Eleven Favourite Quotes from “Permacomputing”

Apologies for the clickbait format, which is hardly in keeping with the concepts I’ve been absorbing from Ville-Matias “Viznut” Heikkilä’s remarkable recent article. Think of it not as a push for attention on an ephemeral feed, but respectfully memorialising another’s inspiring vision here on my own site.

Today I will summarise some of that piece’s most remarkable insights for you. I’ll react to quotes, picked for their awesomeness, in turn.

(My WordPress stats suggest that most visitors are here for the jazz content. If that’s you, you are most welcome to stick to that stuff. But consider reading on to ponder alternative visions of the internet and entertainment technology that makes this very blog possible.)

BTW, Viznut is not writing in his first language, and uses “would” where “should” might be more idiomatic, when discussing idealistic futures.

Let’s go!

1. Computers have been failing their utopian expectations. Instead of amplifying the users’ intelligence, they rather amplify their stupidity. Instead of making it possible to scale down the resource requirements, the have instead become a major part of the problem. Instead of making the world more comprehensible, they rather add to its incomprehensibility.

Pessimistic, yet I agree. “Amplifying stupidity” is quite precisely what Twitter does, intentionally spreading wildfires of outrage through our nerves and networks. ICT is projected to take up between 8% and 20% of all energy worldwide by 2030. And incomprehensibility… Jesus. I feel so strongly about how non-technical folk (my parents, for a start) are made fearful and humiliated by corporate tech like antivirus software, operating systems, bank and telecoms billing, touchscreen interfaces, and so on. Yet technologists (I’m one myself) always blindly return to their comfort zone: abstractions, services, always-on internet, new languages and upgrades and frameworks. “Increased controllability and resource use.” And increased incomprehensibility, infantilisation and frustration for everyone else.

Am I being hypocritical? Totally. I depend on myriad frameworks and the seemingly-invisible, actually aggressively-corporate-sponsored development work that keeps big platforms, and our whole civilisation, going. The point is not to deny that but rather observe it and judge it from a dispassionate viewpoint, asking what do we really need, in the long term?

2. Permaculture trusts in human ingenuity in finding clever hacks for turning problems into solutions, competition into co-operation, waste into resources. Very much the same kind of creative thinking I appreciate in computer hacking.

So, Viznut turns to permaculture, a gardening philosophy. Actually, in my long list of article ideas for this site, is one about how my grandfather manages his large garden, despite being in his mid-80s. The point was that due to an inherent rightness in his methods and tools, and a humble reliance on nature to do the work, his garden is still productive and pleasant no matter how physically weak he gets. His work is opportunistic and adaptive. Son-in-law visiting? Make him sharpen my tools. Grandson loafing about the house? Get him to plant lettuces, or pull down vines. Can’t walk much? Put a trailer on the lawnmower. Even when sinking into decay, everything still works, just at a lower level. His old greenhouse, lean-tos and cages are merely waiting for when he has the energy to put one or the other to use.

What has that to do with staring at a screen and tapping away at a keyboard?

3. Any community that uses a technology should develop a deep relationship to it. Instead of being framed for specific applications, the technology would be allowed to freely connect and grow roots to all kinds of areas of human and non-human life.

Could technology – or one or a few specific, locally chosen technologies – fit into our lives like a well-stewarded garden? Like leaving a garden to grow in rain and sun, we would let it do what it’s good at. When resources were at hand we would apply them, if not we could wait. We could deploy it in new ways all the time, like using a garden for meals, sunbathing, athletics, meditation, crafting, cooking, drawing, retreat, nature watching and so on. Even with minimal maintenance it would function, while occasional bouts of serious group work would provide exercise, catharsis and new directions.

Dream on, Kevin.

But I’m basing these ideas off a real scene, as Viznut does with the demoscene. Since about 12 or 13 I’ve been interested in Quake modding, a scene in which enthusiasts create new levels, monster types, versions and toolchains for the first person shooter game, Quake (1996, id Software). There’s something more than a little amazing about how this online community has grown while nurturing a set of powerful, well-maintained software tools, and releasing hundreds of fun things to play. Which also provides a strong, common base for engineering experiments. All with no money changing hands!! Just people doing things out of pleasure and dedication, making the world better.

The DOOM community, based around a similar but earlier and simpler game, is if anything even more broadly creative and supportive.

I won’t go on – I think you get how I feel about this.

4. At times of low energy, both hardware and software would prefer to scale down…. At these time, people would prefer to do something else than interact with computers.

This is where the radicalism comes in. Viznut doesn’t believe our current civilisation can continue. His is a worldview directly in opposition to values we absorb in school, college courses, news, and so on. (For example, in my one-year computer science course, it was absolutely unquestioned that e.g. ever-increasing virtualisation and cloud storage, or working in a monopolistic platform giant, were desirable things.) None of my close friends, who work in engineering or finance, would find it digestible. I haven’t read up myself on degrowth ideologies although I did learn a lot from the fearsomely knowledgeable Dutchman Kris De Decker who runs Low Tech Magazine. But the highly unpalatable idea is that we’ll all have to stop depending on things we’re used to: unlimited flashy content, new phones and personal gadgets, and quite a lot more; because they take too much energy which ruins the planet.

5. People would be aware of where their data is physically located and prefer to have local copies of anything they consider important.

There are countless ways, most of them still undiscovered, to make low and moderate data complexities look good…. For extreme realism, perfection, detail and sharpness, people would prefer to look at nature.

My quick take on this is I don’t know. I don’t know if Viznut is right. However, my intuition says yes, it is healthier to check out some bark patterns, dewdrops and butterflies in your local park, than clicking through 1080p videos on YT. And that yes, something doesn’t add up when Google offers to host gigs and gigs of my data forever on a server for free, even though it would be a notable responsibility and an effort if I resolved to keep it safe on a disc at home.

(Y’know, on that seemingly facetious point about going outside: I think that could be the unexpected philosophical realisation from our constant exposure to high-quality computer graphics – yes, we human beings like looking at realistic, crisp, crunchy visuals… and they’re all around us, all day long, lit by the sun for our convenience.)

More broadly: maybe the saturation of network bandwidth and processor power that now surrounds us is neither necessary nor desirable? Maybe this thing that we’ve had for the last ten years and not in the preceding ten millenia isn’t yet being used right. Maybe we don’t benefit enough from guaranteed industrial strength computing and data streaming at our fingertips day and night, to justify the environmental cost.

6. Integrated circuit fabrication requires large amounts of energy, highly refined machinery and poisonous substances. Because of this sacrifice, the resulting microchips should be treasured like gems or rare exotic spices.

A great way of putting it! The demoscene that Viznut came from is all about getting the utmost from old technology and systems instead of relying on Moore’s Law. So he has come up with a sound justification for this aesthetic interest, which can often otherwise relapse into mere nostalgia. He’s careful not to tie himself to “junk fetishism” as an end in itself.

7. The space of technological possibilities is not a road or even a tree: new inventions do not require “going forward” or “branching on the top” but can often be made from even quite “primitive” elements.

And here’s a justification for playing with old tech, from the point of view of innovation. It does make sense. Again, what I like about Viznut’s writing is the confident, autodidactic, outsider’s perspective. From there I can look at computing, whether enterprise systems or game modding or web content management, quite afresh.

8. Computer systems should make their own inner workings as observable as possible.

Another lofty ideal. I am strongly, instinctively behind this one. In all the software I’ve coded, I came back to real-time feedback as a tool again and again. Observing changes in a feedback loop suits my short attention span. In my computer science course, I most enjoyed the sensation of tunneling into the depths of a system and making them comprehensible and useful. Even a routine backend database like I made for my e-commerce project gives me this pleasurable feeling.

My site (made for a college project) plucking content from a backend database.

9. Any community that uses computers would have the ability to create its own software.

I interpret this not as a call for us all to be hackers, or teaching “kids to code”. Rather I think it’s a call for a smooth continuum of complexity to be available, from newbie use to full control of building the software. For example, I would say Excel formulas, Access pivot tables, and any kind of macros are an absolutely legit place to start programming. Same with game modding, or shell scripting, LaTeX, whatever. (This philosophy developed from ideas from the lovely, now-defunct blog by James Hague.)

The tricky part is for each level of complexity to bleed naturally into the next, tempting the learner to try new things.

This is where gated platforms, whether that’s FB posts or software on the cloud, can be the enemy of creativity. I’ve discussed that issue before.

10. The ideal wieldiness [of a program] may be compared to that of a musical instrument. The user would develop a muscle-memory-level grasp of the program features, which would make the program work like an extension of the user’s body (regardless of the type of input hardware).

Not much to say to that, except that most of the programs we use day to day haven’t reached that standard.

11. Artificial intellects should not be thought about as competing against humans in human-like terms. Their greatest value is that they are different from human minds and thus able to expand the intellectual diversity of the world.

Viznut’s interest in AI was perhaps the most disconcerting part of his article and the one that changed my outlook the most.

For the last few years I’ve viewed AI as a tech buzzword whose visible manifestations (neural upscaling, Google DeepMind, GPT-3) are distinguished by aesthetic hideousness. And as you might gather, fear underlies that dismissal. I found the thought of AI disturbing.

Viznut gave me a different view. While emphasising the computational expense of training machine-learning systems, he mostly views AI as a welcome new type of entity for us to exist with. Criticising it for being inhuman isn’t saying anything. Rather it can be judged by how well it helps us humans to survive. Pragmatic, yet (in a nice change from how we started this piece) optimistic stuff!

Thanks for reading!

[Cover image is nabbed from Kris De Decker’s astounding Low Tech Magazine website. Do yourself a favour!]

Inspired by “Permacomputing”

I read Viznut’s piece on “Permacomputing” last night and got all fired up. We do live in an age of unparalleled waste of computing resources. He is far from the first to discuss this – I recall Fabien Sanglard‘s and Derek Sivers’ polemics – but Viznut has the uncompromisingly ecological and long-term vision to contextualise and channel the typical hacker’s anger at wasted CPU cycles.

Viznut a.k.a. Ville-Matias Heikkilä.

That made me think of my recent graphics-heavy work, using large resolutions and high-level frameworks; and of the kind of work I see myself doing long term: “coding ceremonial space, presence, substance and light”.

My recent work….

Frankly, I felt indulgent. I think Viznut is right: our civilisation needs to make drastic adjustments to save itself from ecological collapse. And although those changes are gonna be harder than a few well-intentioned Westerners turning to gardening, common sense and intuition and aesthetics and the environmental statistics suggest that permaculture and related ideologies – emphasising resilience, adaptation, local conditions and lowered resource use – may hold more solutions than our current dependence on growth.

When I read Viznut’s weighty opinions I wanted to do some work in the vein of his competition-winning computationally minimal art. Work that uses no more computing power than needed for the goal at hand.

Viznut and his ilk are so much more learned than I am, as coders. They specialise in low-level hardware hacking, an esoteric and difficult topic. However, one skill of theirs is more generally applicable yet fits precisely in the permacomputing ideology. As Viznut puts it, “Optimization/refactoring is vitally important and should take place on all levels of abstraction.”

So I’ll get technical now and chat about how I optimised my most recent learning project: “Iridesce”, a raycaster!

(In case you don’t know what raycasting is, it’s an old and simple way of rendering a maze from a first-person perspective. Windows 95 used it in an iconic screensaver, and it featured in 90s games, most famously Wolfenstein 3D.)

My raycaster is written in JavaScript and so runs in a browser. Try it now if you like!

I used the profiling tool available in my browser, Slimjet (a clone of Google Chrome). This gives an indication of how much CPU time is spent on various aspects of running your site’s frontend code.

The pie chart at the bottom right shows the breakdown.

How did it go? Long story short, I was able to reduce 68% CPU usage to 20%! The things that worked were:

  • Lookup tables – so, instead of calculating the rainbow colour function 400 times per frame, I save all possible values of it into an array and access that instead. This was the biggest single saving and is a pretty classic technique, whenever you have more memory than CPU available. I was also already using a lookup table for the angles of the raycaster.
  • Using the HTML5 Canvas graphics API properly, in particular the ImageData objects which I was using to manipulate raw pixel data. Originally, from a vestigial memory of how raycasters are traditionally done, I was working with one-pixel-wide strips of data for every single segment of wall. This was entirely unnecessary and I saved a lot of CPU time by switching to a single large ImageData object covering the whole canvas. Incidentally, this necessitated some manual byte offset calculations, which felt pleasingly close to low-level.

And what didn’t have much effect:

  • Tidying up to remove nested if statements and repeated checkings of the same condition. This improved the legibility of the program but I don’t think it did much for performance.
  • Removing at least a dozen multiplications from loops. (Taking stuff out of inner loops is another classic optimisation approach.) I really thought this would make a difference, but I couldn’t see it in the stats.

So… the conclusion is pretty clear. Modern computers are stupidly fast at arithmetic. Manual low-level cleaning up doesn’t seem to change much. I’ll still do it for elegance. And I expect I’ll start seeing the performance benefits as I get better at implementing algorithms and doing my own profiling and benchmarking.

But more important than removing those multiplications and ifs, was checking which external functions are taking up time. Using the profiler I could spot that my colour calculations as well as the ImageData manipulations were actually taking up the most time. In both cases there was no need to call the function 400x a frame and I got massive improvements by fixing that.

So that was fun. Am I any closer to sustainable computing? A tiny bit.

Calculating byte offsets is getting into the realm of pointer arithmetic, a skill needed when programming simpler and older machines – increasing the range of systems I could do useful work on.

I learned about profiling and I did some quite major optimising, if mostly by fixing previous poor decisions.

And I got some clarity about what values are important to me, and a good dose of idealism. I’ll keep Viznut’s ideas of communally stewarded, resourceful not resource-intensive, locally appropriate, and aesthetic computing close to my heart as I decide how to direct my energies in projects and job-hunting.

There are other of Viznut’s ideas that I could elucidate through my own practice. How about developing the communal appreciation and understanding of technology in my own family home? Or working on feedback and visualisation of complex system state (I love interactive and live feedback from running systems and that’s how I tackle a lot of coding problems). Or the classic yet delicious challenges familiar from the 80s and 90s: making impressive graphics on slow processors! Perhaps even finding styles and tricks so that the imperfections of low-fidelity enhance the aesthetic affect.

Anyhow. Thanks for reading!

Chuck Berry, Emancipation & Problematic Art

It’s hard to pin down what I love in Berry’s recordings. They are bluesy, for sure, but in combination with an unsubtle pop sentimentality which generally wouldn’t be my thing. They also undeniably represent a commercialisation of black aesthetics. (Whitewashing, if you like.) But there’s more to it than that.

Today I’ll quickly discuss my three favourite aspects: powerful performances in the bluesman tradition; an incredible gift for songwriting; and his recasting of black church music’s utopian politics as an emancipatory youth culture.

Performance

Check out his entrance in this 1965 TV performance:

Berry casts doubt over even his bare engagement with the situation – exactly the attitude discussed by Questlove in that article on Black Cool I’m always linking. Now check the intro to this song:

Berry’s pompous and mannered crowd talk, “And in fact, a relished memory in my mind was”, his ambiguous attitude (between mockery and reverence) towards Beethoven and indeed to his audience, his switches between impassivity and completely over-the-top moves, all tie in to complex traditions of enactment of black identity for white audiences. As in the Louis Jordan video I discussed, the star opens a space for multiple simultaneous meanings, quite possibly up to and including bitter contempt. Both performers reference racially-stereotyped symbols (Beethoven and chicken), present themselves mock-stupidly (“I love chicken”, “I ask him to forgive us”), and have a manner that is apparently friendly and explanatory yet mystifying.

Berry lengthens “Roll Over Beethoven” with extra solos and choruses. The aesthetic of “doing it”, manifesting energy and rocking the crowd, is prioritised above content or thematic development. I love the risk-taking – he even forgets the proper end line “I wanna hear it again today” in the first verse. That attitude is rare now in pop and rock.

Berry restrains his wildest dancing and guitar work until the end of this, the third song in the set. That’s good showmanship, and also I think demonstrates one of Questlove’s elements of Black Cool: unleashing hidden power – which Berry embodies generally with his switches between grotesquerie and stillness, i.e. 2:16-2:36, and dance moves that take over some limbs while others remain still.

Songwriting

Moving on. Chuck Berry’s incredible lyrics can’t be appreciated without recognising their reliance on myths. Berry connected (among other things):

  • the American dream of hard work, success and consumption,
  • conventional boy-meets-girl romance (with mild objectification of female bodies “tight dresses and lipstick”, “lookin like the cover of a twenty-dollar magazine”)
  • black music’s utopian politics (a phrase from Paul Gilroy’s The Black Atlantic)

… into a rock’n’roll ideology of emancipated youth expressing itself and looking for romance in the countercultural forms of listening to records, going to dances and concerts, and driving fast cars.

Here’s a verse from the late-career hit “You Never Can Tell” (it comes in at 0:52), about a couple who marry real young but find happiness against the odds:

They had a hi-fi phono, boy, did they let it blast
700 little records, all rock and rhythm and jazz
But when the sun went down, the rapid tempo of the music fell
“C’est la vie,” say the old folks, “it goes to show you never can tell”

The theme of the first two lines is individualist freedom to shape a countercultural lifestyle via consumption (“700 records”) of new technology and rhythmic music. The third and fourth lines then frame this as conventionally romantic and part of a cycle of generations.

Notice the deft loading of emotion into evocative words: “hi-fi phono” is slightly mystical jargon conveying the thrill of powerful new technology, and is also a satisfying sound that Berry stylises with a dive on “phono” resembling an exclamation of appreciation like “damn” or a whistle.

“Let it blast” hints at unleashing hidden power, transforming everyday situations, while the pitch dive on “blast” has a timbral effect again imitating appreciation (the onomatopeic slang word “phwoarr” conveys something similar) very much like “reel and rock” here. “Little records” is an affectionate phrase – the affection of obsessive “rock, rhythm and jazz” fans. Groove music’s power is conveyed by those alliterative word sounds and a descending blues melisma on “jazz”.

The third line gets me every time I hear it. It makes great use of cliches, with strong overall feeling of relaxation and cooling. “But” evokes a quietening-down after “they let it blast”. The parallelism of “sun down” and “tempo fell” invite the listener to imagine what else might be lowering or calming – the mood of the party, perhaps? This implication of a more intimate mood, and the images of “night” and “slow tempo”, suggest to me “slow dance”. “Sundown” has the implication of twilit mystery and fading warmth, and it brings us into a specific moment. “Rapid tempo of the music fell”, by starting the line with “rapid”, takes us through the cooling-down, which is also sketched by the unwinding rhythm. These ideas unite for me in an impression of cool-of-the-night sensuality and slightly illicit romance – feeling the “rapid tempo” of a dance partner’s heartbeat, perhaps.

The fourth line, zooms out of the storytelling to contrast this with the old folks’ square perspective. Berry uses this effect in many of his hits, contrasting teenage rebellion with convention: the “teacher” of “School Days“, the “back in class again” and the off-stage parents of “Sweet Sixteen“, the “jubilee” that gets all rocked up in “Rock and Roll Music“. I suspect this is derived from a technique of juxtaposing hip, black-coded viewpoints with square ones that crops up all over black music. The point is, Berry basically remoulds the opposition from “white-black” into “authority-youth”, handing over black hipness to American teenagers.

And the way in for white youth is mass-market consumption. The protagonists of “You Never Can Tell” create a hip lifestyle through their glamourised acquisitions: a nice record player and a huge record collection. This way they access the identity-forming power of black music. In the subsequent verse it’s a car that gets romanticised, a “souped-up jitney, cherry red ’53” – both the car and the record player are liberating, empowering technologies that allow free performance of one’s identity. The car motif taps into an American romance of the road trip which predates World War II and lead to publications like the Automobile Blue Book and the Negro Motorist Green Book.

So, we have consumerism, mass-market technology, black rhythmic music, the open road, boy-meets-girl and the American Dream. Berry’s ability to fluently intermingle these myths, have them resonate, and release their power in expressively-sung key phrases and words, is uncanny.

Utopianism

I believe there’s one factor that keeps these highly conventional myths and emotions from being too sentimental. It comes straight from black music. It is, I would say, a spiritual orientation towards joyful freedom, or as Paul Gilroy puts it, the politics of utopianism.

Gilroy distinguishes two strands of utopianism: the politics of fulfilment, which demands that society lives up to its own promises of equality and justice (Marvin Gaye, Curtis Mayfield, spirituals e.g. “Let My People Go”, roots reggae, etc.); and the politics of transfiguration, which, within the music itself and its immediate circumstances of production and distribution, manifests new and fairer modes of friendship, happiness and solidarity between black people, and between blacks and whites – generally on a non-verbal level and in signs whose brokenness (dirty timbres, fragmentary phrasing) maintains a memory of slavery’s unsayable terror. That is, the great-feeling moments in black music invoke a utopia where all of society could feel and interact in joyful ways that originated as captives’ survival/resistance techniques.

Gilroy goes on about how these strains of utopianism form an effective critique of capitalism and Western scientific racism, and you should read his incredible book if you’re interested. But let’s look at utopian politics in Chuck Berry’s song “Promised Land”:

It’s about the centuries-old American trope of going West, which featured in previous r’n’b songs such as Route 66. Here’s the 8th verse of “Promised Land”:

Swing low sweet chariot, come down easy
Taxi to the terminal zone
Cut your engines, cool your wings
And let me make it to the telephone

The song title and the first line of this verse are taken from famous spirituals. To simplify (and this is a topic I know little about), both of the original spirituals are about finding redemption in a welcoming heaven that was both the far-off opposite of the socially-unjust, uncaring and prideful world of today; and an ecstasy momentarily attainable in the grooving call-and-response and group connectedness of church music and preaching. I find those emotions incredibly appealing even as a foreign white atheist whose origins are more imperialist than oppressed (seeing as some of my ancestors worked in Dublin Castle for the British administration, and another was a mining engineer in colonies and was briefly in the French Navy).

Berry neatly channels the feeling of an approaching, inevitable freedom into the national myths of going West and making it big. So the song is not just about travelling and getting rich. It’s about finding something you and yours have a birthright to, an emancipation from misery.

The rest of the verse once again shows Berry’s skill: the affectionate addressing of the aeroplane “Cut your engines, cool your wings” conveys strong affection for the empowering new technology. Like the “sun down” line from earlier, it uses the sensation of heat. (I guess all these references to cooling off would appeal to listeners in a heaving dance!) “Let me make it to a telephone” creates a character, a drive, and a scene in seven words.

Later verses also once again use contrasting worldviews, i.e. that of the “poor boy” narrator (reminiscent of Johnny B. Goode) and the citified plane pilot, rich friends and the phone operator.

So, Berry tied together expressive singing, great phrasing, emotion-laden words and images, characterisation, national myths and black spirituality. And, I want to say, all this stuff happens concurrently, within individual syllables and yet permeating not only whole songs but his whole output. Add that to the solos, backbeats and the secret sauce of Johnnie Johnson‘s sophisticatedly rippling and tumbling blues piano lines…. No wonder this music defined America as the land of the free, shaping global youth culture for decades.

Problematic Art

I didn’t have time to research Chuck Berry’s political views on race and how it affected him and his music. So I’ll leave that massive topic. It comes up somewhat though in the last thing I want to talk about: Berry’s criminal record that shows him to have been a misogynist creep.

He went to jail in 1959 for transporting a 14-year-old across state lines and having sex with her. The girl was an Apache Native American who had worked as a prostitute and who testified against Berry. Berry claimed the judge had made racist comments to turn the jury against him, and that he only wanted to give the girl a job at his racially integrated nightclub, Berry’s Club Bandstand. (The conviction was under the Mann Act which was used against both real predators and social dissenters like polygamists and black boxer Jack Johnson.) Both his appeals failed.

Berry also had to pay out to a woman who claimed he punched her, in 1988, and to women whom he secretly videotaped going to the toilet in a restaurant he owned, in 1990. That’s pretty low!

And I heard a story recently about him inviting an underage girl he had spotted in the crowd to come backstage at one of his Irish gigs.

There’s a lot we could look at here, especially about the whole “can the artist be separated from the music” angle. But I’m bringing it up because I found it remarkable, when Berry died a few weeks ago, how hurt I was by people denigrating him on Facebook.

My point is that we identify with art and build some of our self-image on it. That feeling of hurt illuminated for me how sensible people can defend unpleasant causes if their self-image is attacked. In particular, I’m thinking about the gamergate online movement which fed into the rise of the alt-right. It came out of passionate fans feeling hurt when outsiders took the high moral ground to disparage much-loved video games as misogynist and sexist.

If I pick up that someone is saying “I don’t know much about Chuck Berry’s music but he was evil”, I don’t think that would bother me. But if I pick up “You are wrong to like Chuck Berry’s music”, even if that wasn’t the intended message, I get angry and upset.

So what do I think now about the position of those people who leapt to their keyboards after Berry died to dismiss him? Well, firstly that they probably don’t fully get what he gifted to mass culture –  all the stuff I mentioned above, as well as the raw craft and the use of transcendent myths. (His songs were justifiedly ubiquituous for decades, required learning for rock, pop and r’n’b players, especially in England.)

Secondly, that he got so far having started as a black r’n’b musician.

Finally, that I agree Chuck Berry was predatory and venal and that we should keep that in mind as we enjoy his brilliance. That way, we can evaluate his achievements, rather than just throw them away. For example, how much of Berry’s success was due to his celebration of, perhaps surrender to, consumer capitalism as an American value? Does he represent a continuation of a black tradition of subverting capitalist/white commercialised music distribution from within? What about his hewing to standard, sexist depictions of women? (Which gets kind of sinister in “Carol” when he mentions the “little cutie” who takes your hat… hatcheck girl was the job he gave his victim in the trafficking case.) Was his stage demeanour reflective of an inner anger? Etc., etc. Keep at this and you can get pretty deep…. Doesn’t the virulent misogyny of a number of my very favourite artists (say Chuck Berry, Skip James, Miles Davis) demonstrate a problematic link between patriarchy and my favourite genres? What drew me as a teenager towards such hyper-masculinised styles as country blues and funk?

All questions for another day as I’ve been writing this thing for weeks now. Please leave comments, I love that.