|
|
|
|
Radwanski's Ramblings... Check out my new digs It's only taken me three months to get around to it, but it's finally time to shift operations over to the site that's paying my bills. So from now on, blogging will be here - that's macleans.ca/radwanski, for those who want to commit it to memory. Nothing much will change, except that I'll be blogging a lot more often. And I'll probably keep plugging other Macleans.ca content, because I happen to think it's pretty good. Word games What jumped out at me in Kady O'Malley's wrapup of Stephen Harper's assorted end-of-year interviews was, disappointingly enough, a quote about Quebec's status. I'm bored with this issue...you're bored with this issue...by this point, Gilles Duceppe must be bored with this issue. But I'm beginning to get the sense we're not going to get past it. In this case, it wasn't even Harper's discussion of his "nation" motion - more confused than offensive - that bothered me. It was, of all things, a quote about the environment - or at least, why we suddenly care about the environment. That would be, according to the PM, because everything else is going so swimmingly. Or, as he put it: "Things are going well for Canada and for Quebec." Maybe I'm nitpicking here. But does anyone else find it at all strange to have the Prime Minister referring to Canada and a province therein as two separate entities? Identity crisis averted Wow, it sure is a good thing Ted Morton didn't win the Alberta Conservative leadership. Because just imagine what a freak-out Ezra would've had about his dual Canada-U.S. citizenship. Unless I'm missing something, of course. Redirect The analysis I wrote in Montreal over the weekend will turn up around here, sooner or later. But if I just put it here, then those of you who are breathlessly awaiting it but haven't yet discovered the joys of Macleans.ca would miss out on all the great work our other writers were doing. So, instead, I'm going to send you here for all of it at once. Some of it is a bit dated, since it was live coverage of the weekend's festivities. But read their other stuff - get in the habit of reading it, even - and thank me later. Don't know the past, you don't know the future The other night, a couple of hours after Dion won, Maclean's Ottawa bureau chief John Geddes recalled the endless parade of commentators who insisted that a party led by Jean Chretien would never win seats in Quebec. It's probably best just to let John recall what happened: "A few days before election day in 1993, I took a swing through Quebec, mostly with Jean Chretien’s campaign, but on my own at times. At that point in the campaign, many Quebec pundits were predicting that Chretien would not win back his old Saint-Maurice riding, where voters were regarded as having a powerful sovereigntist, or at least nationalist, sentiment. Members of the francophone media told me with great confidence that the old federalist fighter would lose his own seat. It would be a poignant story on election night. "But I walked around Shawinigan one afternoon with a French-speaking friend to get my own sense of the mood. We asked everybody we met — patrons in a coffee shop, a guy pumping gas — which way they would vote. Unscientific, of course, but they all said they’d vote for Chretien. Every last one. I remember a women who was working in a gift and book shop leaning forward over the counter and, in a mock conspiratorial whisper, confessing that she supported the federal Liberals. "Of course Chretien won..." I'm not saying Dion is beloved in his home province, nor that the Liberals are about to have a major breakthrough there. But John's experience is something to keep in mind when you're reading, say, today's Chantal Hebert column. Beware nationalists (or quasi-nationalists) who purport to speak for all Quebecers. Especially when they're describing a guy who entered an eight-way contest with 30% of the Quebec votes as "not even the last choice of the vast majority of Quebec delegates" - not to mention relying on Denis Coderre as an example of anything other than his own self-interest. I'm not MIA...honest Yes, I'm in Montreal for the Liberal extravaganza. Yes, I know you're insanely jealous. Yes, I'm blogging it for your edification. But no, I'm not doing it here. Allow me to introduce you to the Maclean's Liberal leadership blog. As of right now, it looks slightly like the Aaron Wherry Liberal leadership blog. But sooner or later, the rest of us will give him a run for his money. If there really is a God, Tim Murphy will be the MC I keep being asked what I think the Liberals' Martin tribute on Thursday night is going to be like. So allow me to provide the short answer. If it's organized by the party itself, it'll be restrained, tasteful, slightly awkward and quite excruciatingly boring. But if it's being left to the remaining Martin loyalists to fill out the program, it's going to be phenomenal. Okay, so this is the new Captain Canada I'll confess a slight suspicion that Gerard Kennedy might not have done this if it wasn't the only way for him to get the national media to stop ignoring him. But at this point, I don't much care. Stephane Dion wimped out, presumably because he doesn't feel like being serenaded with vendu (or whatever equivalent Ignatieff's supporters would've thrown at him). Kennedy has stepped into the void. And having been telling people for months that he deserves to be taken seriously, I have to admit I'm pretty glad to see it. (Incidentally, does anyone else find it a bit weird that Canada seems to be going through one of these existential crises every time the Liberals have a competitive leadership? Granted, one of the candidates didn't start Meech Lake like Ignatieff started this mess, but still.) "Let's not be so frightened, Evan" Even if they agree with his ruminations on Quebec nationalism - in which case they deserve what they get, but that's beside the point - Michael Ignatieff's interview with Evan Solomon should be enough to convince any Liberals who still need convincing that he's not the guy for them. As a general rule, it's pretty much impossible to win an election talking down to people. The really smart politicians (think Bill Clinton) know that they have to talk to the rest of us as equals. The slightly less smart ones (think Michael Ignatieff) spend all their time trying to prove how smart they are. Then again, I also kind of enjoyed Nelly Furtado Back from Winnipeg, barely, having completed my annual Grey Cup bender. If you're dying to hear about our various adventures there - and who isn't, really? - I'll direct you to the usual place. In the meanwhile, I'm going to ponder the deeper significance of having enjoyed the completely ridiculous Rolling Stones cover band at the Saskatchewan party considerably more than I enjoyed the actual Rolling Stones the last time they played Toronto. Democracy in action Given Michael Ignatieff's performance since the DSMs, there's been plenty of speculation as to how many of his delegates will take their votes elsewhere on the second ballot (after being required to vote for their candidate on the first one). But here's another question, which will affect all the candidates on second ballot: How many of their delegates were really theirs in the first place? One of the common tricks for leadership conventions is to run "dummy" delegates - i.e. delegates who are elected to support a rival candidate, but actually plan to vote for yours. If, for instance, Bob Rae has little support in a riding, he might have one of his supporters claim to be an Ignatieff backer, get elected as such, and then vote Rae on the second ballot. It's awfully cheap, but it's also inevitable wherever unscrupulous organizers are to be found. And this being a Liberal leadership, you know there are plenty of them - which is why the "dummy" rumours are already out there. Hey, why have trials at all? The Globe reports today that MADD is happy about the Tories' crackdown on driving while high. This is neither surprising nor unreasonable; operating a vehicle after smoking something that dulls your reflexes is pretty stupid. But buried toward the bottom is an update on what else Andrew Maurie, the top "mother," is up to: "MADD is talking to MPs, especially Justice Minister Vic Toews, about preventing people who have been charged with drunk driving from presenting testimonial evidence that puts doubts in judges' minds." Now, let me get this straight. If you're accused of rape or murder, you get to present evidence - testimonial or otherwise - in your defence. But for drunk drivers, we're going to throw out the principles (something about the right to a fair trial) that our justice system revolves around? These people aren't mothers, and they're against a lot more than drunk driving. But they're certainly zealots of the first order. Mega-housekeeping I've been extremely lax about updating content in these parts. Blame it on spending more time worrying about websites I'm actually paid to worry about. That said, it's time to spruce things up over here. Over in the archives, you'll now find my final entry as a Post columnist (on Jack Layton) and a one-off op-ed I did for the Post last month (on Gerard Kennedy). And over in the music section, there's my interview with Art Brut and a review (with interview bits spliced in) of The Hold Steady's recent show at the Horseshoe. As for the actual blogging, I promise to get back to a regular routine soon. Honest. How does it taste when you're swallowing yourself? I probably forfeited my right to complain about iheartmusic's annual
"Hottest Bands in Canada" list, since I failed to submit my list despite
repeat reminders. (If you haven't noticed from the lack of blogging, it's
been a little busy.) And I really do admire Matthew's effort to get people
talking, and to promote Canadian music. But the results are a little
depressing, aren't they? For a brief period there, the Canadian indie scene seemed to have hit
upon something really fresh and exciting and different. And the more you
look at lists like this, the more you realize that pretension has come to be
valued above all else. Final Fantasy atop the list was pretty predictable. But in what universe
are Final Fantasy, Destroyer and Sunset Rubdown (an offshoot of Wolf Parade)
the three hottest bands in Canada? In what universe do most people listen to
all the stuff released this year, and conclude that these were the
albums they most enjoyed? In what universe are Metric and Emily Haines combined less "hot"
than Islands - a band that seems like it was designed by people sitting
around a boardroom trying to come up with something suitably indie to
appease bloggers? And in what universe is mainstream success such a negative
that filling increasingly large venues prompts commenters to conclude that
you're "losing steam fast"? In what universe is k-os, the rare mainstream artist with almost
impeccable artistic credentials, less "hot" than something called Swan
Lake? I'm aware of the dangers of reading too much into what a collection of bloggers - the snobbiest of music snobs - has to say about who's "hot," which is a fairly vague concept open to interpretation. But these are the people who claimed (and deserved) considerable credit for advancing the indie scene in the first place. And so there's something a little depressing about watching their respond to that advancement by turning on any act with a modicum of broad appeal. The more you know... Knowing what we knew of the B.C. Liberals three years ago, it wasn't all that hard to believe that something genuinely untoward had merited the much-publicized raid on the provincial legislature. Knowing what we know of the RCMP now, it's not all that hard to believe defence allegations that it was the Mounties who were doing stuff that was untoward. Reason #862 I prefer living in Toronto: We have Ricky, they have Peter and Belinda I spent yesterday on one of those one-day in-and-out trips to Ottawa, which ironically meant I had less time to pay attention to what was going on in the capital than I do when I'm in Toronto. But on my drive home from the airport, I chanced upon something much more interesting - an hour-long in-studio radio interview with Ricky Williams. To read print interviews with Ricky - even Linda Frum's completely uncritical piece in last weekend's Post - is to get a pretty one-dimensional perspective on him. Having read far too many of them, I'd have expected him to be so introspective as to be almost incoherent. But much as that was the case when the hosts tried to pin him down on his future, on other topics - from his college days to the differences between the CFL and NFL to the cultural merits of Toronto - he was lucid, candid and more insightful than 99% of other athletes would be. (He also apparently likes Family Guy, which I really didn't see coming.) Ricky's stint with the Argos has been a little less than dominant, to say the least. But the guy is such a fascinating and utterly likeable character that it might just have been worth it anyway. Department of the obvious Well, duh. Just in case you've been in withdrawal While the Volpe campaign has still provided its share of amusement, it's
not been quite as entertaining since the glorious Volpe-Karygiannis tag-team
met its tragic end. In fact, Jimmy K has been oddly silent these past couple
of months, possibly because at least one - and possibly several - of the
other leadership camps have declined his services. I'm not saying that's necessarily going to change in the near future. It
might well be that rumours of some unpleasant business on an upcoming
edition of W-Five are nothing more than that. But if they're true,
our next fix of Jimmy K might just be the best one yet. A night well spent Supposedly, the Leafs are a much more promising team than last year's
edition. Toronto media rules dictate that such stories be written in the
first year of a coach's tenure, regardless of the actual results; likewise,
Maurice could lead the Leafs to a significantly better record four years
from now, and have Damien Cox writing columns every second day explaining
why the Leafs' refusal to fire him shows why they're not serious about
winning. Anyway, it's possible the Leafs are better this year - I just
haven't seen it. I seem to have knack for only watching their most
unwatchable games, so fittingly my first visit to the ACC this year was for
last night's stinker against the Sens. When you realize ten minutes in that
you've wasted your money, you have to find ways to make the rest of the game
at least moderately interesting. Consequently, I offer a few invaluable
observations: 1.) The whole "kiss-cam" thing is pretty tired by this point. But
occasionally, it still pays off. Those occasions most certainly include last
night's shot of a thoroughly irritated Dash Domi shaking his head as the
blond woman next to him fled the scene. 2.) The love affair with Bryan McCabe is officially over. He'll be
getting booed - deservedly so - within the next few weeks if his play
doesn't improve. Which kind of makes you wonder whether the GM who just
handed him a massive contract with a no-trade clause really deserves that
contract extension of his own just yet. 3.) When attending a terrible hockey game, it's always best to sit
next to a pissed-off Eastern European. I probably would've left earlier if
not for the endlessly entertaining stream of invective next to me -
highlights of which included "They are stupid! They have holes in their
head!" and "It's okay to lose - not okay to play like assholes!", along with
the slightly curious "Come on Kilger - kill!" Oh, and he really hated
McCabe. 4.) I generally find the iconic status afforded to Tim Horton's a
little embarrassing. But say this much - it's the only franchise I've seen
that doesn't jack up its prices in a stadium or arena. Consequently, I was
extremely excited to find that my medium coffee cost $1.24 - approximately
$28 less than a beer. And yes, the fact that I was buying coffee tells you
something about what kind of game it was. Elect at our peril I've generally been of the mindset that, while I have no idea who'd get my vote if I were a Liberal, I'd love to see Ignatieff win the leadership because he'd be the most fun to cover. But the more we see stuff like
this, the more that anyone concerned with the well-being of the country has to hope that he loses. He's a bright guy, a sharp intellect, and someone I'd love to have dinner with. But he needs to be as far from power as possible. Drink and gamble safely Gerry Phillips - who, I should probably admit, employs several friends - is having rather a busy week. The good news is, there's this. I never really understood the ban on carrying drinks into the washroom, and even I felt a little weird leaving mine sitting there unattended - so I can only imagine how women felt. (According to Christie Blatchford, mind you, their unwillingness to subject themselves to date rape will now make them feel like sissies.) On the downside, there's this. I'll grant that those late-night online gambling ads targeting seniors are creepy. But how can the provincial government make hundreds of millions of dollars off casinos ? casinos that advertise constantly - while banning a company like Bowman?s from promoting itself? It?s one thing to oppose gambling altogether; as it is, the government is just protecting its monopoly. Speaking of vices... I'm not a Brett Favre fan. I'm fairly convinced, in fact, that he'll go down as one of the most overrated players in football history. But I like him a lot better after this. When you're part of NFL royalty, it takes some intestinal fortitude to stand up for a down-and-out dude like Koren Robinson. I'm much more impressed by this than how much Favre loves to play football. Speaking of football... I caught an episode of Friday Night Lights the other night. If reviews are to be believed, it paints a reasonably accurate portrait of how high school football fits into small-town America. If so, small-town America is ever weirder than I previously thought. The requisite Liberal leadership post Because of a family commitment, I didn't get to watch yesterday's leadership debate live. But near as I can tell, the general consensus is that Ignatieff bombed, Rae scored, Dion showed some welcome passion but may have gotten a little overheated, and Kennedy - well, Kennedy was good, but so was Scott Brison and one is only slightly more relevant to the race than the other. This doesn't surprise me, because pretty much every time I mention Kennedy in conversation - especially if it's with someone from Ottawa - I get brushed off. But it does confuse me. I'm not here to shill for Gerard, because I'm far from sure he's the best candidate. I mean, I didn't even support him to be the Ontario leader, and this is a slightly bigger pond. But I don?t understand what exactly the guy currently sitting in third place has done to disqualify himself. The main knocks on Kennedy are that (a) he lacks federal experience; (b) his French is sub-par; and (c) he's not on the map in Quebec. With the possible exception of that last one (based on the turnout at the delegate selection meetings, none of these guys are on the map in Quebec), these are all valid and potentially fatal flaws. But they're no more valid and no more potentially fatal than those of his competitors. The frontrunner, who's busy self-destructing, was out of the country for 30 years, supported the Iraq war and has a propensity for saying things so stupid that Stockwell Day would shake his head in bemusement. The second-place contestant was recently a New Democrat, was arguably the most unsuccessful premier in modern Ontario history, and has taken on such a chilly persona (skinny-dipping TV appearances notwithstanding) that he's lost most of his charm. And the gentleman currently sitting behind Kennedy speaks very shaky English, has failed to resonate outside Quebec, and makes Stephen Harper's charisma look Trudeauesque by comparison. Do these flaws supercede Kennedy's? Possibly not. But to suggest that Kennedy's flaws so supercede these that he should be disqualified from the race is a little much, no? Best animated video since that cat turned up with Paula Abdul I can?t possibly see myself buying Oasis' new best-of, since I already have all the tracks elsewhere. But if for no other reason, the compilation is to be celebrated for bringing us this video for The Masterplan - possibly the best song Noel Gallagher's written, even though it was inexplicably a b-side. I'd rarely suggest that music videos can qualify as art, but this animated one comes awfully close. (For the record, that was via Stereogum. And also via Stereogum, we get this account of an unfortunate incident involving Two Gallants, who eleven nights earlier put on one of Toronto's best shows of the year at the Horseshoe.) This is totally going to validate Chuck Klosterman's career When asked last year about my favourite books, I volunteered that Chuck Klosterman's Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs topped my most overrated list. I guess I have to stand by that, since I haven't reread it since. But having just finished his subsequent tome, Killing Yourself to Live, I feel obligated to concede that I rather thoroughly enjoyed it. It's not that Klosterman - who, for the uninitiated, is probably North America's best-known and most influential music writer - doesn't remain almost insufferably self-indulgent. Also, I maintain that his attempt to attach cultural relevance to Saved By the Bell was a total failure. But when he's got some smidgeon of focus - and Killing Yourself to Live's narrative of his own cross-country roadtrip does that for him - he's awfully good at turning random observations into cogent analysis of modern culture. This is where it's time for some full disclosure. See, on Friday night around 9:45, I found myself relating to Klosterman more than ever before. This was because, having invited a group of people over for 8:30, we were still sitting around waiting for the first one of them to show up. Once they did (en masse between 9:55 and 10:10), it was all very enjoyable. But leading up to it, I kept thinking of Klosterman's complaint of our society's bizarre relationship with time. In all honesty, had I been invited to a shindig beginning at 8:30, I probably would've considered how to ensure I got there once the party was already going without being grotesquely late - and turned up at 10:00 p.m. But when you think about it, our whole concept of time is insane. To borrow from Chuck, who claims to actually turn up on time for stuff: "In America, parties that are supposed to start at 9:00 P.M. actually start at 10:00 P.M. However, rock concerts that are supposed to start at 9:00 P.M. actually start at 9:45. Movies that are scheduled for 9:00 P.M. don't begin until 9:09. Sporting events set for 9:00 P.M. begin at 9:05. However, television shows that are set for 9:00 P.M. do start at 9:00 P.M., unless they're being broadcast on TBS. So what's crazier: That I show up for things when they're supposed to begin, or that everyone else in the entire world has somehow come to accept that every activity operated within its own unspoken, individual schedule? How is everyone else's wrongness understood to be right? I should probably acknowledge that I'm very, very rarely on time, even when I should be. But sitting there on Friday night pondering what a loser I'd look like to the first person who got to our place, who'd find me 90 minutes into my alleged party waiting pathetically for everyone else to show up, it occurred to me that Klosterman may have more to offer than I'd previously suspected. Fun with roleplaying Monday October 9, 2006 What everyone comes here for - last week's football news Based on my limited exposure to him, the Gazette's Jack Todd might just be the worst sports columnist in the country - a guy so busy resting on his laurels as Montreal's sole prominent anglophone sports pundit that he neglects to ever bring anything fresh or insightful to the table. But say this much for him: At least he's honest. It's a fairly shameful tendency of sportwriters to run otherwise successful coaches out of town for failing to be sufficiently deferential to them. Consider, for instance, that the same guy who made an impassioned plea for Mike Murphy to keep his job after leading the Leafs to two straight non-playoff seasons spent much of Pat Quinn's tenure calling for him to be fired - even when, as the immediate successor to Murphy, he'd taken the Leafs to the playoffs every season. But rarely are they half as open about it as Todd was in his celebratory column following Don Matthews' departure as the Alouettes' head coach last week. I've yet to meet any fan who particularly cares if coaches show "contempt" for reporters, so long as they produce wins. So the next time they let guys like Todd influence public sentiment toward their team of choice, they'd do well to consider what motivates them. And yes, I know there's something in here somewhere about Stephen Harper's relationship with the press gallery. But it's Thanksgiving. Let's go eat some turkey, watch some football and worry about politics another day. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiThursday October 5, 2006 On second thought... In my hasty post-"superweekend" analysis, I may have jumped the gun on one front. As I keep being told, including by Gerard Kennedy's supporters, my theory that he targeted less Liberal-heavy ridings to maximize his resources doesn't quite hold up - not when Quebec, where he basically doesn't exist, apparently had the worst turnout for the delegate selection meetings. Congratulations to those who spotted my clever test to see who was paying attention. The rest of you failed miserably. Shame. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiA quick cure for hockey fever Having just started a new job and all, I was a little worried that the start of the Leafs season would prove a bit of a distraction. Luckily, there's clearly no reason to worry about that. After last night's season opener, my appetite has already been significantly dampened. Losing I can deal with. But there's no excuse for being so damn boring. Then again, there's also no excuse for coming out of a month-long training camp with a power-play unit featuring John Pohl, Jeff O'Neill and Bates friggin' Battaglia. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiTuesday October 3, 2006 For those who thought All These Things I've Done was too restrained I have a certain affinity for the Killers. See, back in '04, the Post ran an occasional feature called "Next Up," wherein I (or Wherry, I think) would profile a band about to break. For the most part, my guesses haven't quite hit the jackpot just yet (Hope of the States, anyone?). But I did correctly peg the Killers just before Somebody Told Me took over the airwaves, which arguably stands as my sole qualification as a music critic. What really fascinates me, though, is their transformation in little more than two years. When I met Brandon Flowers at the Mod Club, he was shy, soft-spoken and frankly seemed a little overwhelmed by the relatively modest success they'd had to that point. Following that, he somehow became a full-fledged trash-talking meterosexual rock star. And now, he and his bandmates have delivered the most ridiculously over-the-top album since...well, I'm not really sure since when. Sam's Town suffers from a bit of the Coldplay problem - when every song is written and recorded like a single, nothing really stands out and it all becomes a bit tiring. Mind you, if you're looking for faults, you're probably best to start with the fact that the whole thing is completely ridiculous - a heaping pile of Americana that sounds like some insane combination of Springsteen, Queen, New Order and Meat Loaf, made by a band that wants to be the next U2. That being said...deep breath...I kinda dig it. A band like the Killers, which is basically the invention of a bored Mormon kid who decided to become a British rock star, is supposed to offer escapist fun - something that Sam's Town indisputably qualifies as. And even if it's spectacularly bad - which it just might be - at least their attempt at conquering the world is more interesting than X&Y was. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiMonday October 2, 2006 If you're here for music stuff, skip over this post at all costs The biggest surprise coming out of the Liberals' "superweekend" (a term, incidentally, that makes me feel like an enormous loser every time I use it) seems to be Gerard Kennedy's relatively strong showing - either third or fourth, more or less even with Stephane Dion, and very much in the game. Or what I really should say is that it seems to be what's most surprising people. Having been giving Kennedy a decent shot for months (and getting a lot of skeptical looks for my trouble), I'm not all that shocked. It's true that Kennedy doesn't have the national profile of the others. But national profile doesn't mean a hell of a lot when it comes to leadership races - as evidenced by Ken Dryden's mighty 4.7% share of delegates at last check. What matters is having good organizers and using them properly, which Kennedy appears to have done. Kennedy's strategy for the delegate selection meetings, rumoured months ago, was pretty obvious. Rather than spreading resources thin in hope of picking up delegates here and there, his campaign concentrated on select areas where a relatively small number of votes would pay dividends. That explains why he was completely off the map in Quebec. And it equally explains why his best showing was in Alberta - a province that has fewer Liberals per capita than any other. Considering that he's unlikely to get too many of the undeclared ex-officio delegates, and that none of the lower candidates seem likely to go to him (with the possible exception of Martha Hall Findlay, who has too few delegates to matter), Kennedy's probably still going to be off the ballot before Ignatieff, Rae or Dion. But he's got a shot, which is as much as he could've hoped for. And he might just have run the smartest campaign so far. A couple of other observations, with full disclosure that I spent a lot more time this weekend watching football games than watching delegate selection meetings: Thursday September 28, 2006 Random music notes (with bonus party dog) In fact, as anyone who saw them last year would've expected, Kasabian's show last night at the Phoenix was just about the closest you'll come in this city to a British concert experience. To some, that's probably just as well. But much as I could've done without the close contact with people who were even sweatier than I was, I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed myself. Monday September 25, 2006 The x-rated column the censors don't want you to see Last week, I wrote what would've been my final column for the Post - a (rather positive) reflection on my four years there. The Post opted not to run it, on the basis that it prefers to avoid farewell columns, good or bad. Fair enough - I knew in advance that might be the case, and it doesn't change the fact that I left on pretty good terms. But there was a broader point I was trying to make, which I think is still worth throwing out there. And besides, the column was intended partly as a tribute to the people I worked directly with at the Post, so if nobody else at least they'll probably find it worth reading. Hopefully, it's not quite as self-indulgent as it sounds. You can have a look for yourself here. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiThursday September 21, 2006 Who taught you to vote like that? It's not quite as much fun as Wherry's account, but my wrapup of Polaris night (from yesterday's Post) is now here. Now, once you're done that (I'm assuming you're having a slow day), give my Sloan piece a read. And while you're doing so, ask yourself this: Does Never Hear the End of It, which is deservedly getting rave reviews, have a chance of getting a Polaris nomination next year? And if not, why not? If that's too much work, you can just have fun spotting Chris Murphy's thinly veiled shot at Broken Social Scene (hint: it's toward the end). >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiWednesday September 20, 2006 Long live the National Post A couple of weeks ago, I started telling people that I was leaving the Post to take a job at Maclean's (as Managing Editor, Macleans.ca). Since then, I've been hearing a familiar refrain: "Good thing you're leaving, because who knows how long the Post will be around." I say it's familiar because I've been hearing versions of the same thing since I started at the Post more than four years ago. I've generally avoided commenting, because it seems unprofessional. But on my last day in Don Mills, I feel obliged to say something. See, here's what you need to understand: The National Post isn't going anywhere. It remains, despite the bodies it's shed over the years, a pretty dynamic work environment. It's in much better shape than it was a couple of years ago. And most importantly, it's a good newspaper, run by good and committed people - people who deserve better than to be told constantly by smug naysayers with no idea what they're talking about that they'll soon be out of work. For the record, I'm not leaving because of any lack of faith in the paper, nor because of any distaste for it. I have a great deal of fondness for the Post, and particularly for the people who work there. I'm leaving for the reason most people leave jobs - because there's a new challenge somewhere else that I'm keen to take on. That's it. That's all. And I'll defend the National Post as vigorously as ever the next time someone tells me it's going down. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiNow who looks dirty? As others have already pointed out, arguably the most despicable aspect of the Maher Arar debacle was that the RCMP (and to a lesser extent CSIS) steadfastly refused to acknowledge their mistake when he was finally returned to Canada, opting instead to try - and fail - to prove his guilt. So I feel obliged to highlight my own limited experience on this front. Working where I've worked, I've encountered my fair share of staunchly conservative journalists. And in the past couple of years, more than one has interjected himself into a conversation about Arar's treatment to insist that, contrary to what we've all heard, the guy is "dirty." Their basis for saying so? Their intelligence friends have told them so. No actual evidence. No specific allegations. Just some innuendo strategically dispered so people they knew would buy it hook, line and sinker - and pass it on to others. I don't really fault my colleagues so much. True, they heard what they wanted to hear. But their main mistake was believing that we live in a world in which you can generally trust the men and women charged with defending our security to tell you the truth. Clearly, you can't. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiSunday September 17, 2006 Three cheers for unpredictability A couple of weeks ago, singing the praises of Who Taught You to Live Like That in the Post, I wrote that recent history suggested Sloan's new single would be surrounded by a lot of filler on their new album. After all, that had been the pattern with pretty much everything they'd released since Navy Blues. Happily, it seems I grossly underestimated them. Never Hear the End of It - with a slightly insane 30 tracks spread over 75 minutes - is the sound of a band that's broken free from routine and is thoroughly energized by it. If you'd given up on Sloan, give them another shot. This is the best thing they've done since One Chord to Another. >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiRadwanski's Ramblings from September 1-14, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 18-31, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 4-17, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 21-August 3, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 7-20, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 23-July 6, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 9-22, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 12-June 8, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 28-May 11, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 14-27, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 7-13, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 24-April 6, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 10-23, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from February 24-March 9, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from February 10-23, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from February 3-9, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 27-February 2, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 20-26, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 13-19, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 30, 2005-January 12, 2006 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 16-29, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 2-15, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 18-December 1, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 4-17, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 28-November 3, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 21-27, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 7-20, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 23-October 6, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 9-22, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 2-8, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 19-September 1, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 5-18, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 22-August 4, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 15-21, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 8-14, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 1-7, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 24-30, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 16-23, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 10-16, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 3-9, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 20-June 2, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 13-19, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 29-May 12, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 22-28, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 8-21, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 1-7, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 25-31, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 18-24, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 11-17, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from February 25-March 10, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from February 11-24, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 28-February 10, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 14-27, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 31, 2004-January 13, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 17-30, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 3-16, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 19-December 2, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 5-18, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 22-November 4, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 8-21, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 24-October 7, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 17-23, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 3-16, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 20-September 2, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 6-19, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 23-August 5, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 16-22, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 9-15, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 25-July 8, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 18-24, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 11-17, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 4-10, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 28-June 3, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 21-27, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 14-20, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 7-13, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 23-May 6, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 16-22, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 9-15, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 2-8, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 26-April 1, 2004 All rights reserved. |