prints, jazz and community practice?

Remember that A snot-addled, animated wander through San Francisco I wrote a little while ago? Well the Riverwalk Jazz people read it and thought it was so great they did their own show on San Francisco jazz.

You know that’s a joke, right? Good, just checking.

Anyways, it’s an interesting episode, and the highlight is of course the live material by Jim Cullum’s band.

Above image is from the RWJ page linked above, and they credit it with “Handbill for Turk Murphy Band at Earthquake McGoon’s, San Francisco. Image courtesy oldhandbills.com”. Here’s the direct link they forgot to add. I think this handbill is actually the most interesting part of this story, mostly because I’m a nut for promotional ephemera, particularly the sort that involves some sort of creative work. I’m very interested in Redback Graphix, an Australian printing cooperative business with radical political roots that I remember from the 80s in Queensland, and I’m also a big fan of 1920s art prints as well. And then I do have a passion for 70s, 80s and 90s music PR posters and print making. Here is where I’m tempted to insert a sad little whinge about digital media sucking the life out of print media and art, but that would be ridiculous, because digital media has brought me things like that Old Handbills website, digital archives of Australian prints, and of course lots of new ideas and information about printing.

NB While I’m crapping on about RWJ, I have to say, again, how very disappointed I was by their bullshit work on women in jazz history for Women’s History Month this year (and last year). Just one story, out of a month’s worth, on the topic, and the same boring old musicians. Even I managed more, and I’m hardly a jazz historian, and certainly don’t have their resources to draw on.

Euthanasia, ‘disability’ and human rights

I’ve read two interesting pieces about Peter Singer this week. Harriet McBryde Johnson’s 2003 piece is deeply moving Unspeakable Conversations and Stella Young’s piece The case against Peter Singer from today is a response to his recent visit to Australia.

Twitter was alive this week during Singer’s spot on Q&A (Big Ideas and Big Society: Euthanasia), and I’m extra glad I have so many crip activists in my feed to keep things real.

I’m going to simplify complex issues here, with my next comment. Perhaps the most powerful point made during this discussion was that living with debilitating or full-on medical or physical conditions is so challenging not just because these conditions are so full-on, but because our society(s) don’t recognise and protect the basic human rights of these individuals. That’s why so many disabled people live below the poverty line, consider suicide and generally get a crap deal. If our society was more enlightened, and aggressively pursued and defended basic human rights for all of us (including exploring options like the NDIS), then Singer wouldn’t feel justified in making the arguments he does. Or, as McBryde Johnson puts it (with greater eloquence):

What worries me most about the proposals for legalized assisted suicide is their veneer of beneficence — the medical determination that, for a given individual, suicide is reasonable or right. It is not about autonomy but about nondisabled people telling us what’s good for us.

… I argue that choice is illusory in a context of pervasive inequality. Choices are structured by oppression. We shouldn’t offer assistance with suicide until we all have the assistance we need to get out of bed in the morning and live a good life. Common causes of suicidality — dependence, institutional confinement, being a burden — are entirely curable.