlessly ” —and Dr. Feelgood ’ s guitarist Wilko Johnson .
He ’ s not usually mentioned in American arguments about seventies rock , but Johnson is the biggest antecedent for Gill ’ s playing .
If the name rings no bells , listen to Gill ’ s playing on “ Outside the Trains Don ’ t Run on Time ” or , really , any Gang of Four song .
Then , watch a clip of Dr. Feelgood playing “ She Does It Right , ” live on the British television @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in 1975 .
Johnson doesn ’ t play with a pick or use his fingertips like a folkie .
He whacks the guitar with the back of his hand , using fingernails but also the hand itself .
That attack , combined with his Fender Telecaster , created a sound that is as bracing and harsh as Gang of Four itself .
( If you want to keep learning about the band , don ’ t worry .
The rights to Gang of Four recordings were owned by Warner Bros. in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the song files down when the band could not reach an agreement with the company about a new contract last year .
The rights to the recordings have now reverted to the band , and the original recordings should be up on streaming platforms soon . )
When Gang of Four came to New York in 1979 and performed at Hurrah , they did a version of “ Damaged Goods , ” which was already enough of an underground hit that the audience sang along to most of it .
Included in “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Goods ” was the band ’ s first single , there on the flip side of the first version of “ Anthrax , ” and it probably remains the band ’ s best-known song .
King likened the sound of it to the first-generation video game Breakout ( a bouncing ball chips away at a wall of bricks ) , which he and Gill played during the recording of “ Entertainment !
” In “ Damaged Goods , ” the bass and guitar toss small chords back and forth and then take off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what sounds like the song ’ s melody and Gill hacking away like a sort of angry , rusty metronome .
The demystification of sex and love referred to on the B-side , in “ Love Like Anthrax , ” had already begun on the A-side : “ Sometimes I ’ m thinking that I love you / But I know it ’ s only lust .
”

Gang of Four inverted the idea of what a guitar band with a vocalist might do. Photograph by Adrian Boot / Urbanimage / Camera Press / Redux
For the first two minutes of Frank Ocean’s “Futura Free,” a slow, half-drowned beat runs beneath Ocean’s voice and piano. It’s taken from Gang of Four’s “Love Like Anthrax,” recorded in 1979 for the band’s début album, “Entertainment!” The sample comes from the point in the song right after Andy Gill toggles a two-note alarm on his guitar. His tone softens and lifts up to make room for the entrance of Dave Allen’s bass and Hugo Burnham’s drums. Gill’s guitar has been groaning and screeching, like a fender pulled across a bollard, for ninety seconds, but with deliberation, as if his noise were fulfilling a single purpose. The rhythm section starts playing a figure that sounds like dance music with some bits removed, spinning off its center like a dryer full of wet bath mats. The song is bright and awake and not like any music that came before it, not really.
All three instruments are there in the Frank Ocean sample, apparently, but you can only hear the drums. “I couldn’t hear our bit but pretend that I do when anybody asks,” Burnham told me a few days after Gill died, from a respiratory illness, in London, on February 1st. “I love Frank Ocean.”
It is proper that one of the most recent appearances of Gang of Four’s music is in a song by Frank Ocean, someone who has melted and reshaped what a pop star can do and say. Ocean inverted the role of the male singer just as Gang of Four inverted the idea of what a guitar band with a vocalist might do. Should a singer talk about feelings or theories? What are electric instruments for? Why is music amplified? Why do songs have so many notes? Why would four people go into a room and play together? Gill’s spoken-word part of “Love Like Anthrax”—one of two simultaneous vocals, inspired by the split-screen dual narrative of Jean-Luc Godard’s film “Numéro Deux”—gives us an answer, a way of understanding the cultural moment and how Gang of Four reimagined it in 1979. “I don’t think we’re saying there’s anything wrong with love,” Gill says in the song. “We just don’t think that what goes on between two people should be shrouded with mystery.”
The original lyrics to “Anthrax,” handwritten by Jon King. Photograph Courtesy Jon King
The day after Gill died, I spoke to the Gang of Four singer and lyricist Jon King. “ ‘Anthrax’ was a breakthrough,” he said. “We felt able to move on from verse-bridge-chorus songs. We had discovered a sound.”
If a Frank Ocean fan, or anyone who doesn’t know Gang of Four, plays “Anthrax,” they will find the essence of Gill, in a performance as important as any other from that time. Eulogizing music is another form of death, so put the song on at a high volume and wait for the nearest person to complain. Feedback isn’t particularly novel now, and it was hardly new in 1979, but “Anthrax” used it in a way that is still astonishing. The song begins with just a guitar, feeding back enthusiastically for a minute with no nods toward a song or any obvious musical frame. It’s a happy and glorious and dangerous noise, and once the rest of the band leaps in it disappears. When Gill’s guitar returns, it’s no more normative. He just keeps squealing. It’s a fabulous guitar song with no guitar part. How’s that for minimalism?
Gill presented his love of minimalism as a guiding principle for Gang of Four, in an interview with Mary Harron for the British weekly Melody Maker, in May of 1979. “Our attitudes have always been to strip down to the bare essentials, or try to,” he said. “Most New Wave groups had a lot of sound textures going on simultaneously. What we’re more interested in is being able to listen to a Gang of Four song and hear every single element—bass, drums, vocals, guitar—separate and equally dominant.”
Making a band legible, from any distance, involves more than a little technical modification. King told me about the band’s collective desire to get away from the “fatness” of valve amps like those made by Marshall, which were popular with English bands in the seventies. Gill used transistor amplifiers made by another English company, Carlsbro, which lent a cold clarity and nakedness to his playing. “That was very much one of Andy’s things,” King said. “It’s very difficult to be naked—it has to be about the thing.”
That thing was very much up for grabs in 1978, when what is widely called the post-punk period was gathering steam in England. Inspired by the self-starters of punk, the second wave of bands had a double remit: love the past and sound nothing like it. The critic Greil Marcus, in the liner notes of “A Brief History of the Twentieth Century,” Gang of Four’s first compilation album, describes this moment: “The Gang of Four acted out, and put into records, a picture of an individual who had discovered that ordinary life—the gestures of affection and resentment one made every day, the catchphrases one spoke every day as if one had invented them—is in fact sold and bought as grease for shopping and silence for the accumulation of capital and passivity.”
The band’s musical influences were not obscure: Allen loved the Meters; Burnham praised the work of Simon Kirke, the drummer for Free; and all the surviving members of Gang of Four mentioned Parliament and Funkadelic. Of Funkadelic’s “One Nation Under a Groove,” King said, “You just lay down a groove and then you come in and out with something or other.” This describes, precisely, one of the ideas behind “Anthrax,” mapped out on paper by Gill and King in 1977, when they occupied “adjacent rooms in a shitty house” while attending the University of Leeds.
Two major inspirations for Gill specifically were Jimi Hendrix—especially his work on “Voodoo Child (Slight Return),” which King says he and Gill listened to “endlessly”—and Dr. Feelgood’s guitarist Wilko Johnson. He’s not usually mentioned in American arguments about seventies rock, but Johnson is the biggest antecedent for Gill’s playing. If the name rings no bells, listen to Gill’s playing on “Outside the Trains Don’t Run on Time” or, really, any Gang of Four song. Then, watch a clip of Dr. Feelgood playing “She Does It Right,” live on the British television show “Old Grey Whistle Test,” in 1975. Johnson doesn’t play with a pick or use his fingertips like a folkie. He whacks the guitar with the back of his hand, using fingernails but also the hand itself. That attack, combined with his Fender Telecaster, created a sound that is as bracing and harsh as Gang of Four itself. (If you want to keep learning about the band, don’t worry. The rights to Gang of Four recordings were owned by Warner Bros. in the United States, and the label took the song files down when the band could not reach an agreement with the company about a new contract last year. The rights to the recordings have now reverted to the band, and the original recordings should be up on streaming platforms soon.)
When Gang of Four came to New York in 1979 and performed at Hurrah, they did a version of “Damaged Goods,” which was already enough of an underground hit that the audience sang along to most of it. Included in “The Pitchfork 500,” “Damaged Goods” was the band’s first single, there on the flip side of the first version of “Anthrax,” and it probably remains the band’s best-known song. King likened the sound of it to the first-generation video game Breakout (a bouncing ball chips away at a wall of bricks), which he and Gill played during the recording of “Entertainment!” In “Damaged Goods,” the bass and guitar toss small chords back and forth and then take off in opposite directions, with Allen playing what sounds like the song’s melody and Gill hacking away like a sort of angry, rusty metronome. The demystification of sex and love referred to on the B-side, in “Love Like Anthrax,” had already begun on the A-side: “Sometimes I’m thinking that I love you / But I know it’s only lust.”


newyorker--2020-02-17--A Teen-Age Trump Tries to Win His High School’s Election

Every year , Townsend Harris High School , in Queens , New York , holds a school-wide election simulation .
Students are assigned roles and begin campaigning in September .
Each candidate has a staff , raises money , and makes ads for the school ’ s radio and television network .
This fall , the school simulated the Democratic and Republican primaries .
Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden got into a rap battle .
The American Family Association joined the fray and released a rap of its own .
The New Yorker ’ s Joshua Rothman first observed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 Presidential election .
At the time , he saw that Donald Trump ’ s political arrival was greeted with distaste at a school where many students come from immigrant families .
“ There was some stuff Donald Trump was saying that , if you heard from any other candidate , it would frankly be disgusting , ” Justin , who played Buttigieg this cycle , said .
But Togay , who was assigned the role of Trump—he ’ s a Democrat in real life—was determined to make the President more appealing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I watched Alec Baldwin for a couple weeks , ” he tells Rothman .
For Togay and the Townsend Harris student body , Trump ’ s unprecedented Presidency is normal .
“ We ’ ve seen what ’ s actually going on in Washington , because it ’ s been like a reality show to us , ” Justin said .
“ This isn ’ t really surprising .
This isn ’ t new .
”

Photograph by Matt Rourke / AP / Shutterstock
Every year, Townsend Harris High School, in Queens, New York, holds a school-wide election simulation. Students are assigned roles and begin campaigning in September. Each candidate has a staff, raises money, and makes ads for the school’s radio and television network. This fall, the school simulated the Democratic and Republican primaries. Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden got into a rap battle. The American Family Association joined the fray and released a rap of its own.
The New Yorker’s Joshua Rothman first observed the simulation during the primaries of the 2016 Presidential election. At the time, he saw that Donald Trump’s political arrival was greeted with distaste at a school where many students come from immigrant families. “There was some stuff Donald Trump was saying that, if you heard from any other candidate, it would frankly be disgusting,” Justin, who played Buttigieg this cycle, said. But Togay, who was assigned the role of Trump—he’s a Democrat in real life—was determined to make the President more appealing to his classmates. “In preparation, I watched Alec Baldwin for a couple weeks,” he tells Rothman. For Togay and the Townsend Harris student body, Trump’s unprecedented Presidency is normal. “We’ve seen what’s actually going on in Washington, because it’s been like a reality show to us,” Justin said. “This isn’t really surprising. This isn’t new.”


newyorker--2020-02-18--A Lost Chance to Bring the Green New Deal Home

During the past year , in addressing the crisis of climate change , the Democratic Presidential candidates have spoken earnestly , if evasively , about the Green New Deal .
But in December , at the last hour , the Democratic leadership in the House agreed to strip a provision from a corner of the tax code—a capitulation that will prove damaging to the environment and to job opportunities .
The provision was cut from the omnibus spending bill , a 1.4-trillion-dollar package that was negotiated by the White House , Senate Republicans , and House Democrats and signed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ originally conceived in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 , was simple : a thirty per cent household tax credit for the cost of installing a residential solar-electricity system .
The act , signed by George W. Bush , capped the solar credit at two thousand dollars per project .
In 2008 , with the Democrats in control of both the House and the Senate and a recession underway , the cap was removed so that thirty per cent of even large-scale residential projects would be rebated at tax time .
In 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now , if new legislation isn ’ t passed to redeem the credit , it will drop to twenty-six per cent this year , twenty-two per cent in 2021 , and nothing in 2022 .
Lobbyists close to the oil-and-gas industry wanted the tax credit ended ; predictably , the Republican leadership and the White House joined them .
The majority of House Democrats wanted to extend the credit , but the Trump Administration dug in .
The Democratic leadership , it seems , feared a government shutdown before Christmas , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they let the credit for residential solar power drop .
But this was a pivotal fight , and tenacity would have been both simple to explain and likely to gain bipartisan support .
This past summer , more than a thousand solar companies signed a letter in support of an extension .
Soon after , a group of lawmakers , led by two Democrats—Senator Catherine Cortez Masto , of Nevada , and Representative Mike Thompson , of California—and two Republicans—Representatives Paul Cook , of California , and Brian Fitzpatrick , of Pennsylvania—introduced legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more , not just for solar electricity but also for fibre-optic solar technology , fuel cells , small-wind technology , microturbines , combined-heat-and-power technology , and geothermal heat pumps .
In October , a bipartisan group of two hundred and thirty-one mayors , from Kenosha , Wisconsin , to Fort Lauderdale , Florida , signed a letter in support of the bill .
“ Charles Grassley managed a five-year extension for biodiesel ” in the spending bill , Gregory Wetstone , the C.E.O .
of the American Council on Renewable Energy , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That credit expired in 2017 , so its extension is retroactive to 2018 and runs through 2022 .
Wetstone was frustrated that Senator Grassley , Republican of Iowa , stood firm for his farming interests ( in 2018 , Iowa farmers harvested more than five hundred million bushels of soybeans , a key crop for biodiesel production ) and prevailed , but Democrats gave in .
Most frustrating , he added , is that the credit was not some new idea but one that has been “ working well for over a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Rust Belt businesspeople as to Green New Dealers .
“ The leverage was there to get more done , ” Wetstone said .
Michael Brune , the executive director of the Sierra Club , was more blunt .
House Democrats , he tweeted in December , “ were given a mandate to fight hard ” to secure victories on climate action .
“ They had an opportunity this week .
They failed to deliver.
” Nor did they convey what was at stake .
According to an analysis from the Solar Energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consulting and equity-research company based in the United Kingdom , extending the credit through 2030 would likely have added eighty-two gigawatts of solar power “ over baseline forecasts ” —that is , forecasts of growth without the credit .
Eighty-two gigawatts amounts to about seven per cent of total power-generation capacity in the United States .
The credit would thus have offset more than three hundred and fifty million metric tons of carbon dioxide in a decade—equal to a fifth of U.S. electricity emissions in 2018 .
The credit worked and rallied some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for government to the market logic of the private sector .
House Resolution 109 , in which the Green New Deal is envisioned , alludes to the “ Federal Government-led mobilizations ” that spurred the economy during the Depression and the Second World War ; it sees the government now taking a similar role , “ dramatically expanding and upgrading renewable power sources ” and “ prioritizing high-quality job creation.
” The expansion of solar energy , specifically , would mean myriad installations in towns and suburbs ; dramatic expansion would come , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government helping to shape market forces there : regulating carbon emissions , normalizing technical standards for regional power grids and electric vehicles , and providing targeted tax incentives .
The solar tax credit , in this context , has already been “ incredibly consequential , ” Abigail Ross Hopper , the C.E.O .
of the Solar Energy Industries Association , told Wired last summer ; it was largely responsible for getting the solar industry off the ground in this country .
During the past decade , according to the S.E.I.A.
, solar installations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on average .
Since 2011 , the Department of Energy reports , installations have grown “ more than tenfold , ” with more than a million currently in operation .
“ The cost of solar energy has also dropped as much as 65 % .
” Solar installation , moreover , has been a godsend to the struggling construction industry .
Nationwide , there are almost seven hundred thousand construction companies of all sizes , employing more than seven million people .
Many residential companies have been pushed to the edge since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rural areas , where manufacturing jobs have been growing scarce and new home construction has lagged .
The tax credit prompted many of those firms to switch to offering residential solar-energy installation .
There are now ten thousand solar businesses in the country , located in every state and employing about a quarter of a million people .
The tax credit helped them by turning householders who may have been wary of the unfamiliarity—and the cost—of solar power into more or less confident buyers .
My wife and I were just such householders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solar tracker on our home , in rural New Hampshire ; it ’ s an array consisting of twenty solar panels , mounted on a galvanized steel frame and pylon and connected to a smart piston , which rotates and pivots throughout the day , following the sun .
Our tracker was designed to produce , on average , just under ten thousand kilowatt-hours per year .
That ’ s about what our home consumed in 2017 and 2018 .
The fully installed system cost more than thirty thousand dollars—a serious investment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is hardly a place to invest in solar energy , given the long winters of short days .
We did , until we looked more closely at the numbers .
In New Hampshire , the winter months normally see a spike in demand for natural gas for heating , which tends to drive up electricity prices .
The average price of a kilowatt-hour is about twenty cents for residential customers , which is among the highest in the nation , owing in part to the cold .
So our total annual cost for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cents ) is about two thousand dollars—a hundred and sixty-seven dollars a month .
Our tracker , we figured , would compensate us for this sum by replacing much of the electricity that we ’ d normally have to buy in the winter and by allowing us to sell excess power to the utility company in the summer , albeit at a rate slightly lower than what we ’ d have paid for it .
It would take about sixteen years to pay off the system ; with the tax credit , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eleven years .
After that , the power would be free .
Sixteen—or even eleven—years may seem a long time for older homeowners , like us , but the logic of the investment is even clearer if , like us , they borrow to buy the installation .
In our case , the question was do we keep paying a hundred and sixty-seven dollars to the utility company , or do we install solar technology and pay monthly installments to the bank ?
How much would we pay the bank ?
If we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per cent , over sixteen years , the monthly payment would be slightly less than two hundred and forty dollars—seventy dollars more per month .
The tax credit , however , brings the tracker ’ s all-in cost down to slightly more than twenty-two thousand dollars—a monthly payment of a hundred and sixty-seven dollars , or exactly the actual cost of power .
( There is also an added sum for the mortgage-interest deduction . )
The credit meant that we could do something for the planet , the local bank , local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a dime more .

During the past year, in addressing the crisis of climate change, the Democratic Presidential candidates have spoken earnestly, if evasively, about the Green New Deal. But in December, at the last minute, the Democratic leadership in the House agreed to strip a provision from a corner of the tax code—a capitulation that will prove damaging to the environment and to job opportunities. The provision was cut from the omnibus spending bill, a 1.4-trillion-dollar package that was negotiated by the White House, Senate Republicans, and House Democrats and signed by President Donald Trump. The provision, originally conceived in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, was simple: a thirty per cent household tax credit for the cost of installing a residential solar-electricity system. The act, signed by George W. Bush, capped the solar credit at two thousand dollars per project. In 2008, with the Democrats in control of both the House and the Senate and a recession underway, the cap was removed so that thirty per cent of even large-scale residential projects would be rebated at tax time. In 2015, Congress extended that credit through 2019. Now, if new legislation isn’t passed to redeem the credit, it will drop to twenty-six per cent this year, twenty-two per cent in 2021, and nothing in 2022.
Lobbyists close to the oil-and-gas industry wanted the tax credit ended; predictably, the Republican leadership and the White House joined them. The majority of House Democrats wanted to extend the credit, but the Trump Administration dug in. The Democratic leadership, it seems, feared a government shutdown before Christmas, which Republicans would blame on them, so they let the credit for residential solar power drop.
But this was a pivotal fight, and tenacity would have been both simple to explain and likely to gain bipartisan support. This past summer, more than a thousand solar companies signed a letter in support of an extension. Soon after, a group of lawmakers, led by two Democrats—Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, of Nevada, and Representative Mike Thompson, of California—and two Republicans—Representatives Paul Cook, of California, and Brian Fitzpatrick, of Pennsylvania—introduced legislation to extend the credit for five years more, not just for solar electricity but also for fibre-optic solar technology, fuel cells, small-wind technology, microturbines, combined-heat-and-power technology, and geothermal heat pumps. In October, a bipartisan group of two hundred and thirty-one mayors, from Kenosha, Wisconsin, to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, signed a letter in support of the bill.
“Charles Grassley managed a five-year extension for biodiesel” in the spending bill, Gregory Wetstone, the C.E.O. of the American Council on Renewable Energy, which lobbies for solar companies, told me. That credit expired in 2017, so its extension is retroactive to 2018 and runs through 2022. Wetstone was frustrated that Senator Grassley, Republican of Iowa, stood firm for his farming interests (in 2018, Iowa farmers harvested more than five hundred million bushels of soybeans, a key crop for biodiesel production) and prevailed, but Democrats gave in. Most frustrating, he added, is that the credit was not some new idea but one that has been “working well for over a decade.” It has appealed as readily to Rust Belt businesspeople as to Green New Dealers. “The leverage was there to get more done,” Wetstone said. Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club, was more blunt. House Democrats, he tweeted in December, “were given a mandate to fight hard” to secure victories on climate action. “They had an opportunity this week. They failed to deliver.”
Nor did they convey what was at stake. According to an analysis from the Solar Energy Industries Association and Wood Mackenzie, a consulting and equity-research company based in the United Kingdom, extending the credit through 2030 would likely have added eighty-two gigawatts of solar power “over baseline forecasts”—that is, forecasts of growth without the credit. Eighty-two gigawatts amounts to about seven per cent of total power-generation capacity in the United States. The credit would thus have offset more than three hundred and fifty million metric tons of carbon dioxide in a decade—equal to a fifth of U.S. electricity emissions in 2018.
The credit worked and rallied some bipartisan support because it wedded progressive ambitions for government to the market logic of the private sector. House Resolution 109, in which the Green New Deal is envisioned, alludes to the “Federal Government-led mobilizations” that spurred the economy during the Depression and the Second World War; it sees the government now taking a similar role, “dramatically expanding and upgrading renewable power sources” and “prioritizing high-quality job creation.” The expansion of solar energy, specifically, would mean myriad installations in towns and suburbs; dramatic expansion would come, if at all, from the federal government helping to shape market forces there: regulating carbon emissions, normalizing technical standards for regional power grids and electric vehicles, and providing targeted tax incentives.
The solar tax credit, in this context, has already been “incredibly consequential,” Abigail Ross Hopper, the C.E.O. of the Solar Energy Industries Association, told Wired last summer; it was largely responsible for getting the solar industry off the ground in this country. During the past decade, according to the S.E.I.A., solar installations grew by fifty per cent a year, on average. Since 2011, the Department of Energy reports, installations have grown “more than tenfold,” with more than a million currently in operation. “The cost of solar energy has also dropped as much as 65%.”
Solar installation, moreover, has been a godsend to the struggling construction industry. Nationwide, there are almost seven hundred thousand construction companies of all sizes, employing more than seven million people. Many residential companies have been pushed to the edge since 2008, especially in mill towns and rural areas, where manufacturing jobs have been growing scarce and new home construction has lagged. The tax credit prompted many of those firms to switch to offering residential solar-energy installation. There are now ten thousand solar businesses in the country, located in every state and employing about a quarter of a million people. The tax credit helped them by turning householders who may have been wary of the unfamiliarity—and the cost—of solar power into more or less confident buyers.
My wife and I were just such householders. Last summer, we installed a solar tracker on our home, in rural New Hampshire; it’s an array consisting of twenty solar panels, mounted on a galvanized steel frame and pylon and connected to a smart piston, which rotates and pivots throughout the day, following the sun. Our tracker was designed to produce, on average, just under ten thousand kilowatt-hours per year. That’s about what our home consumed in 2017 and 2018. The fully installed system cost more than thirty thousand dollars—a serious investment. And one might think that New Hampshire is hardly a place to invest in solar energy, given the long winters of short days. We did, until we looked more closely at the numbers.
In New Hampshire, the winter months normally see a spike in demand for natural gas for heating, which tends to drive up electricity prices. The average price of a kilowatt-hour is about twenty cents for residential customers, which is among the highest in the nation, owing in part to the cold. So our total annual cost for delivered power (ten thousand times twenty cents) is about two thousand dollars—a hundred and sixty-seven dollars a month. Our tracker, we figured, would compensate us for this sum by replacing much of the electricity that we’d normally have to buy in the winter and by allowing us to sell excess power to the utility company in the summer, albeit at a rate slightly lower than what we’d have paid for it. It would take about sixteen years to pay off the system; with the tax credit, however, it would be paid off in eleven years. After that, the power would be free.
Sixteen—or even eleven—years may seem a long time for older homeowners, like us, but the logic of the investment is even clearer if, like us, they borrow to buy the installation. In our case, the question was do we keep paying a hundred and sixty-seven dollars to the utility company, or do we install solar technology and pay monthly installments to the bank? How much would we pay the bank? If we repaid the loan at the standard five per cent, over sixteen years, the monthly payment would be slightly less than two hundred and forty dollars—seventy dollars more per month. The tax credit, however, brings the tracker’s all-in cost down to slightly more than twenty-two thousand dollars—a monthly payment of a hundred and sixty-seven dollars, or exactly the actual cost of power. (There is also an added sum for the mortgage-interest deduction.) The credit meant that we could do something for the planet, the local bank, local business, and our community and pay not a dime more.
However, the most striking benefit of the tracker came into focus when the crew from Granite State Solar arrived in late June to install it. A dozen men (all men, in this case) showed up at eight in the morning, distributed in a convoy of three large trucks and an enclosed pickup: one hauling vehicle carried the racking, pylon, and panels; another carried an excavator, to dig a trench for the wiring; the third brought a skid steer, to drill a hole for the pylon and close up the trench; and the pickup brought the managing electricians. Within minutes, the electricians got out of their truck and called the crew together, like officers planning to take a hill.