"After Dracula - the 1930s Horror Film" by Alison Peirse

Fascinating read and collection of inspired essays about 1930s Horror movies beyond "Dracula" - author is a known University lecturer and her intention was apparently to scratch under the surface and to point at other movies made in aftermath of "Dracula" success, many of different directors, actors and film-makers in general who worked in than-new genre still uncluttered with what today we recognize as formulaic.  Peirse purposely avoids any discussion about "Dracula" since tons of material was already written about it and goes on into detailed analysis of its successors, like "Mummy", "Island of Lost Souls", "The Black Cat', "White Zombie" and such.

Author's love for these old movies is infectious and I found myself making notes and making my own Internet research immediately - not to mention getting back to movies that I already have in my collection, as "The Black Cat" where Peirse interestingly points at importance of architecture (modern architecture seems to have been accepted at work places but people still prefer traditional-style houses, on the screen modern architecture is significant as a sign of something decadent and dangerous) or use of classical music (negative characters love classical music). Perhaps the most interesting is insight about lesser known British Horror production of 1930s and how British cinematography in general was seen as something amateurish and provincial compared to far more advanced Hollywood (even American guest stars in British production would often give disparaging comments about their experiences when "on loan" in UK) - did you know that Brits actually had "Wolf Man" long before Americans made it to the screen? Yes, "Werewolf of London" was made some six years before famous, now classic "The Wolf Man". The book has seven chapters and I would gladly have double amount of this, its really enlightening and inspiring read.

A heathen on Christmas Mass

As I am spending my vacation in this little mountain village, I am perfectly happy being on my own though whenever I meet locals I am always nice to them and greet them politely - they are simply folk, minding their own business, tending to their little houses, gardens, cows and what not, its not my intention to show as condescending because we share different perspectives or experiences - in fact, they might be perfectly happy living in their own isolated, quaint world that has not changed for generations and had not been spoiled with commercialism. So when my friends returned for Christmas and went to a local church for a midnight mass, I tagged along out of curiosity, wishing to share this particular moment now at the end of 2013 (I am always sailing somewhere far and very rarely have this opportunity) and yes, somewhere deep inside I had childish expectation than maybe some divine grace will make me happy exactly than and there, at stroke of midnight.

Now, I must explain that I was child of Tito's Yugoslavia so back than, religion was considered something superstitious and backwards, reserved for uneducated village people and not for enlightened post-WW2 society that strove towards academic education. Surely, communism was very strong and made a point of not exactly legally forbidding religion but making it somehow underground, it certainly wasn't welcomed among party members (I still remember our family having a Christmas tree but carefully hidden behind a thick window curtain) and there was a very intense anti-clerical propaganda with stories about selfish, cruel priests siding along with Nazis and enemies, which persist to this day and probably goes centuries back, since church members never paid taxes and lived nicely off donations no matter how much ordinary folks walked barefoot. Now communism is gone, Croatia is back to its historical Catholic nest and I see religion taking a serious upwards swing in society, though is it good or bad probably depends from point of view (sure, focus is on tradition and family but to me it sounds very much "us" against "them").

Anyhow, off we went, well fed after dinner and never ending mulled vine, right into a very crowded village church. Ordinary people everywhere, not particularly well dressed (except one lady with a intensely pink hat, who was very much talked about, she is not from here) and singing off-key so much that I started to wonder do they hear themselves at all, than came to conclusion "oh, she must have been singing harmony, that's it". To my biggest sadness and regret, it wasn't memorable or exceptional in any sense but in fact very boring, formal and obviously tedious to everybody around. Children were reciting some poetry with their little squeaky voices, music was dragging along too slow (nothing joyous but very monotonous), crowd had to sit & stand up too many times (until I found myself swearing under the breath and my friend laughed next to me) and elderly priest was going trough the motions, his long ramblings were simply tolerated with sympathy "because he is so old". I didn't feel God's presence and in fact was a little sad, because I thought to myself well if that's all there is (like Peggy Lee) I am not missing much. Where the fuck is this religion going if it all comes down to a bunch of people who visit church once a year and stand there bored to tears out of respect for tradition, just like their grandfathers did, repeating same words like lobotomised (I found it all very, very brainwashed and clearly designed to make people feel humble, meek and unworthy) and simply being there but not really wanting to be there? Just like a visit to a dentist. Nobody was excited or happy (except children and their parents) and clearly it was all a obligation - as for the sermon, I could improvise something out of my sleeve, far more interesting - at the very end, when congregation had to say "to God we thank" a man in front of me audibly sighed "thank God" and we giggled. When leaving the church, people were relieved and happily mingled at the entrance greeting each other, I found this quick meeting far more happy than anything else.

This was not my first Christmas mass ever - suddenly I remember myself visiting Cathedral in Zagreb as a teenager with friends because it was "cool" but nothing much else - however this time I saw it as a grown up man and was saddened that God's grace somehow escaped me without leaving any nice feeling about it. Strangely, I feel much closer and completely at ease with "God" when I'm alone at home than like this. I still like Christmas tree, gifts, music and having a friends around laughing and simply being together. Nothing wrong with Church itself (it was pretty decorated) or the locals (they were sweet) but repeating some medieval mumblings about beings with wings and meek, cuckolded Joseph accepting that his young wife got a baby by herself, well that was a bit much. I still think its a very nice way to cheer up people during cold December though not so sure about the whole package, we might as well jump over some open fire and burn occasional victim & dance around. I love my friends trough the whole year and occasionally give away to the poor when I'm inspired, not just once a year.

"Another side of Bob Dylan" (1964)

Musically not so much different than Dylan's previous albums (guitar, harmonica and occasional piano) but thematically decidedly "another side" since songs completely reject protest movement and focus completely on relationship issues in its various disguises - funny, angry, confused, lovelorn, disappointments, you name it, its all here. And you know what's funny? Though it had its share of criticism back than (for leaving social causes and going "mainstream") these songs are actually far more "evergreen" than perhaps earlier stuff (at least to my ears) as they communicate something we all can relate to - protest songs were awesome but in a distant, literary way while this this is something from right under the skin and we can recognise it as our own experiences. And its because it completely rejects any commercial aspects of recordings (plainspoken, simple technique, guitar-and-voice, that unrepentantly ugly-but-appealing voice) that it sounds so sincere even today, some half a century later.

I listen to these lyrics this morning and could just bow my head in awe - and shame that it took me so long to get my way around Dylan, but than we all come from so many different backgrounds and our tastes are shaped with numerous influences so obviously I took my time with something so brainy.

"Dylan covered" a 2005 Tribute album to Bob Dylan

A surprisingly decent tribute album, thanks to compilers who used imagination and avoided usual predictable choices - Bob Dylan is such a ubiquitous presence that at this point anybody could quickly make a Dylan-tape with eyes closed and hands tied. However, guys from "MOJO" magazine cleverly interspersed some old recordings from 1960s with completely new versions recorded specifically for this release and I must say these new recordings are most welcome breath of fresh air to Dylan's songbook. Sure, there's nothing wrong with Brian Auger, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Fairport Convention but they were echoes of their own time, new recordings amassed here bring their own aesthetics and production values - sure, maybe not gigantic difference from originals but recognisable and likable nevertheless. Maybe I could do without The Hollies and Nancy Sinatra as from today's perspective they sound insincere like little satellites jumping on a trend, however new tracks are really good and interesting.

This compilation tribute somehow really came to my hands unexpectedly this morning and I found myself enjoying it very much - found myself listening familiar lyrics again, recognising little twists and tweaks that artists added, thinking how I never really enjoyed Dylan's voice but love to hear his material sung by other performers. This is purely subjective of course, but I must point at Ben Weaver, Hugh Cornwell and Michael Weston King (whose "Simple Twist Of Fate" I really, really like) as favourites. In the 1990s there was a big trend of this tribute kind of albums, where recording companies experimented with all sorts of weird choices and gimmick was to see what could established stars do with other composers, but it was a gimmick and I rarely found such interesting listening like on this CD - maybe also because I am not familiar with these new voices so have no prejudice against them.

And you know what, I'm going back to originals now.

"The night of the hunter" (1955) by Charles Laughton

Since I love "film noir" and Robert Mitchum, I thought this must be one of those chilling masterpieces I should treat myself, so I dived into it absolutely unprepared.

During first 10 minutes I said to myself "wait, this is a very bad movie, what is this, Ed Wood?" - there was something very strange about script and the way story unravelled. And constantly during the movie I saw gaffs and occasional over-acting (scene in basement?) but I still watched mesmerised because it hypnotised me in a nightmarish way. It definitely wasn't what I expected and I am still unsure how to categorise this movie because it definitely is not "film noir" but some surrealistic dream that actually works very powerfully, I mean I still think about it much more than about many other movies. Than I went on line and found out its a recognised classic because of this "bad dream" quality, its not "film noir" at all but a art-movie of first order and everything was done intentionally. Ah, now I get it. Still strange how a thin line makes huge difference between Ed Wood and a classic.

Robert Mitchum is so perfect here as a serial killer (talking to himself and God, hating women obviously and being absolutely psychotic) that its impossible to imagine anybody else in this role. He dominates the story so much that its easy to overlook supporting cast that reminds me very much of citizen of "Frankestein" movies specially Mrs. Icey Spoon who is a perfect caricature of righteous busybody, later a scary monster herself. Shelley Winters does wonders with a fairly limited role but her repressed sexual hysteria/religious delusion is very powerful - there is a scene later in the movie where she doesn't talk at all and this is one of most unforgettable scenes in the whole movie, but I suggest you should see it for yourself. Alcoholic uncle Birdie Steptoe is somebody we expect would help the children and he does, thought not in a way we would expect. And than there is wonderful old-time actress Lilian Gish (star from silent era) in a quite epic role that seems like a perfect continuation of her earlier, sentimental work - it is a rare instance of actress finding perfect character definition of her career in later age. Children themselves are surprisingly good, they are not a cutesy Hollywood children but more like Hansel and Grethel of Depression era.

Visually, the movie is stunning, with true expressionistic look and lots of Freudian symbols all over. I understand it wasn't successful back than but gained a reputation with time and deservedly so, makes you wonder what else would director come up with if he had a chance. What would Hitchcock made out of this?

"A tiny bit marvelous" by Dawn French

Dawn French is one of those TV faces I am vaguely familiar with - always found her extremely funny but since I don't watch TV often (thanks to my job and my own superstition that its a demonic, soul-sucking invention) she was always somewhere in the corner of my eye as potentially entertaining. Than I find this book,her first novel.

I didn't want to like it. It was placed among bestsellers and had a note "extremely funny" which surely would put me off because in my imaginary world I like to think about myself as having very delicate, particular taste, contrary to long list of superficial fluff that points at completely opposite results. But curiosity got better of me and before I knew I was snorting with laughter right in the middle of bookshop (so much about my sophistication) and yes, dear reader, I bought it immediately.

It is a very Adrian Mole kind of novel, which means entertaining, funny and quick to read. A story about dysfunctional family or perhaps completely normal family, depends on point of view - if you ask me, there are far more people like Battle family than anything from postcard, just scratch the surface. Instead of private musings of Adrian Mole here we get peek into psychology of several different people who seemingly can't stand each other but stick together anyway, with lovely finale that gets reader all teary. Every character has a distinctive, recognizable voice and each of them is nutty in his own way, but we root for them because they are not just caricatures but reminds us of our own different chapters in life - how I shiver in terror when I remember myself during puberty - I don't understand why would anybody dislike this cute, little book, its very funny indeed and you can be sure that next time I will not think twice when I see Dawn French on cover.

Lola Novaković early recordings

Now this is a strange, little historical artifact - the very first single by girl who will soon became biggest female pop star in Ex Yu.
Late 1950s were years when lot of new pop singers appeared on a music scene and were mostly gracing stages of than-immensely popular pop festivals, our own version of not-so-distant San Remo. It is interesting fact that those festivals were firstly planned as presentation of composers and singers were actually secondary (often same song was sung in two different versions by different singers). Its very interesting to hear all those young guys and girls from todays perspective because one can clearly hear foreign influences and who wanted to be Doris Day and who Ella Fitzgerald.

Lola Novaković is recorded here with Spanish-language movie theme (very clumsy Spanish, I must say) and pronunciation aside, her strong, clear voice is backed with some great arrangements (its truly a bolero). As a sharp contrast to this bolero, B side got true swing number (a cover of course) that sounds incredibly enthusiastic and optimistic, except that lyrics unfortunately have nothing to do with original ("Little Red Riding Hood" completely replaced "Alice in Wonderland") but if listener ignores this mash up with lyrics, its a great swinging music and wonderfully shows off the versatility of young singer. I am great fan of this old recordings and find them very enjoyable.

Great early 1960s songbird emoting trough than popular music landscape and backed with professional orchestra.
Novaković had a strong voice and recognisable tone, often matching foreign originals with passion and "tear" in her voice - here she bravely faces Italian originals (San Remo of course), full blown Spanish melodrama and even than new Greek hit "Never on Sunday". Though her strong voice sometimes sound strident when she belts, whenever she tone it down its quite amazing - this kind of singing was fashion at the time. She was certainly very versatile.

It is hard to understand today why would recording company release several EP recordings with absolutely identical cover but apparently this is how things worked way back in 1960s.

Lola Novaković was hit-maker of the first order during early 1960s and "Jugoton" served her well with nice,little EP recordings that perfectly mirror the soundtrack of time - she had cute,little (somewhat squeaky) voice, instantly recognisable and easily translated into theatrical ballads or upbeat novelty songs. Because she could sing anything, this is exactly what she got: two cinematic ballads and two pop jingles. In ballads (Italian and French origin) she is powerful and subdued, her voice nice and clear - it took me some time to get used to her tone but now I find it pleasant - while upbeat songs are, well, upbeat. "Rosalie" is note-for-note cover of cowboy song (relative of "Cowboy Jimmy") that almost bursts into Dixieland but manages to stay firm in music frame of wild west. "Valentino" is much better, pretty Tango that Novaković emotes calmly,like a dream.

Her early 1960s recordings are very interesting survey of what was popular back than - Novaković was professional enough to tackle absolutely any music genre under the sun and she almost did. Listen her recordings and you will find Tango, San Remo covers, schlager, Jazz, even Rock (via covers of Italian singers like than-young Mina). Give her Spanish melodramatic songs or Mexican waltzes, Novaković was right there, with just right amount of pathos in her voice to impress mainstream audience who followed her with great admiration. This versatility is simultaneously gift and a curse - gift because from today's perspective Novaković is far more interesting than her contemporaries, a curse because sometimes her discography seems roaming all over the place and some music choices are questionable - what was popular at the time (Mexican waltzes, for example) sound cheesy today, but Novaković did it with such aplomb that its hard to tell where her heart exactly lied, in dreamy orchestrated ballads or in commercial material. However, I dare listener to find a wrong note in anything she had recorded back than - its all very professional and polished to perfection.

Very interesting EP with music from Spanish movies - for once, Novaković left simple jingles aside and focused on really beautiful, orchestrated music straight from Spanish popular songbook, Carmen and all. It is very impressive, specially when one consider Ex Yu singers back than were mostly limited with right material and often sang cutesy cha cha cha numbers popular at the time, even Novaković herself was singing ditties only a few years ago - here she got huge orchestra with cinematic sweep, quasi-classical arrangements and even conductor of serious calibre (Ferdo Pomykalo) so results are quite awesome. Clearly, the idea was to channel than-popular Spanish singer Sara Montiel who had some hugely popular melodramatic movie themes and surprisingly they pulled it off nicely. Pomykalo did the music with a great taste (Hollywood would have been impressed) and singer obviously loved this material - this is actually quite impressive and I must admit that I never heard Novaković singing so right. All the songs have Serbian translation and for once, lyrics don't sound forced but poetic (ubiquitous Mario Kinel wrote lyrics for "La Malaguena").

The same year when Lola Novaković recorded impressive Spanish songbook EP, she also did this interesting single with two songs associated with great Italian singer Milva. Where on Spanish EP she was backed by seriously cinematic orchestra of Ferdo Pomykalo, here she got herself equally talented Nikica Kalogjera who surrounds her with swirling strings that sound like foreboding thunder on a horizon. Because originals themselves were bombastic ad theatrical, music here is equally dramatic but Novaković is perfectly at home with it and matches Italian singer perfectly and I must say fearlessly, considering we are talking about San Remo classics. I heard many other Ex Yu singers attempting same feat and failing, but Novaković really nails it here.

"Zlatna Kolekcija"

When Zagreb's "Croatia Records" released this double CD compilation of famous early 1960s songbird from Belgrade, it was surprising just until I realized she had indeed started her discography with releases for "Jugoton" (now "Croatia Records") - Zorana Novaković might have stepped into world in Belgrade but Zagreb was where her recordings were made from 1958 until mid-1960s. That her Croatian colleagues (Arsen Dedić, Gabi Novak, Stjepan Jimmy Stanić, Višnja Korbar) recorded for Belgrade's PGP RTB just shows how music industry back than worked differently.

Raised on Hollywood musicals and singers like Doris Day and Caterina Valenti, Novaković learned her craft trough performances in Belgrade's hotels and engagements trough Eastern Germany where she recorded her first single (released by "Jugoton" under license) but it was a year and half spend singing in Middle East's night clubs that gave her self-confidence and experience that resulted with victorious return home, triumphant solo concert (first ever by single artist) and continuous stream of hit singles, first of them being cute little ditty she had brought home from Middle East - "Mustafa".

This double CD compilation focuses on recordings Novaković made while under contract for "Jugoton" and they surely gave her star treatment. Her strong, clear and recognizable voice was very versatile and she showed equal enthusiasm for uptempo ditties as for sentimental ballads - perhaps under all those Italian covers, cha cha cha, San Remo, Manos Hadjidakis and country & western tunes it is hard to find who real Novaković was but apparently she had no problems with it and heroically plowed trough everything recording company threw at her, be it "Quando Calienta El Sol", "Moliendo Cafe", "La Malaguena", Mexican "Gotazon Apasinado" or something called "Ko-ko-da". Among all her famous singles and EP recordings, this compilation brings also some of her most popular festival performances ("Jednom u gradu ko zna kom") and they were without exception far more focused, stylish and elegant than the rest of Novaković's discography: included is her 1964. Eurovision entry "Ne pali svetla u sumrak" where she easily overshadowed even Claudio Villa (she got to 4th place, which was for a long time highest position Yugoslavia had achieved) - strangely, this song was never released on single and to my knowledge this is first time it was ever properly compiled on CD. Novaković continued later with fair success under PGP RTB but this first decade is where her legend was cemented. Excellent compilation.

"Short History of Croatian Film" by Ivo Škrabalo

Recently I wrote abut very first Croatian feature movie "Lisinski" (1943) and noted how existence of this movie was mostly unknown to wider audience who assumed our cinematography started after WW2 with Yugoslavia and "Slavica" - at least that is what was officially taught in schools. So its perhaps not accidentally that now I stumbled upon very interesting book called "Short History of Croatian Film" (Hrvatska filmska povijest ukratko) written by late Croatian movie historian, Ivo Škrabalo - he had actually written two similar books in 1984. and 1998. but this is somewhat shortened & edited version.

First time around, back in 1984. Škrabalo's book came under fire and he was considered politically incorrect for pointing at Croatia's far older cinematic history against accepted dogma that it all started after WW2 with new regime, communism and Yugoslavia. It was dangerous to openly contradict this story and to insist on national cinema heritage - in fact, anything that even suggested one nation opposite "brotherhood umbrella" was seen as reactionary. Which is clearly a nonsense because as this book explains, it just happened that Croatia actually had some cinematography (no matter how small and provincial) while other Ex Yu countries had not, so there you go.

These are facts:
First movie screening happened in 1896.
First public cinemas in Zagreb and Pula in 1906.
First Croatian short movie in 1917.
First school for "cinematic acting" opened in Zagreb in 1922.
First Croatian animated movie in 1929.
Around 42 cinema magazines up to 1941.
Producers from Hungary, Vienna and Berlin often made movies in Croatia (director F. W. Murnau, creator of "Nosferatu" was filming here!)
First Croatian feature movie "Lisinski" had premiere in 1944. and was a big hit.

All of these was swept under the carpet once communists came to power in 1945. and "our cinema" officially started than and there. I really wonder why did it took so long until somebody in 1984. finally decided to clear this up (and unwittingly end up in trouble for speaking the truth), after all I saw pre-WW2 cinema posters advertising movie hits with Charlie Chaplin and Greta Garbo with my own eyes during recent visit to Museum of Zagreb's history. Because Škrabalo also worked on academy teaching movie history, he decided to edit and shorten his previous two books into new easier-to-digest version that I keep in my hands now.

One thing missing naturally here would be overview of cinema in other Ex Yu countries (I am sure they had some cinema screenings elsewhere even back than) but Škrabalo is focused on Croatia and he insist that his job here is not to explain relative qualities, merits or lacks of those in movies he lists, he simply weaves them all chronologically to make some clear presentation how the Croatian movies developed trough time. As I read about all these movies, I couldn't help but asking myself why is there such a big difference between cinematography in two of Ex Yu biggest countries, Croatia and Serbia. After all we spoke very similar (almost identical) language, made movies at the same time, used same movie actors and had film festivals awarding them simultaneously - so why did we always end up like two distant relatives circling around each other?  Somewhere between the lines Škrabalo himself even accepts that Serbian movies were always far more successful commercially while Croatian had more prestige, but nowhere near market. Even with all those movies listed (majority of them I forgot completely) I can see that Croatian directors were mostly unable to connect with wide audience the way Serbian directors so effortlessly did. And not only Serbians, hough they were definitely masters of war spectacles - Bosnian director Hajrudin Krvavac made legendary "Valter brani Sarajevo" that was such war/action phenomenon that ended up being the most popular ever foreign movie in China! As for Croatia, the only movie everybody agrees is sweet, old fashioned music comedy "Tko pjeva zlo ne misli" (1970) that is deservedly cult classic but hardly appeals to audiences who are not born locally and don't understand this loving homage to Zagreb between two world wars. So finally, its one Croatian classic against huge Serbian cinematography. It was definitely not author's intention but I certainly started to ask myself could it be that with all their educations, schooling and academies Croatians are simply pretentious elite who insist on art while Serbians are populists who know what audience really wants? Not that I approve on low-humour comedies tailored to "everybody" and in many cases I find Serbian movies simply vulgar and not funny at all but when they are good they are great, while there is nothing great in Croatian movies - wooden acting, unconvincing scripts and gloom everywhere. Recently I saw two relatively new Croatian movies on TV and although they had some good ideas, they simply looked low-budgeted and made for TV. Even supposedly all-time great "Tko pjeva zlo ne misli" is not something to proudly present to my international friends who are already familiar with highlights of international movie masterpieces. It seems to me that Croatian directors are constantly repeating the same mistake and trying to be sophisticated and serious, where simple little stories told with warmth and humour leave far better results.

"Back up train" (1967) by Al Green

One of all-time great soul singers records album in 1960s (supposedly golden era of soul music) and its almost unknown today - sure, it was not earth-shaking as his later work that cemented his legend in 1970s and beyond but is it any good? Well, dear reader, if you are already here it probably means that you are familiar with honey-voiced classics and curious about his beginnings. Considering that album is such rarity and almost ignored every time when Al Green "true" work gets discussed, it comes as surprise that "Back up train" actually sounds incredibly good on its own terms.

Everything is here - falsetto, moans, swoops and that recognisable voice - you can tell its Al Green from the first moment, thought production and cellophane is different. This is our same old church boy transported back in time, framed with assured, professional palette of sounds that worked so well for countless of other singers (horns, Hammond organ, female chorus) which in itself means it was all done before in works by Percy Sledge, James Carr, Otis Redding, you name it. So there is no fault with music, it still sounds like any excellent old soul album from 1960s - just listen to "Back up train", its pure magic and thought ignored today, single was a big splash back than, got Al Green nine encores in Harlem's "Apollo" and that is not a small thing. Pop audience still had no clue but ask black sisters.

Perhaps the "fault" if there is any, is that young singer relied to much on his idols - its easy to forget today that "soul" singing back in 1960s meant that singer must have powerful, raspy and screaming voice like James Brown, Otis Redding or Willson Picket (even that golden voiced angel Sam Cooke could rough it up in live performances,just check out his live albums) and Al Green was completely different kind of species, he would later find his own style (glorious, soft, love making croon) but back here he channels all of them and occasionally fails because he tries too hard to be a soul shouter. However, let's say you don't know anything about his later work or that he never recorded anything else - in that case this would be one of those obscure, brilliant forgotten jewels just waiting for re-discovery. Listen for yourself and tell me this is not a ass-shaking, great soul music.

"Bez rocka trajanja" by Anđelo Jurkas (2010)

Last night's insomnia pointed at something that I was not aware of:

a) That literature about music (and not just classical but any genre) that was so rare and exclusively
     translated decades ago when I was growing up, is now small but quite visible part of  
     any bookshop in Croatia
b) Among obligatory translated biographies of international pop & rock stars who are considered
     "cool" a the moment, we actually have some young, talented people with something
     interesting to say like Anđelo Jurkas , who writes about popular music passionately, knowingly and
     inspired.
c) Names of musicians & bands mentioned here, who author considered worth mentioning and
    according to him (and countless interviews) were very important and influential I am
    mostly unfamiliar with
d) CD with music that accompany this interesting book (all those "stars" of angry, young music) is not
    appealing to me at all and I find it only mildly interesting in places
e) That 18 years that passed since I left Croatia had left me not only disconnected with popular music in
     Croatia(it seems I missed 1990s completely) but marked my music taste and
    personal growth into another directions, where I explored music by myself, by some eccentric spurs
    of the moment and definitely following my own aesthetics that completely ignored
    anything that was angry,aggressive or "cool" - even back than I thought that world is ugly and brutal
    enough without purposely searching for aggressive music
f) That I passionately love all things retro and don't find current music very much original or inspiring
    (with few exceptions) and even if all points at my ageing, it has always been the case
    of subjective taste and I am pleased with it

Actually I bought this book not knowing anything about the author (who seems to have been noticed for his writings) under false understanding that this will be about rock music, where in fact book collects all kind of music popular trough Ex Yu, from gypsy artists to trashy turbo-folk icons, from ubiquitous MOR pop stars to rock bands adored by teenage girls or "cool crowd". Book was wrapped in a cellophane and impossible to actually check before the purchase (probably because of CD that could easily fall out) but once I checked the chapters inside I read it with biggest interest.Each artist gets one particular, selected album where Jurkas writes accompanying essay (very good,I must say), artists own words about it and selected opinions about it from different perspectives of public names who loved/hated it. As I mentioned, many of these names are completely unknown to me - not only 1990s artists but quite a few from previous decades I never found interesting enough (strange how some music went above my head completely) - so CD was actually a good idea and gave me some idea who these people are. The whole concept of the book was quite brilliant, I think that conversation with author might be very interesting though I would probably be intimidated to talk to someone so completely into completely different kind of music, but maybe I am wrong - we both would agree that music is either good or bad, depending on one's own perception and feeling. All the production, management and production, all the cellophane and beautiful photo covers have actually nothing to do with the real listening experience and response that comes out of it.

For many years I have been doing my own little excursions into Jazz, Blues and Classical genre (not to mention guilty pleasure of collecting "kitch" 1960s ancient old pop festivals that still bring me lot of pleasure) + sideways and byways into anything recorded before 1940s, so naturally when I read about all these obscure punk rock musicians from frankly small provincial places, I am quite amazed with diversity of it all and how much it echoed with listeners. Political provocateurs, shock value, trend hopping, crooners and screamers, its all here in some micro cosmos and more I think about it, more I start to understand that all that anger perhaps has less to do with war that raged in Ex Yu during 1990s (as I believed earlier, though it must have some effect on musicians and young populations) and was just a mirror of far bigger, global picture - these people would very probably find some ways to express their inner turmoil no matter where they lived.

Jurkas writes almost lovingly (and very informatively) about all of them, no matter what genre and cleverly covers almost every aspect of "popular music" be it neglected intellectual troubadour, angry rock band or one-hit-wonder. About 50% of them I never even heard of and there is quite big percentage of artists who might have been "cult" but not in my world, however I love this kind of writing and find the author very talented, inspiring and interesting despite differences in our music tastes. Hat off to a talent. I must find more from him. Five stars, definitely.

"Outlander" by Diana Gabaldon

I discovered Diana Gabaldon's hugely popular "Outlander" way back some ten years ago while I still lived in Amsterdam and gulped what was than a trilogy with the biggest pleasure, than drifted away from it and did not return to sequels for practical reasons - couldn't find darn titles in order, so I gave up. But I do remember that I gave the first part as a gift to my work colleague who loved it and we were both aware this was not some mystical, life changing, soul-searching, philosophical wisdom but a first-rate escapism, good old fashioned historical novel with a twist & perfect rainy day book.

Now it was finally translated and printed in Croatia - 700+ pages in intimidating hardcover that says "first in serial" so God help us with collecting novels in this bulky format. I have spotted it on the very first day when novel was published here and naturally thought it would make a great Christmas present, carried this brick home and than realised that I secretly probably bought it for ME. What can I say, I read it in two days non-stop marathon and still feel little dizzy from all that action, sword fighting, men in kilts and what not.

Apparently this was Gabaldon's first novel - she wrote it for herself, as amusement and did not expect she will create a phenomenon that would change her life and make her  full time writer. It is a first-class "chick lit" or should I better say, historical adventure/romance/time travel fluff that is simply intoxicating and infectious. Main protagonist is WW2 nurse who during her honeymoon in Scotland accidentally walks into ancient stone circle and finds herself on the same spot but back in time some 200 years earlier. From than on, she is on mercy of ruthless Scottish clansmen who fight and intrigue for power among themselves AND against English army who see all these highlanders as dirty barbarians. Her experience as nurse helps to get protection from Castle Lord but she is suspected on every step of being spy ... and from here Claire is basically falling from one adventure to another, gets ravished by all those men in kilts (and Englishmen as well) and even gets accused for witchcraft.

As I read it, at first I was mortified with embarrassment - "this is really silly love story" I said to myself "my friend will laugh at me" but couldn't stop reading. And than found myself reading it some more. At 3 a.m. and again in the morning, with the winter outside my windows. I don't remember when was the last time I was so swept away and giggled with glee when author(ess) was so obviously enjoying herself. This is the way I read books as teenager, completely lost in another, imaginary world, pure escapism. Sure, there were too many sex scenes and unnecessary hand holding moments, but what the hell - call it silly romance, call it "housewife's novel" but I purred with pleasure as I was reading it and was glued to the very end. Literature does not always have to be deep, heavy and monolithic - though holding this in hands certainly felt monolithic - for the simple fact of entertaining escapism "Outlander" is the purest guilty pleasure. I have actually skipped some scenes because was so lost in story that couldn't wait to find what's next. Sure, its not perfect and Gabaldon could probably cut half of it but never mind, I am not nitpicking here, this is not meant to be Tolstoy.

Josipa Lisac Live 2013.

This year I was lucky enough to have vacation at Christmas time (second time in ten years!) + hear my all-time favourite singer live exactly at the time when she had two sold out concerts in Zagreb's "Vatroslav Lisinski" concert hall, celebrating 40 years from release of her now-classic, debut album "Dnevnik jedne ljubavi" (Diary of one love) that has never been out of print ever since & was recently re-released on vinyl again.

My friend assumed that Josipa (63 now) is probably not force she was all those years ago, but surprisingly we were both amazed with lady's undiminished vocal power - in fact, seems she sound better than ever now. Surrounded by virtuoso backing musicians, she was the biggest virtuoso of all, swooping and thundering high and low with that recognisable, powerful nasal voice  and audience was thrilled. I must say that I watched it all somehow detached from all that adulation, because I found that all these vocal acrobatics became a dead end - even back in the day of Ex Yu, when competition was much bigger, Josipa was counted among handful of our all-time great singers and today it seems that she grew as artist in another direction, where playful vocalising and circling around original melody became her main goal. I noted that almost every single song has been turned around and twisted somehow into new dimensions, not necessarily a good thing. The only time when I truly enjoyed was during old classic "Ležaj od suza" that was left miraculously untouched and rocked just the way it was supposed, the rest of the concert Josipa improvised and insisted on new arrangements that the rest of audience loved but I found a bit tiresome. All those beautiful old songs were stretched beyond recognition and yes, guys were excellent, Josipa is still authoritative stage presence (with amazing voice) but I constantly wished that she showed off just a little less - perhaps occasional improvisation would be better thing that this overkill of theatrics. She has always played around the melody but now it seems like it became main focus of her live performances. Amazing singing but as I said, where does it lead? Standing ovations of course, though I was very tired at the end.

"Der Untergang" (2004)

As someone who had a real overkill of war movies in childhood (every child in 1970s Ex Yu knew those filmed WW2 epics with Partizans and Nazis too well) not to mention that I actually had my first hand war experience, at this point I avoid war movies and it became one of things like football, boxing or fishing that I simply accepted I can live without. To put it simply, I don't find entertaining or interesting to spend time watching unhappy, scared people screaming and running around while earth shatters under bombs and such - my dislike of anything warlike goes so far that I never even bought any single "army" clothes item that were so fashionable at certain point. Not that I was myself anything like those war heroes one see in the movies, my own war experience taught me that its more like that classic, satirical novel "The Good Soldier Švejk" where completely illogical things happen to ordinary people swept away in surreal vicious circle of nightmare. Yes, we all know about WW2 but it still didn't make me enjoy "Schindler's list" and I sat very uncomfortably during the screening and don't need to see it ever again. Very, very rarely I have seen war movie that I really enjoyed and those were actually war dramas like "Grand Illusion"(1937) or "The Best Years of Our Lives"(1946) that had superb acting, moving message and no war action at all. Now I can add the new movie on my list and it might be really one of the best war movies I have ever seen.

"Der Untergang" (2004) translated as "Downfall" for international market is lengthy (almost 3 hours) story about last days in Hitler's underground bunker when he was surrounded with only the most faithful followers as Berlin was being trashed and destroyed by advancing Russian army. The whole world is falling down on him, Third Reich is obviously only a dream that he can't let go,his own soldiers are completely destroyed (only soldiers left to protect Berlin are kids recruited as "Hitler Jugend") and even people in the bunker are only here because they have no other alternative. Yes, movie is German and based on several war memoirs of survivors who were there - historian Joachim Fest actually wrote a book "Inside of Hitler's Bunker" and he helped with making a script true to reality, but this is only part of the reason why the movie is such a strong experience. I have read a lot about this and all those scenes, sentences and even gestures actually happened (when disillusioned with his own generals, Hitler goes to congratulate to teenagers who are still fighting on the streets of Berlin and awkwardly grabs boy's cheek) - and than, there is acting. Director Oliver Hirschbiegel didn't just go for visual similarity though this has been achieved and can be checked with shocking results, he has calmly and objectively showed psychological turmoil these people experienced, their fears, refusals to accept the reality and nightmare that became their lives. Swiss actor Bruno Ganz is so perfect that watching him is chilling, almost scary experience - from the voice mannerisms to hand shaking to pathological switch between rage, illogical monologues, charming politeness and racist ramblings he IS the man crashing down completely. There is the whole team of excellent actors who were used to great effect even though their roles appear small - Eva Braun (Juliane Köhler) is beautiful, submissive and forcefully cheerful like she is pushing herself and everybody around to enjoy, dance and have good time (just one more cigarette) but than she sits alone in front of the mirror and in a stunning, wordless scene watches herself, gazing at the reality and death approaching. The whole Goebbels family re-creating suicide exactly as it happened, with soldiers waiting around the corner to burn their bodies. Young, naive secretary (Alexandra Maria Lara as Traudl Junge) hoping until the last moment that this is not the end and not understanding the seriousness of situation. Just watch the face of Albert Speer (brilliant actor Heino Ferch) as he listen her naive questions  - he says not a word and just looks at her. These moments when characters actually don't talk, just a glance or look, it says it all.

I was not surprised that movie was nominated for "Oscar" because it is so powerful, but I was surprised that some critics find the movie "too sympathetic" to Hitler - contrary to what most of the reviews so forcefully argue about, I see it not as glorification of Hitler but as a artful re-creation of true-life story and magnificent piece of psychological portrait, after all the movie does not show Hitler as a victorious or in any sense positive character, he is broken down man lost in his own illusions of grandeur and has no feeling of guilt whatsoever (he finds his war against Jews his biggest accomplishment and does not care for civilian life losses, dismissing it as unimportant - "they have chosen us, so they deserve it") . Brilliant, brilliant movie and I recommend it to everybody - and this is coming from somebody who usually don't care for war movies.

Alternative History

While I was dusting and re-arranging my books collection, I have unearthed something that I bought many years ago in Amsterdam and than promptly forgot about it. The book is called "What if?" and its actually very interesting, it is a collection of essays about moments in history where simple accident forever changed everything that happened later (kind of "butterfly effect") - its written by military historians and fiction writers, covering everything from ancient world to WW2, truly my kind of book because its entertaining and informative at the same time. Man I love non-fiction!

The first few chapters deal with ancient battles that seriously shaped world back than, but curiously also had effect on present time - for example,Assyrian army had raised to the ground everything in front of them but somehow did not destroy Jerusalem. Mysterious disease attacked Assyrians just as they camped around city walls (plague?) and they left Jerusalem intact (for time being) therefore giving chance to rise of Christianity which otherwise might have been completely destroyed. And so on trough battle of Salamis where Greeks won and got to rule over Mediterranean (imagine if Persians had won!), Alexander the Great (who might have died much later in old age) and Mongol army that came right in front of Vienna in 13.century. Very interesting. When I came to the story how ever-expanding Roman empire was abruptly stopped by German tribes who simply destroyed three legions somewhere in Forrest trap beyond the Rhine I really got excited and remembered that I actually have a TV documentary that deals with this story.

"Terry Jones' Barbarians" is excellent documentary (and a book) about people who old Romans called "barbarians" - in fact everybody who was not Roman, including me and you.
As Terry Jones points, historians were mostly Roman and they described all those kingdoms as savage, brutal, unwashed and primitive, but archaeology shows that they were everything but primitive. Celts for example had very interesting culture where society took care of elderly, sick and children - they did not write as far as we know, but passed knowledge from generation to generation trough oral tradition (I also learnt about recently discovered "Coligny calendar" that was Celtic and far superior to Roman calendar). Goths on the other hand were fierce warriors who had gold and this is why Julius Caesar decided to "protect" them by killing and enslaving some 263,000 people (and this is just one tribe) which of course Romans welcomed happily at home. Right now I watched episode about rich kingdom of Dacia (present Roumania) that emperor Trajan completely and utterly destroyed because, guess what, they had gold mines - as one of the historians in this documentary points, there is nothing new under the sun, every time when certain country had geological wealth it brings occupation and troubles. More I watch this, more I learn about these "barbarians" and how history was shaped by winners - I actually feel for "barbarians" and despise Romans who enjoyed killings in arena's for fun and had built Rome on looting their neighbours.

"Lisinski" (1943) - first Croatian feature movie by Oktavijan Miletić

This is something very interesting - a movie recently discovered and restored from Croatian State Archive, the very first Croatian feature movie with a sound. Yes, I know - Hollywood was there already some 20 years before and even neighbours like Hungary,Austria or Italy had their own movie stars and industries while poor little provincial Croatia limped way behind them, however some time in mid-1940s there was enough enthusiasm, energy and inspiration to have this first ever Croatian movie finally made.

The most interesting of all is the fact that this movie was for almost half a century completely forgotten and believed lost. Generations were born and died without ever knowing about it. The main reason behind it was timing - it was filmed around 1943. and had a premiere next year, with biggest names from politics and public life arriving in the cinema. Apparently it was a huge success and people loved it,even for simple fact that this was first local, home-made cinema feature and not some little short documentary. However, as WW2 ended and new political regime took over, everything from 1940-1945 was seen as embarrassment and collaboration with previous enemy-state. From now Yugoslavia started as a new country and in the schools we all learned about the first Yu-movie "Slavica" (made shortly after the war) but nobody had ever mentioned that Croatia already had a movie hit earlier - this movie was finally unearthed and lovingly restored on DVD with some nice extra clips, photos and even short documented newsreels from premiere on Easter 1944.

Apparently the movie had been already screened in cinemas and shown on TV several times recently but I am always away travelling so this is all new to me - I saw DVD on "Interliber" book fair and immediately purchased it, not expecting much from some old historical document. It is supposed to be movie biography of famous Croatian composer Vatroslav Lisinski who is remembered as writer of our first opera and the biggest concert hall in Zagreb is named after him, but to be honest nobody knows much about him beyond this fact. We know the titles of his operas ("Love and Malice", "Porin") but how did they actually sound nobody can tell. So I decided to check it out last night and to my biggest surprise this is what I saw.

Movie is surprisingly beautiful visually - not only considering the time when it was made (middle of WW2) but also that it was basically made by people who had to improvise on each step, overcoming technical difficulties and trying to make something out of non-existing local cinematography. Director Oktavijan Miletić comes across as eager movie fan who valiantly tries to prettify what is truthfully half-baked idea - there are many beautiful scenes filmed around Zagreb's historical old parts (with palaces, squares and churches), lovely period costumes and quaint panoramic views of flowery fields. Unfortunately the script is all wrong, presenting poor struggling artist as a overtly naive, meek and humble to the point that viewers find him annoying little mouse (he constantly worries is he "worthy" and needs to be pushed and poked into action by friend Alberto Štriga who is far superior character in the movie). As for acting, it is all very wooden unfortunately - main role was given to certain Branko Špoljar who looks like Lisinski but can't act to save his life and comes across as poor country relative lost in intrigues of big city.

In fact, everybody looks quite unconvincing from today's perspective, except supporting roles of energetic Alberto Štriga (Veljko Maričić) who constantly pushes Lisinski into getting on with composing and lovely real-life opera singer Srebrenka Jurinac as countess who sang and promoted Lisinski's work on the stage (Jurinac later made a nice international career in classical world under name Sena Jurinac). It would be unnecessary nitpicking to list all that is wrong with this movie today - the final result looks really naive and amateurish in many ways, however this is exactly what it was, labour of love for its creators who had no big companies backing them or superior technical gadgets to work with - as a historical document it is however a truly heart-warming little masterpiece that has to be taken for what it was, specially considering that none of the artist (including the director) was later given chance in Yugoslavia when future decades would be focused on WW2 spectacles, heroic sagas about partisans and such. We all grew up watching partisans fighting Nazis, bridges falling and villages burning but none of us ever knew about "Lisinski" and this little romantic biography of 19. century composer. Until now.

"Banović Strahinja" (1981) by Vatroslav Mimica

"Banović Strahinja" (Duke Strahinja) is the title of ancient Serbian epic poem that probably have some basis in real life - characters from the poem really lived at the second half of 14th century and their names are remembered. Some 600 years later, the movie was made and I clearly remember watching this movie in cinema with my mother - it was a huge cinematic spectacle at the time and somewhere in my memories I cherish the occasion, not so much because of the movie as a gentle look back at my younger self and my late mother sitting next to me.

Some 32 years I found this movie again on DVD and was very curious how will I see it now.
Just as I remembered, it is quite a gruesome experience since story is set in medieval times and everybody looks either very dirty or stern or both - Italian actor Franco Nero played the main role (guest star?) and he does the best he could with attempting to be heroic and strong in another language that he doesn't even speak. Far juicier roles were Dragan Nikolić as Turk who burns his castle & kidnaps his wife and Rade Šerbedžija as his brother -these two guys actually got to act in negative roles that were far superior and interesting than one-dimensional Serbian nobility. Both show surprising humanity in their characterisations even as "bad guys" but of course I was not aware of this decades ago when I was probably swallowing epic story about brave Strahinja. There are two plots here actually - we are to understand that Serbian kingdom will be attacked by huge Turkish army and everybody is worried about it, on another hand Strahinja goes to follow Turks who destroyed his castle and took his wife with them. Serbian nobility lead by Strahinja's dignified father-in-law refuses to help as they assume she is sinner now and as good as dead. Full action follows now with lots of sword fighting, cruelty, screaming and someone even get impaled as Turks do - according to oral tradition, Strahinja brings his wife back home and refuses to have her punished as sinner, he rides with her on a horse like some medieval gentleman.

Naturally I see the movie a little bit differently now - it is clumsy, overacted and obviously made within a permitted budget. Franco Nero has nothing much to do but being "heroic" and dead serious, as I have mentioned, bad guys have far interesting roles. His young wife (Sanja Vejnović) is more of a symbol of passive medieval woman than real character - at the beginning of the movie she washes Strahinja's feet before the dinner, than accepts being kidnapped (even falling a little for her kidnapper who cleverly does not force himself on her) and at the end meekly accepts she will be punished & blinded as adulteress. Somewhere in the crowd there is an elder nun who was blinded long time ago and her unforgettable, bald face and closed eyes are stark contrast with young Vejnović who waits for her turn. It is quite a barbaric scene, with her whole family assembled to see the punishment, bells ringing and church hymns being sung until in the nick of time Strahinja decides he wants to keep her for himself, punished or not (even with her forehead tattooed now, Muslim way). This whole story actually happens in a twilight of Serbian kingdom as very next year all these aristocrats will perish under Turkish invasion at battle of Kosovo.

Joan Baez in the 1960s (Vol.2)

Here I will continue with my re-visits of Joan Baez's 1960s discography - since I bravely started ploughing trough works by Bob Dylan (it took me some 4 decades to finally get curious about him) Baez naturally came to my mind and as I always liked her voice, going trough her recordings is far more pleasurable than focusing on Dylan who is sort of acquired taste. I admit Bob Dylan was a great poet and natural songwriter but I am not completely convinced by his singing and this is where Joan Baez come along as far superior interpreter of his songs. People say that she "prettified" them but I disagree - there's no harm in having a good songs sung by good voice and although occasionally Dylan's mosquito-buzzing talk-sing can be effective, Baez does wonders with same material.

Baez in the 1960s was very. very interesting person as she took all her political commitments very seriously and (as opposite to Dylan who couldn't be bothered) got herself in all kinds of troubles because of this, participated in demonstrations, got arrested, donated money to anti-war charities and probably even alienated a lot of mainstream audience with her involvements. She even posed (along with her sister) on a poster encouraging young men to refuse army, it looks quite silly now but it was a strong message back than. Funny enough, her own husband will be one of those guys who refused to go into Vietnam and he will end up in prison for it, with pregnant Baez waiting for him outside. Everything about Baez at that time seems quite heroic.

The most ambitious album Baez recorded until that point finds her working again with classical music conductor/composer Peter Schickele who arranged her previous Christmas album - in short, bells are tinkling around Baez as she covers songs of current pop songwriters and movies into art-song territory where her fellow folk warrior Judy Collins already stepped a year earlier with her beautiful In My Life album. For Collins it meant farewell to folk music and her future direction moved her completely into another direction, while Baez later experimented with country but never completely severed her ties with protest movement, even if that mean her participations in anti war demonstrations (she was arrested countless times) somehow alienated mainstream audience.

Baez must have heard and admired Collins album, because she even records the same song that was on that album - Jacques Brel anti-war "La Colombe" - what works very well for Collins and her collaboration with Joshua Rifkin, does not really fit Baez's style and she sounds as she is straining to be heard above massive orchestration. This is the only bad decision on otherwise lovely baroque pop album of meditative, melancholic song collection. For a change we have no Dylan here, but in his absence we got songs by Donovan, Lennon/Mc Cartney, Paul Simon, Richard Fariña, Tim Hardin and even Baez herself who felt inspired enough to include two of her originals - guitar introduction to "North" sound like a very close relative to her later "Diamonds and Rust".

Peter Schickele does wonderful job here with somber, quasi-classical, almost cinematic arrangements that made very pretty album but were probably impossible to recreate outside of a symphony hall and without a help of all these musicians. Considering that Baez at that time mostly performed only with her guitar, her live interpretations must have been very much stripped down. It is perhaps unfair towards Schickele considering how much care he put in these arrangements but Baez actually sounds the best on two occasions when he steps out and leave her alone, letting that voice to soar without all this ornamentations and frills. However, I must say that it sounds perfectly natural as a sequel to her Christmas album and one-off experiment that she would never repeat again. I have been listening this album frequently during past few days and came to honestly admire its beauty (skipping "La Colombe" though).

"Baptism" was the last in the trilogy of collaborations with classical composer/arranger Peter Schickele who makes everything sounding quasi classical and christmasy. In her memoirs "And a voice to sing with" Baez is very short about this work (she actually spends far more time discussing her various political activities than her discography) and jokingly admits that her popularity way back was such that even album of spoken poetry actually charted.

Apparently 1960s were really completely different times because today nobody would even think about releasing, financing and promoting album by popular star reciting poetry - Baez was lucky because she had manager who was more interested in art than commercial aspects of the business - her albums were selling good anyway and she was giving a lot of money to charities, performing benefit concerts and walking around barefoot. So perhaps this poetry album is not so strange, however it is not really highlight of her discography - when she speaks Baez sounds unsure and/or too darn serious and the only time when recording gets going is when she sings, which she does marvellously as usual.  Poems are by Jacques Prévert, Federico García Lorca, James Joyce and such - overall sound is kind of 1960s antiwar psychedelia. Interesting for Baez completists but quite surprising for casual listeners.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but am I the only one here who see this choice of material strange considering that Dylan had left the protest movement and Baez, moved in Nashville and completely changed his music direction - what Baez does, she follows him to Nashville and records a double LP of his songs? I mean, yeah, they are great songs but why would Queen of Folk bow at altar of "unwashed phenomenon" who used her and had already married somebody else and got a child in the meantime? O.K. she also married somebody else, so perhaps all was forgotten and she simply enjoyed doing the songs she remembered being created. In fact, she adds never-recorded original.

Many of us had our first contact with Dylan trough Joan Baez - considering that he was covered by many far more commercial artists (Sonny & Cher anyone?) Baez actually has some credibility here even though nitpicking critics loved pointing that its not "the same" and she lacked bite, fire and irony of the originals. Well, who didn't? Composer himself is so idiosyncratic that there is no point of trying to sound like him (and she certainly can, jokingly imitating him in "Children and all that Jazz" much later). What Baez does here is transporting famous originals into country language, backed by Nashville musicians and she actually sounds very relaxed, with far less soaring vocals than earlier. You actually hear almost country-rock here, the first time ever that I find drums on Joan Baez album ("Dear landlord", "Walkin' down the line") not to mention she sounds just fine as always. When people complain that she prettified Dylan songs, I find no fault with that - she was far superior singer and her interpretations happen to be more accessible. Music lives on trough different variations and interpretations so these excellent songs simply found another voice. Background story left aside, I find this album very enjoyable and truth to be told I might even prefer her versions to originals.

Albrecht Dürer's dream

While watching "Art of Northern Renaissance" again last night, I came across two very interesting little stories.

First was the identity of St.Barbara - an early martyr whose story was very highly respected and painted in medieval times but later Vatican decided she is probably just a fiction and Barbara was removed from liturgical calendar altogether. St. Barbara was often painted as patron saint in many masterpieces mentioned in this documentary and she can be recognised as always having a tower somewhere near by (she was imprisoned in tower, according to story). St.Barbara was also a protector of everybody working with explosions, navy and explosives of any kind. Now, what was really strange was that her feast day is December 4, which is exactly the day I read about her and find this spooky, I mean what were the chances I would discover this obscure Saint from 7th century exactly on her day?

Second story is about great German artist Albrecht Dürer who lived in 15th century - he left some truly magnificent paintings and metal engravings that gained huge success trough whole Europe thanks to invention of print. His prints were done with such skill that he completely overshadowed everybody before him - he was truly genius. Now, what I find interesting is that at the very end of his life Dürer had apocalyptic dream about end of the world - this dream was very disturbing and he couldn't help but making a painting of it, with clear explanations bellow the painting as to point at his vision. Where usually Dürer was very skilled painter of panorama and often would add lots of carefully detailed animals, in his dream the earth was empty and lonely with some huge foreboding smoke-tower in a distance that rains down on everything. Looking at it now in 21 century it looks very familiar and I can only gasp in awe that a painter in 15th century had such a vision in his dream. Is this a premonition of the end of the world?

"Art of Northern Renaissance"

I spend a lot of time working on the ships, in fact far more than being on the ground.
Since I am doing this job for a decade already, it has ceased to be exciting or new - I do feel good when walking around some sunny street in Spain but to be honest it seems that as the years pass by these moments are rarer since job overload grows bigger and bigger, not to mention that I am somehow getting more and more tired of everything, I just want to use every free moment to sleep and rest.Sometimes - just sometimes - there is a "movie hunting" where I ask people around do they have any movies and mostly they carry around newest action movies with cars overturning, explosions and what not - so I go back to my black-and-white classics or documentaries. This time I had actually met somebody who had nice collection of documentaries, lo and behold I got my hands on excellent lectures about art and for the last two days I sit here mesmerised, watching and soaking everything in.

"Art of Northern Renaissance" is narrated by Professor Catherine B. Scallen from Princeton University  and she is sweet,mousy lady that looks like librarian (one of those absent minded ladies you see wearing something wrong or necklace hanging wrong) - but what she has to say makes a very interesting lecture and I can easily imagine having a wonderful after dinner conversation with her. What is the most fascinating here is that this is the lecture for artists, students of art and such but I found myself completely immersed in her world and even questioned myself was History of Art perhaps my real calling - after all, for years I have been browsing museums and galleries with greatest interest, though never really cared for religious paintings. This lecture changed all of this, because it points at so many fascinating stories behind it that I never was even aware of.

First, what it actually means "Northern Renaissance" - it is a reflection of Italian Renaissance as seen in the North of Europe, a brilliant combination of two worlds where artists were often travelling back and forth, admiring each other's work, copying and in turn creating something new and unique. For example, Flemish painter would travel to Italy,Spain and Portugal and bring home ideas about something, than Michelangelo wold later see this painting and impressed with colours and composition, would do his own thing inspired by it. Fascinating. Lecture also explains about many different, now almost forgotten ways art was created back than - Book of Hours, for example, which was lavishly illustrated book of prayers created for rich aristocracy , each of this books was of course unique and only one made exactly the same, the prettiest of them all used to be created by famous Limbourg brothers who all died probably during the plague epidemics. Having this Book of Hours was equivalent of having the biggest masterpiece created and designed just for yourself, with not only beautifully handwritten prayers but also stunning binding and precious illustrations like this one that represents February.

What I have seen for many years but somehow not recognised were all those little details and symbols hidden in religious paintings of the time - carving in the furniture that points at Biblical story, what it means to have that particular fly exactly there, what was painted and than changed later, how can we tell which saint this actually is and who were these real people (mostly wealthy donors) included in the painting. Honestly, I would pass by Ghent Altarpiece without a glance earlier maybe recognising a character or two, but now I am so intrigued that I even think about visiting Ghent myself and seeing it in reality. Not to mention that after almost every single lecture (that lasts for 30 minutes and covers different painters) I am so fascinated that I browse Wikipedia like a madman and making my own notes and research. I have finally learnt about the background of all these old masters, who they were and how can one tell one from another, who inspired who and what was probably lost forever in time. And I haven't even came to the stories of people like Hieronymus Bosch who I admired and loved for many years, not really understanding what's going on there but actually hardly anybody knows today. Yes it is a pity and embarrassing to realise I saw some of this paintings earlier and was so ignorant that I just passed by, but that is why this documentary is so exciting because in the future I actually might see them with different eyes.