与音乐人相关的电影丝毫没有减弱的势头，在《灵魂歌王》（Ray）和《一往无前》（Walk the Line）连续在奥斯卡擒获大奖，当以鲍博·迪伦（Bob Dylan）为题材的文艺片《我不在场》（I’m Not There）都可以在去年的威尼斯电影节大放异彩，许多人可能觉得这个题材的电影需要歇一歇了，以免“审美疲劳”的光环笼罩在那些挚爱的音乐人或者导演身上。但大家其实也一直放不下一个情结，对因为滚石，这个最有资格被致敬甚至也最有故事的乐队，早该轮到他们了，只所以不趟“音乐人传记片”风潮只是还不到时候。

当看到“Shine a Light”字样和同样大牌的马丁·斯科塞斯（Martin Scorsese）时，这种放不下的情结似乎就越发浓烈了。因为大家都知道，老马丁是铁杆的摇滚迷，从早期为伟大的伍德斯托克的记录片做剪辑，到在流行音乐史上留下浓墨重彩的《最后的华尔兹》（The Last Waltz），当然还有2005年的《没有方向的家》（No Direction Home），由他来操刀拍滚石当然最合适不过。当然，滚石早前还曾和戈达尔弄出过个无比离奇的《一加一》，而《给我庇护》（Gimme Shelter）在摇滚乐的史料意义上也是举足轻重。所以当老马丁和老滚石5个老人在柏林电影节并排出现的时候，真是让人觉得无比高尚。

但当《Shine a Light》（港译“电光滚石”）真正呈现给世人的时候，那种臆想中的崇拜感就要打些折扣，《Shine a Light》的主旨，只不过是纪录滚石乐团《A Bigger Bang Tour》两场在2006年10月29日及11月1日于纽约市Beacon Theatre举行的音乐会，而这个音乐会还和当年是迷惘青年后来做了总统因为耍流氓差点被弹劾的克林顿有关，是为庆祝他六十大寿而特别举行的演唱会，观众当然是高朋满座，集结了许多政要和诸多的富豪以及大大小小社会的头面人物，更是让那些原教旨主义者和愤青很是不爽。一方面挺让人羡慕，真是给摇滚人争脸，可以去赚头面人物和富商的钱；一方面又觉得挺没面子，怎么就去给克林顿老小子庆寿，难道真是“同情魔鬼”（Sympathy For The Devil），丧失了立场不说，还留下被政客和资本家收买的嫌疑。

影片一开始，老马丁就亲自出镜，讲述了一番老滚石几个老家伙的难搞，原来调皮的米克·贾格尔（MickJagger）一直对演唱会的歌曲编排次序举棋不定，一会儿这样一会儿那样让老马丁颇费脑筋，直到剧院的舞台布幔徐徐升起时，坐在后台控制室内的老马才收到第一首歌的名字，虽然之前声称“这部电影40年前就曾拍过”，但这个开场也确实让整个电影变的即兴味道十足。这也许是滚石四老想要的效果，也许是他们对老马丁的绝对信任。但从克林顿的开场白之后米克·贾格尔开始展示他65岁的杨柳细腰开始，不少还沉浸在《没有方向的家》时候的乐迷开始有些不爽快。几个当年的街头斗士现在的风骚老人为老小子克林顿祝寿姑且不论，原来影片也只是记录这场庆寿音乐会，不同的，只是换来马丁·斯科塞斯执导和做幕后操盘手而已，对于一般的乐迷和非影迷来说，上当受骗的感觉又增添了几成。

毕竟老滚石也是在咱中国演出过的，即使没有现场领略过他们的风采，电视上影碟中也见过不少，而作为一般乐迷或者想要更多了解滚石乐队的人，也许更希望能从影片中知道一些乐队鲜为人知的故事，比如乐队成立早期的是是非非，有关那个年纪轻轻就把别人肚子搞大同时也搞死自己的布莱恩·琼斯（Brian Jones），以及乐队早期干过的那些当众撒尿以及摔电视机这些事是不是真的是受人指引，或者是唱片公司的宣传所为。从一般意义上，代表下层蓝领生活并且一直被传闻生活放荡不羁的滚石四老，有着中产的出身以及良好的教育，他们的歌词反叛直露，真实的生活中却又谈吐得体。刚刚基斯·理查兹（Keith Richards）还说把自己老爸的骨灰卷烟抽，一转身就抱着吉他给LV当起了代言人。他们的唱片，他们的巡演，几乎每年都在艺人收入中名列前矛，而他们的音乐和主张却还是平民的，街头的，愣头青和混不吝的，这其间巨大的反差是多么有戏剧张力啊，但是当以这种奢望去看《Shine a Light》时，得到的必然是失望，因为这丝毫不是老马丁的兴趣所在，他想要的，也许只是为什么这几个同龄的老头儿还这么有火力有激情，尤其是米克·贾格尔和基斯·理查兹，前者做了那么多坏事身材却还那么好，那腰身几乎让二十出头的小伙子都无比汗颜；而尝遍百毒的基斯·理查兹，几十年前就被预测肯定活不过40岁，但现在60多了吉他技术反倒是炉火纯青，老树皮一样的脸写满了沧桑写满了狡猾写满了阴险却就是不见忧伤。

滚石的双重生活和双重身份在这场演出和有演出衍生出的《Shine a Light》中越发完全暴露，一会儿他们是反叛人士，一会儿有成了绝对的“武林正宗”；一会儿是当年撒野的街头战士，一会儿又成了可以登堂入室的“万户侯”；一会儿是“阅尽人间春色”的流氓恶棍，一会儿又成了言语举止得体丝毫不出位的“绅士爵士”；一会儿还为城市蓝领惨绿青年代言，一会儿又成了腰缠万贯的上层人士。或者只有在舞台上的的刹那，他们才是单纯的，而舞台上的单纯又越发衬托了舞台下的多面性，让人对这支恐龙级的乐队哭笑不得。在《Shine a Light》电影中，你无法不进入他们所能营造出的问题域，也无法挣脱他们编织出的话题场。知道他们是双重的，却又被他们的纯粹所吸引，在他们的音乐和歌声里感受水清沙幼；在他们的纯粹中，又被诱惑到私下的多重性，因为那里边有亦真亦幻的绝对现实，有这个摸爬滚打了半个世纪的乐队，有历史的影子，有时间的痕迹，有你自己。

当然，单纯从音乐的角度上，从演出现场的角度看，这两场演出浓缩出的电影还是很有些超出预期的，比如影片里滚石跟比他们高半辈的巴迪·盖伊（Buddy Guy）互飚《Champagne and Reefer》，就让许多老乐迷大呼过瘾，巴迪·盖伊和基斯·理查兹互相逼视互相较劲的时候真让人心潮澎湃，音乐的意义陡然间升华和超脱了许多，让人不自主忘掉那些八卦而回归音乐本位；而后生白色条纹（The White Stripes）乐队的杰克·怀特（Jack White）一起演绎《Loving Cup》又让人看到希望，其实几个老人家一直没有脱离时尚，即使是最根源的布鲁斯也因为他们而变得有趣味。此外孙女一辈的大美女克里斯蒂娜·阿奎莱拉（Christina Aguilera）的出场，就算是再加一份性感吧。

其实片名出自滚石乐队1972年的经典专辑《Exile On Main St.》，而演出的曲目上，《Start Me Up》、《I Can’t Get No Satisfaction》等也都在列，而当米克·贾格尔唱起《As Tears Go By》时尤其勾魂，那种一下子回到上世纪60年代的时空错位感，因为这首歌还有Marianne Faithfull，而歌词中“It is the evening of the day/I sit and watch the children play/Smiling faces I can see/But not for me/I sit and watch/As tears go by”（这是一天的黄昏，我坐下来看小孩嬉戏，我看见一张张笑脸，却都与我无关，看着看着已经泪流满面）。看来滚石早已经深谙“乐中写哀，哀中写乐，一倍增其哀乐”的道理，而这首歌描绘的也正是一种富裕充实之后的空虚无力感。当年被老情人Marianne Faithfull唱得荡气回肠，现在米克·贾格尔唱来无疑更平添了许多现实的投射。当肌肉松弛，伊人不在，即使名满天下享尽荣华富贵，音乐所折射出的现实映照在金碧辉煌和松弛肌肉上，一种无法抵抗的虚无感变得无比充盈，自是另有感慨。

再回到电影本身，作为乐迷和滚石同龄人的马丁·斯科塞斯，已经乐队本身，都没有去预先设置要拍成什么样的影片，即使还不到“从心所欲，不逾矩”，滚石和老马丁所经历的岁月洗礼也不是后世的普通乐迷所能达到或者企及的。而不论是接受唱片公司的安排把自己塑造出一种肮脏的反叛的街头斗士形象，还是一如既往地遵循自身的行为法则，滚石的双重生活或者多重生活的伟大就在于持久，在于能经受住时间的摧残和各个阶层的接受。在音乐事业和个人名望上，他们都是在给摇滚乐树立活着的传奇，一种标本。他们自己的双重生活和双重话语也正是时下日常生活的虚虚实实的写照，马丁·斯科塞斯看似不动声色没有交足功课的《Shine a Light》，散射出的电光火光可以点击到每一个角落，而滚石真正的华彩瞬间，以及舞台背后的短暂失落，富裕之后的空虚，黑暗中的光亮，腐朽的年轻，错综复杂而又无比单纯忠诚的感情，混乱不堪而又潇洒自由的私人生活，便都有了题中之意。

从音乐事业的意义上，她是格莱美的常客，尽管31岁才推出个人唱片，但9座金唱机几乎让她成为“最佳摇滚女歌手”的代名词以及当代女性摇滚的最佳代言人；在人生的阅历上，更鲜有人能与她比肩，她曾经离死神那么近，并且是一个人战胜了乳癌，说“一个人”是因为就在与病魔角力的关键时期，她已经订婚的男友离她而去，而这个“不义”的男人，正是环法7冠王Lance Armstrong，对，她就是Sheryl Crow。有关她在音乐上的创举，有关她在情感中的遭遇，当然还不止这些，这张新唱片《Detours》只不过是在告诉世人，饱经身体和心灵创伤之后的Sheryl Crow，还在音乐和生命的蜿蜒公路上执著前行。
 
路啊路，飘满了红罂粟

Sheryl Crow的音乐之路并非一帆风顺，尽管她出生在美国密苏里州的音乐世家，13岁就开始自己写歌，早先也是一边做短工一边坚持自己的音乐理想，白天当老师，晚上担任一个小乐队的键盘手。直到有幸通过试音给流行天王Michael Jackson的世界巡回做后备歌手，才有机会在大舞台上一展歌喉。可是当时正值花样年华的Sheryl Crow并没有在光怪陆离的娱乐圈闲庭信步，尽管一些小道消息已经说她是Michael Jackson的秘密情人，并有唱片公司希望把她塑造成一个舞曲歌手，但她还是毅然选择了继续给Bob Dylan、George Harrison、Sting、Stevie Wonder、Joe Cocker、Sinead O'Connor这些资深音乐人做候补和暖场歌手，这些经历对于有自己创作想法和生活立场的Sheryl Crow来说才是真正宝贵的财富。
1993年，《Tuesday Night Music Club》在费过一番周折之后发行，这时的Sheryl Crow已经是31岁的“高龄”了，在流行音乐靠吃青春饭“各领风骚三五天”的氛围里，这个年纪做“新人”出道没有实力是不可想象的。但是一身个性光芒的Sheryl Crow赶上了女权主义盛行的时代，抒发自我性格的《All I Wanna Do》成为了1994年夏天最出色的单曲，大器晚成的“最佳新人”开始显露锋芒。
然而事业刚刚开始起步，Sheryl Crow的不幸就接踵而至，先是和之前的乐队闹翻，然后是当时的男朋友突然离世，再然后是和制作人Bill Bottrell分道扬镳，刚刚开始打好的根基瞬间分崩离析了，期间的艰难可想而知。所以之后的音乐创作，Sheryl Crow开始歌唱愤怒和哀怨，音乐意识上独立和叛逆，生活化的歌词中满载着讽刺和沧桑，甚至有在歌词中点名抵制美国零售业的霸主沃尔玛，被沃尔玛公司在所有的连锁店和相关销售商封杀。
直到2005年“车王”Lance Armstrong对外宣布，和年长他9岁的Sheryl Crow已经订婚。随即，2005年9月27日，Sheryl Crow发行个人第五张专辑《Wildflower》，才让人意识到Sheryl Crow作为女人的柔情万种。这张献给爱人的唱片让喜爱Sheryl早期作品的乐迷大跌眼镜，因为太温情了乐迷措手不及。Armstrong让她不再愤怒，不再与现行的体制对抗，温情脉脉的Sheryl Crow确实有“花的妖娆”，但没有了早前的“野性”和爆发力，是爱情给了她甜蜜和淡定，在一种舒缓中完成悠扬和恬静，以及被愤怒青年所不齿的雍容以及自省，“不惑”的Sheryl Crow似乎开始享受曾经在青春期缺席的美好与婉转了。
但是上帝似乎不准许她这样做，几乎就是在爱情美满功成名就的时候，天平再一次向艺术的神秘和人性的乖张倾斜，作为音乐人的Sheryl Crow有属于她自己的蜿蜒公路，就如同Armstrong自行车下的环绕的征途。所以Sheryl Crow的人生出现重大的“Detours”，在无比紧张地升华面前，拥有超凡意志力的Sheryl在蜿蜒公路上刻画下了自己的坐标，在搞定了癌症和失落的情绪之后，伟大的女性再次起航。

只有转折，没有退缩

《Detours》让人看到一个更加坦荡更加有力量的Sheryl Crow，甚至有人说这是继首张《Tuesday Night Music Club》之后Sheryl最出色的专辑，在经历过《C'Mon C'Mon》和《Wildflower》让人摸不到头脑之后，《Diamond Ring》、《Make It Go Away》、《Lullaby for Wyatt》等新作品坦荡而深邃。《Shine Over Babylon》强烈的鼓点和粗犷让人心潮澎湃，是的，这是那个Sheryl Crow，她的血脉和嗓音里有不屈的气息在涌动，她从不缺乏对这个世事洞明的考量，她的旋律是她自己生命的律动，是她心灵震颤之后的记载，而这张《Detours》就记载了她这两年几近崩溃之后的通透和光明。
你可以在唱片中看到她在与恋人分手后收养的南非儿童，这个孩子在《Lullaby for Wyatt》中还有献声；你可以看到作为民谣的良心的Sheryl Crow对美伊战争的看法，在那首再一次给人措手不及的《Peace Be Upon Us》中，她找来阿拉伯歌手Mitra Rahbar客串唱出，在一种散发着中东神秘气息的笼罩中完成着自己的政治诉求和对和平的渴望；你还可以看到环保，与Ben Harper合作的控诉环境灾害的《Gasoline》，以及折射被卡特里娜飓风蹂躏的新奥尔良的《Love Is Free》；一首纯木吉他伴奏的弦乐《God Bless This Mess》，Sheryl从普通家庭唱到国家，从普通人唱到总统，“每个人都没有时间聊天，每个人都在忙这忙那，有些东西已经永远消失了，这让我感到悲哀。”当然还有爱情，那些大众喜欢研究的爱情，她镇静地唱出来，在《Diamond Ring》中，Sheryl唱着“钻戒、钻戒、钻戒什么也代表不了，你说你爱我，但你不能面对。”这其中其实没有哀怨，而是一种撕心裂肺的“分手快乐”，一种潜藏的伤感，那种把心情压底之后在无人的角落独自体味的忧伤；当然还有很有K歌潜质的《Out Of Our heads》，动感的旋律加流畅的和声，昭示着蜿蜒道路中的不再回头。
所以有说《Detours》的好在一定程度上该归功与Sheryl Crow找回《Tuesday Night Music Club》时候的制作人Bill Bottrell，但不可否认的是“摇滚女人有力量”。正如10多年前Kurt Cobain的世纪遗言“摇滚的未来属于女人”，Cobain这样的“摇滚英雄”在绝望中向自己的脑袋举起了猎枪，Michael Jackson这样的流行天王在丑闻和官司的泥沼中举步维艰，连Paul McCartney这样的前辈都会在离婚和新绯闻中安享晚年，Sheryl Crow们却“敢于直面惨淡的人生，敢于正视淋漓的鲜血”，在是非转折与人生无常中更愤然而前行。Sheryl Crow很早之前就唱出“日子是条蜿蜒的公路”，而她与Lance Armstrong从结缘到分手更是绝妙的反讽，至少在音乐和人生这条路上，Sheryl Crow几经蜿蜒却从不停滞，“我们没有失去记忆，我们去寻找生命的湖。”《Detours》在唱着，Sheryl Crow的音乐之路会直到世界尽头。
 
你还可以听听这个——
 
《Juno》原声音乐
单纯从电影音乐的角度，张原声大碟算是一张经典的老摇滚与时尚现代的Indie-Rock的融合。其中既有The Kinks、Buddy Holly、Mott The Hoople和The Velvet Underground这些上世纪六、七十年代名人堂级别的“老古董”，也有Sonic Youth、Kimya Dawson、Belle & Sebastian、The Moldy Peaches和Cat Power这些叱咤当今流行乐坛的独立尖兵。然而与剧情最“女性伟大”的地方在于，年轻的“妈妈”Juno更喜欢上个世纪的硬核音乐，而也正是因为音乐，让她能够坚持自己并且“一意孤行”可以承受世俗的不理解和嘲弄，可以忍受未知未来的不确定，可以不在乎过多体制内的现行程序；而成年男性Mark却作为对立面自私得一塌糊涂，尽管在小成绩的包装下扮酷，不是对抗体制而只是在“体制内”完成自我的虚荣，在Juno将要生产的时候放弃，固守在自我的空间里不敢承担责任。比剧情更让人欣慰的是好的音乐贯穿始终，并且在电影的结尾是完满的一厢情愿，少女“妈妈”Juno最终和孩子的亲生“爸爸”继续爱情，两个孩子在屋门口弹吉他，是音乐给了他们希望。
 
《Hard Candy》
“大姐大”Madonna的新唱片，时下最“潮”的制作人Timbaland、Pharrell Williams和Nate ‘Danja’ Hills操刀，当红小生Justin Timberlake倾情客串，首发单曲《4 Minutes》已经破了猫王的记录。娜姐在经历了一段时间的低迷后重新找回状态，在舞曲的基础上融入Hip-Hop，再加入一些复古的上世纪80的舞曲风格。但这些都是落伍的时尚，曾经挺立涛头的娜姐尽管活力不减，智商与日俱增，但始终摆脱不了靠“身体”吃饭的本领，尽管都快半百了保持自己的激情不是容易事情，但除了这些就不再有别的。她所开创的挑战禁忌已经不是新潮而是俗套了，所以这张《Hard Candy》尽管可能卖得不错，但却不可能与Sheryl Crow同日而语，尽管都是那个时期“女权”的代名词，尽管都保持着旺盛的创造力和生命精力，但Madonna还是一如既往的简单，所以差距就在于Madonna不如Sheryl Crow更“蜿蜒”。娜姐胜在一种混不吝的直来直去，热闹非凡却没有回味，激情洋溢富丽堂皇一阵之后就算了，Sheryl Crow却在转身之后继续开辟新天地，尽管可能是很小的一步，风景却已不同。

我已经不止一次发誓
要在八月好好用功
因为说实在的
一直还没找到更好的挣钱的途径
尽管我知道很不堪
有时候也不免懒惰甚至是忧虑
并就这样浪费了许多时光

但连续被毙掉几篇稿子后
越发觉得自己不济
于是又开始放任在开心网、海内和豆瓣，甚至发呆中
总觉得自己始终没法成熟甚至是自信起来
尽管马上就三十岁
很多时候还是很鸵鸟，不愿意去面对，于是一直也没什么长进

有时候觉得未来，不过只是一种想象
而朋友，也不过是一种对朋友的想象
像我这样，几年不联系一开口就要钱
还真是不要脸，但反过来还是忍不住想自己究竟拥有什么

终于在现实和金钱面前低头
说到生活和理想
这些都已经很少想了，究竟在想什么，只不过是对许多非具像的想象

每天坐着公车，每天睡去醒来，已经占去了许多时间
睡去的时候世界已经停止

其实还是有一种期许
可以去想象，可以去等待，一点一点的完成，一点一点的明白
有的人早走几步，有的人一直在睡着，而在半睡半醒之中的，竟然是常态

一转眼2008已经过去大半，还有许多事情没有做

谢谢用过我稿子的编辑们，谢谢已经不搭理我的朋友
我恍惚觉得还是在朦胧中，陶醉在半睡半醒中
期待着自己能有朝一日突然彻底醒来
做出真正想做的事，能放得开，能用得出力量

2008真的来了吗？

吴虹飞有什么了不起

文/老丁

“其实吉他手没什么了不起的啦，他只不过参与过《满城尽带黄金甲》的配乐而已；其实贝司手没什么了不起的啦，他只不过帮左小祖咒录过两张唱片而已；其实左小祖咒没什么了不起的啦，他不过和我都姓吴而已……”与满场略带娇嗔的呻吟和含混的音响包裹下的唱腔相比，反倒是这几句口白显得清晰。这个拥有着高学历的自己可以采访自己的摇滚歌手，这个被所谓“专业人士”讥讽“基本上唱歌很难听”的杂志记者，在广州大道转角处的狭小湿热空间里，“像是从太阳上脱离下的鳞片。”
还要用“黄金甲”和左小祖咒来装潢一下，说明著名的阿飞姑娘在流行音乐的圈子里还是没有混开，去年还是前年与更著名的黄健翔的“交恶”以及王朔的“交情”都没有让她在某种程度上更出名。当然，与大约在2004年第一次看她演出时相比，因为合成器的参与让她的声音没那么单薄了，但还是没有学会高音之间的转换。新唱片《胭脂》可以在相对大的厂牌发行，但也未必能够让她富裕，总之这个经常让人“哭笑不得”的姑娘，越发得显得甜腻、执拗，却又长进不大。
当晚的演出她穿一件公主裙，或者更像是睡衣，挤近了看还是在舞台上挥汗如雨，当她站着唱握住麦筒低头的瞬间，不由想起几年前那次露天演出，当时的落日余晖洒在低着头的她的身上，越发显得瘦小并且失落，开始为当初在书摊花5块钱买了一本《小龙房间里的鱼》感到羞愧。差不多四年的时候过去，除了《一只想变成橘子的苹果》、《嫁衣》，又多了《一个婚礼和一个葬礼》、《仓央嘉措情歌》、《南方》这样的歌，乐手或者又换了一批，但词句过渡时的无力唱腔依然故我。站在台下看她抚弄吉他时的颤抖，忍不住想如果她能像那个克死了老公的Courtney Love，在意识和行为上再放荡一些；或者像那个绝望得一塌糊涂的Mazzy Star乐队主唱Hope Sandoval，在唱腔和气场上再颓废一些；如果她的吉他在噪音的路上再拓展一些，如果她的高音在噪音的混杂中再拉长一些，但她显得很着急地就收敛了，正如同她的文字，在自况和嘲笑的紧要关头就急转直下，自己消解了自己，没什么长进也就是分内的事。
也许是她的多重角色混淆了自己，也许正如同那些著名乐评人认为的“永远不会唱歌”，这个没什么了不起的阿飞姑娘，即使没有“颠倒众生的糊涂”，但至少颠倒了自己，她比如我这样的“众生”要更勤奋，更分裂，更糊涂，也更“了不起”，因为她在试图营造着自己的场域，不那么成功但可不是没有勇气。也许像她这样的作为歌手，真的需要时间的历练，能一直这样坚持下去就已经“了不起”。

唐朝、韩寒、盖茨谁更浪漫骑士

文/小丁

唐朝乐队出了20年来的第3张专辑，盖茨捐出了580亿，韩寒说茅盾巴金冰心其实文笔很差，从一般意义上说，当然还是唐朝更“浪漫”，因为《浪漫骑士》贡献的是“摇滚精神”，是附丽在重金属音乐上的几千年深厚激扬的传统文化；盖茨捐得再多也不过是白花花的银子，是金钱，是物质；而作为后生的一贯不老实的韩寒，把矛头对准文学前辈更被认为是侮辱大师、颠覆大师，炒作甚至居心不良。从“非一般”意义上说，问题就来了，盖茨输出的当然不仅仅是形而下的钞票，还有“资本主义高级阶段”的普世价值；而韩寒年少轻狂，纵横文坛、灾区、娱乐圈，甚至作为风度翩翩的赛车手似乎更称得上“骑士”，已经人到中年的丁武们还能通过新唱片续写“梦回唐朝”时万丈光芒的豪迈吗？
在相当程度上，唐朝之所以成为精神贵族是建立在第一张《梦回唐朝》的基础上，到10前的《演义》时，乐队就已经迅速进入偶像的黄昏，期间有张炬的离世和唱片公司撤资等诸多意外因素，但到近年越是“吃老本”骂名就越多，再加上窦唯的惊世一吼，“摇滚皇帝”的贵族地位几近坍塌。随着金属音乐越来越分化为死金、黑金、说金以及各种极端金属的风起云涌，唐朝所以安身立命的重金属已经与时代严重脱节，再加上自身发展上的脱节，所以《浪漫骑士》推出之前的乐队已经到了相当尴尬的地步。如果新唱片真能弥补这种脱节和缓解尴尬，使得精神贵族的地位和形象得以延续，这种内外因素上的错综复杂让乐队很难浪漫，因为许多有意无意地积淀太期待他们重塑《梦回唐朝》时的大气和恢弘了。
从《浪漫骑士》整张唱片的音乐构架和歌词立意看，如果能在《梦回唐朝》随后两三年时候推出，说不定又是一张可以被供奉的经典，《封禅祭》与《大风歌》，虽然丁武高音不复至少老五的吉他还在，而一些传统器乐编钟、大鼓、古琴的参与说不上是画龙点睛也至少丰富了层次。差不多3年前在纪念张炬的《礼物》中丁武一嗓子“时间留下了美丽和一片狼藉”几乎可以追上Tom Waits的“砂纸喉”，所以他更多时候只能试图“浅吟底唱”，可惜的是即使在名义上是送给父辈的《浪漫骑士》里，显现的也是过滤了的沧桑，“浪漫温情”却带不出苍凉，所以即使唱片不是给当下的年轻人而是给同辈的“红色遗老”，却因为个体心灵投射的缺失而很难引起共鸣，悲壮似乎有，但实在浪漫不起来。
时间真的可怕，最早出道时的唐朝何等飘逸大约相当于那个时代的F4，在行为方式上特行独立可以叫板时下的韩寒，单纯在中国的影响力绝对不输给比尔·盖茨，到当下却连个“英雄迟暮”的名份都够戗拿到。人上了年纪就不能玩重型音乐？滚石那群“250”依旧吃香喝辣，齐柏林飞艇去年都重组了，深紫还玩到了克里姆里宫。唐朝之所以不浪漫也许就在于他们依旧只把比尔·盖茨的580亿看作是不屑一顾的物质，未能明了如果没有肉身的沉重，精神便无从附着，于是一定要凭空喷射出天马行空的浪漫；而之所以不能成为“骑士”，大概还是不把韩寒这样的车手当回事，离开了现实的土地，骑士就只能是梦游了。

Coldplay越来越像U2了
——简评《Viva La Vida》
 
文/小丁
 
对于许多不听音乐或者只听网络音乐的人来说，Chris Martin仍不过只是影后Gwyneth Paltrow的老公，以及一个对狗仔队拳打脚踢的蛮汉；而对于流行音乐的“专业人士”，却一直对他的八卦和“大众文艺腔”耿耿与怀，认为在他带领下的Coldplay越来越做作，越来越谄媚。然而就在乐队的上一张专辑《X&Y》，Chris Martin不仅唱红了一首深情款款的《Fix You》，还改编了一首向Kraftwerk致敬的《Talk》，让人对他的品味以及改变有了些须期待，而这张新唱片更是请来了电气宗师Brian Eno担纲制作，期待的等级就又平添了几分。
但是当取材自德拉克洛瓦的名画《自由引导人民》为基础的唱片封套，以及灵感来自于墨西哥女神弗里达作品的唱片名称横空出世的时候，Chris Martin和他带领的Coldplay有些让人措手不及；当布莱尔拿起吉他，小布什操起指挥棒，与奥巴马、克林顿一家等诸多政客联手在第一波主打歌《Violet Hill》的MV中手舞足蹈的时候，提醒着人们也需要收敛起对Coldplay的既有认识——这不再是那个沉迷自怨自艾小情绪的乐队，而开始指点江山激扬文字了；而早在《A Rush of Blood to the Head》时代就开始鼓吹“公平贸易”的Chris Martin，也悄悄把原本环绕在手指上的戒饰变成了更张扬的环绕在手臂上的五彩彩巾，一副“谁持彩练当空舞”的派头。
当然，说Coldplay越来越像U2，不仅仅是新唱片《Viva La Vida》如此高调地过问政治，关注贫穷，许多歌词都隐喻中东战争，也不仅仅是Chris Martin可以以Bono为榜样，去化身“摇滚政治家”，而是因为有Brian Eno的参与，乐队的音乐取向在原有核心美学的基础上被电音润色，吉他手Jonny Buckland似乎也在偷师U2那个大名鼎鼎的Edge了，从电吉他带出的依稀金属色泽的颗粒感和和弦、泛音、回声、滑音、回馈手法上都可以听出Edge的痕迹。尽管Coldplay自己不承认，他们只说是受Blur乐队的《Sing》的影响，创作出了可以支撑整张唱片的《Lost!》；又因为喜欢Radiohead的《Paranoid Android》，创作出一首层次分明的以A-B-B结构的《42》；是The Velvet Underground的一首歌启发了颇有些气势磅礴又充满了异域风情的《Yes》。但不可否认的是这张加上隐藏曲也才46分钟的专辑，在Brian Eno大叔温柔的，鼓励式的引导下，让他们走出过往个人中心的单纯和忧郁，开始尝试更为激烈的旋律和多重节奏，融入扬琴、鸣钟和加料钢琴，在意识和编排上都更为开放。同时让Chris Martin也淡化那些惯有的自我痴情的媚惑嗓音，开始注意低音高音以及和音上的转换，在声音的延展和可扩充性上做文章。
从乐队前所未有的开放性上来说，像U2未见得是什么坏事，因为总不至于困囿在一厢情愿的个人情绪里，整张唱片有着上世纪80年代U2的风味也更说明乐队开始更崇高的音乐使命。当然，Coldplay毕竟是Coldplay，真正让自己伟大起来不是要像谁，《Viva La Vida》不过是熟悉的陌生的开始，能从Brian Eno或者U2身上学到更多，更勇于冒险地走下去，Chris Martin和他的Coldplay或将真的伟大起来。

The Best Of Belle and Sebastian
Balmorhea - Rivers Arms
Best Of The Cardigans
Brazzaville - 21st Century Girl
Current 93 - Birth Canal Blues
The Ditty Bops-Summer Rains
John Zorn - The Dreamers
Leonard Cohen - Recent Songs
Priscilla Ahn - A Good Day
Shannon Wright - Let in the Light
Spiritualized - Songs in A&E
Shearwater - Rook
Death Cab For Cutie - Narrow Stairs
Juno B-Sides_ Almost Adopted Songs
Radiohead Live At BBC
The Field Mice - Emma's House
The Beatles - Revolver
The Delano Orchestra - A little girl, a little boy,and all the snails they have drawn
The Field Mice - Emma's House

巴列霍/黄灿然 译

愤怒把一个男人捣碎成很多男孩
把一个男孩捣碎成同样多的鸟儿，
把鸟儿捣碎成一个个小蛋；
穷人的愤怒
拥有一瓶油去对抗两瓶醋。

愤怒把一棵树捣碎成一片片叶子，
把叶子捣碎成大小不同的芽，
把芽捣碎成一条条清晰的沟；
穷人的愤怒
拥有两条河去对抗很多大海。

愤怒把好人捣碎成各种怀疑，
把怀疑捣碎成三个相同的弧，
再把弧捣碎成难以想象的坟墓；
穷人的愤怒
拥有一块铁去对抗两把匕首。

愤怒把灵魂捣碎成很多肉体，
把肉体捣碎成不同的器官，
再把器官捣碎成八度音的思想；
穷人的愤怒
拥有一把烈火去对抗两个火山口。

不喜欢领导是由来已久的臭毛病，一种很小人的心态，总是觉得领导不如自己，或者觉得领导也就那么回事，再或者，不去把领导当回事，还觉得自己心里有杆秤，自己可以衡量自己的作为。但是我从来没有像现在这样喜欢自己的领导，因为她们都是女性，都是成年女性，并且很多次为她们而折服，为什么自己就没有想到，为什么自己就做不好，或者说我几乎从来没有像现在这样虚心过，低三下四的，谁都可以不喜欢，可以挑剔，可以针对，也许你比我想象得更加敏感，所以小心翼翼，卑躬屈膝，或者忍辱负重，都是图些什么啊。

或者可以说道不同，人各有志，但这么多年来，这么多时间，这么多的时间，程益中是谁啊，当然，更重要的是，真正把自由给你的时候，你是否真能做出东西来，并且真能把东西做得好。DSB那么多牛人，但都服他，都尊敬他，许多人“程门立雪”，“跟着大哥走，有肉吃”。也许我更应该愤慨的是自己不是什么牛人，牛人自己去做领导嘛，既然你什么都不在乎，又何必自寻烦恼，既然你有那么多想法，可是你真有想法吗？但我应该知道什么东西是在浪费生命，大好的时间不应该在无用功上，我必须为自己的选择付出代价了。

毕业3年了，是该出成绩的时候，马上就30了，即使什么都不为，也至少应该对得起自己；即使不去和这个比那个比，也至少得有，因为这么多年来你承受的是耻辱，而我积累的就是叫喊。或者怎么怎么样也许会好些，或者应该怎么怎么样，玩这些小聪明有意思吗？但人家就好这一口，你看到立场，看到态度，看到许多诚实的才华的有观点的东西，看到执着，看到韧性，看到踏实肯干，看到攻击性与不屈服，看到你想看到的东西，看到你应该看到的东西，让无趣有趣，与无聊死磕，多么的天气预报啊。

如果你想当一个好的新闻工作者，如果你想做一个文艺评论员，如果你想做一个好丈夫，一个好爸爸，一个好儿子，一个好哥哥，一个好下属，一个好朋友，一个好哥们儿，一个好的收藏者，一个好的倾听者，一个好的书写者，一个好的记录者；如果你想懒惰，那你就去懒惰；如果你想诚恳，那你就去诚恳；如果你不想去参与那些东西，那你就去参与那些东西；如果你不喜欢，那你就离远点；如果你很小气，那你就去沾一些小便宜，比如借了钱不还，吃饭不掏钱，坐公交少交钱，钱钱钱，钱列宪。

不知道什么时候不再那么悲观，那么绝望，那么愤怒，真的有过吗，没有青春的青春。食色性也，但必须得看到，或者说自己写了这么多年了，但我也许真的该走出去，去看，去听，去与人交往，去发现一些东西，去经历，去见证，即便是不那么好的，从头做起的，去说，去写，去跑，哪怕是被催促，被强迫，被压榨，被控诉，被攻击，被揍，被驱逐，被抢夺，被背叛，被蹂躏，被开除，直面惨淡的人生龙活虎，正视淋漓的血色浪漫卷西风，许多的东西在引诱着，在招揽着，而我把自己包裹起来，去逃离这些，去杜绝这些，这是许多年前就被聪明人批评过的啊。

为什么就不够聪明，或者说多和聪明人交往，和臭棋篓子下棋，白沙在涅，可见是一个多么没主见的人，多么被环境左右的人，多么多么平庸的人。可是聪明的人啊，勿友不如己者，你愿意带我玩儿吗，可是尊敬的程益中先生，是不是还有别的什么益中。超越那一天，超越那一天，当我经历了若干次的苦难之后，发现一种潜在的危险，那种难以预料的演变，我没有为了生存而妥协，是因为你的存在和努力的改变，如果爱能给我力量我将会感到轻松，甚至忘掉所有被忘掉的危险，如果恨起了左右那我只能伤感的去回忆，默默的伤感的，轻松的简单的，我感觉这不是荒野，却看不见这地已经干裂，我感觉我要喝点水，可我不能走也不能哭，我要永远陪伴着你，因为我最知道你的痛苦，我的痛苦，嘟……

然后的事情就是找房子，找工作，被拒绝，拒绝，工作，搬家，辞职，工作，搬家，在XXSB竟然是目前呆得最长的地方了，并且很难想象这样下去会是什么样子，有时候也不免酸溜溜地想，如果第一次就不被拒绝，但当然没有如果，我这样一个“有时候运气比较好的人”，能还活着到现在应该感恩涕零了。我这样一个没什么头脑的莽汉本该去挖人，我这样一个学新闻听摇滚出身的莽汉……

两年了也没学会听懂粤语，两年了也没交几个朋友，两年了也没挣几个钱，想当年老张一边吃苹果一边在犹豫“要不要去挣到一百万”才到南方的，“我的老班长”到南方可是要“开创新的理想”的。在广州的两年，目前为止生活的时间最长的“大城市”，我收获的却是懒惰、和娘子在一起的安静以及不思进取——

一如倒影，一如梦境
——评《Hvarf/Heim》

Sigur Ros乐队的全新唱片《Hvarf/Heim》，由Hvarf与Heim两个不同主题组成，Hvarf意即Haven：避难所/消失，收录他们过去在现场表演经常演出，但却从未发行过录音版本的作品。Heim意即Home：家，收录他们最收欢迎曲目的现场演出纯演奏版本，不含电子合成音乐。而这次发片同时，Sigur Ros也发行了乐队的纪录片《听风的歌》，由奥斯卡提名导演Dean DeBlois执导，纪录了乐队2006年夏天在冰岛为期两周的演出行程，许多歌曲在这段旅程中以不插电的方式收录在《Heim》中。

十年前，Sigur Ros推出首张处女唱片《Von》，就几乎改写了世人制式聆听音乐法则。他们能够从遥远的冰岛被人熟知，当然是因为他们标签式的Post-Rock旋律以及空灵超脱的意境，用承载了遥远的乡愁的美丽和神秘曲调器乐净化了喧嚣，最冷静而又纯洁到洗练的向往。10年后，Sigur Ros在我们缺乏想象力的音乐年代中，又给出了《Hvarf/Heim》这张长达71分钟的双CD作品。包括了3首全新作品，8首重新演绎风格曲目，让乐迷体验该团成军十年来，仍具不断开发新奇听觉趣味的诚意。

早在2005年Sigur Ros的录音室唱片《Takk》就完成一次概念性的探讨和张力——用一种相当别致的方式讲述一个简单天真的童话故事：一个叫Glosoli的小男孩，有一天他醒来发现周围漆黑一片，看不到任何一点光芒，他想应该是有人把太阳偷走了，于是他决定去把太阳找回来，这张充满了童趣和感恩的唱片把乐队的思想和音乐张力发挥得恰倒好处，并且很让人期待接下来的Sigur Ros以及长大后的在黑暗中寻找太阳的小孩。

在新唱片的《Hvarf》部分属于Sigur Ros的沧海遗珠，首曲《Salka》前奏响起，Jon Thor Birgisson那超乎常人的高八度音色声线，配上他们长期伴奏团队Amiina协力管弦乐部份，那道幻梦雾茫的音乐质感立即让歌迷顿入冰岛低温壮丽景致中，一种与世隔绝，与世上众多乐团能有显而易见的区隔性。接下来铺排暗涌的《Hljomalind》从首曲激情结尾后担任了起承转合的角色，以恬静的吉他声缓慢道来，Jon Thor Birgisson似乎刻意压下来飙高音意图，不让首曲的激情一股脑地放送到第二轨来。带有些须Shoegaze风格的《I Gaer》开场带着甜蜜而悬疑的键音，副歌时则急速飙歌，前三首的音乐情绪之饱满，让人处在梦游世界末日与冷酷异境的国度中。

《Von》与《Hafsol》则是选自处女专辑《Von》之中，因为是纯器乐演奏没有巨大的吉他噪音，第五曲《Hafsol》前奏长达1分半全无人声，Jon Thor Birgisson的歌声端正地像欧洲风情唱吟歌剧，接着到6分50秒时，弦乐的拉扯火力全开，和吉他、贝斯、鼓声交织成一片吵杂的激昂旋律，彷佛是进行曲般的澎湃情绪，最后一分钟中时则又回归平淡，好让和《Heim》的首曲《Samskeyti》的宁静开场节奏得以接轨。当然，在第42秒时倾倒出来的寂寞琴音，那般动人的极简旋律中，特别容易勾起早已释怀的青春记忆，那些曾经属于失忆的苍海桑田，那些都已成不堪回首的誓言或场景。Sigur Ros的音乐，就是在轻飘中落差中进入解析，把尘封或者有意回避的遗忘重拾，勾勒出最压抑在深层的过往和回望。

如果说《Takk》是一篇干净的小品文，这套《Hvarf/Heim》就是一幅精悍凝练的小幕舞台剧。如果是文章，那为文的纸张就是冰岛清晨的阳光；如果是舞台剧，想想冰雪挂成的幕布，想想广袤但苍白的背景，都是那么飘渺，寂寥，纯净，透明，清澈，悠扬。拉弦的吉他是走动的笔尖，是漫天飘舞的飞雪；键盘为纸张着色，点缀起舞台的凹凸；很多调皮的桥段是活脱脱的表情，并不夸张的鼓点蕴涵着气势，Jon Thor Birgisson的嗓子纤细但是质感，不染世俗的纯净空幻，孩童呓语般的假声时隐时现，如同舞台上升起的七彩烟雾般缈缈。

“动如脱兔，静如处子，浑浊时如雨后泥塘，清澈时又如山林深泉。”即使你听不清听不懂主唱的呢喃，辨不明怪异的配器，但在闪亮的音色和概念性的主题中，在细微的音节转换中，即使感觉不到钢琴中醇厚和冰岛月光的皎洁，甚至小号的吹管和原声古朴木琴的美伦美奂，但平静的堆积、暗动之后蓬勃的高潮，你应该知道——这是另一种方式的娓娓道来。

爱的碎片的惊鸿一瞥
——小评Radiohead及《In Rainbows》
 
虽然实体唱片还没出，但通过网络率先发声并有说将引起革命的《In Rainbows》还是被许多人誉为《Kid A》以来最好的唱片。当然，因为《OK Computer》被抬到史无前例的高度，而《Kid A》之后的《Hail To The Thief》以及《Amnesiac》，还有只在日本发行的《Com Lag》都是在“宇宙天碟”的阴影下创作出来的，放到流行音乐领域，“宇宙大碟”或者“天碟”已经是惯用的字眼，而在英伦摇滚乃至当代流行音乐真正排资论辈的话，Radiohead到了何种程度不是吹嘘出来的，“Beatles之后最好的乐队”的头衔也曾被用到过许多乐队身上，而在Radiohead这里最没有争议，因为他们最有自己的风格。

近年主唱Thom Yorke和吉他手Jonny Greenwood分别出过自己的唱片，其实Thom Yorke越来越钟情电子乐是人所公知的事情，而据说Jonny Greenwood近年来只听雷鬼，所以在这张新唱片发出来之前很让人担忧这究竟会是一张什么样的实验或者纠缠。至于抛弃了唱片公司先自己上传到网络上这些事情对国内乐迷基本上没什么影响，全部都是DIY也许更适合这几个哥们儿继续自己的自然与自恋，与Coldplay当时被唱片公司逼得喘不过气来相比，当然还是这样更舒服。

《In Rainbows》当然要好过去年的《The Eraser》，许多人还是遗憾没有更多听到Jonny Greenwood的扫弦，但《Bodysnatchers》和《All I Need》立即把失散已久的魂全勾回来了，Radiohead最让人熟悉并且感动的元素全在这里，也许是电子化的圆润和突如其来的爆裂更适合Thom嗓子的迂回；也许是鼓机的机械律动和键盘的质感氛围更能吸纳雷鬼的内核扩散，总之在这些几乎是两三年前就创作出来的曲目中，你能找到自己想要的感动和出其不意的激动。《OK Computer》这样的唱片可遇不可求，《In Rainbows》里，其实能找到自《Kid A》以来的轨迹，并且在《In Rainbows》也有循序渐进的整体性。

之前的《Hail to the Thief》以及《Kid A》与《Amnesiac》，整支乐队给人的感觉就是越来越晦涩，过多电子因素的环绕以及想象力的扩张让乐迷觉得压抑，早期以及《The Bends》时代的华丽夭矫吉他与媚惑分裂嗓音被越来越多的冰冷感笼罩。乐队的走向似乎是在人为地削弱作品歌曲的旋律化，依靠更多实验音效元素来淡化情感温度，将乐队动态机械化。仿佛是在一种失控的想像力的驾御下，成为了盲目的游牧式的驰骋者；或者是在大海航行中为了自由而迷失方向的水手，有了充分的可能却不能集中一个方向用力，只能凭借水流的动向和自身的意志来完成，情绪收敛，情感隐匿，智慧和技术统治了旋律。

《In Rainbows》给出的信号是，乐队似乎又重新回归凡间，只不过是在高空游历与彩虹映照之后的重塑，思考当然从来不缺乏，而灵性和舒适终于再次贯通，灵性不是不要技术，而是技术是在开创之后的情感参与，不再那么生硬；舒适不是不再分裂，而是分裂之后和分裂纠缠之中的和谐，当分裂成为一种常态，和谐就成了一种罕见的共振状态，在《Bodysnatchers》前半段的挣扎中，在《All I Need》后半段的振奋中，终于重新找到了几乎被遗忘的Radiohead，“阳光总在风雨后”应该不足以表达，这种风雨之后的彩虹映现和情感投射不仅仅是在半空的，而是辐射之后的重构，游牧之后确立的路标，迷失之后再度得以出力的岛屿和绿洲，被想象力控制之后的反控制，找回自我灵性之后的自然闪光。

如果说这张《In Rainbows》只是由于长久的期待而产生的小别重逢的过于亲昵，或者只是内心的情结放大以及观念先行之后的暧昧，并且当然功劳簿上不能缺少Nigel Godrich精雕细琢的作工，但更重要，仍然是游牧和放逐之后的作为，Phil Selway沉稳的四四拍鼓击再度主推，配合着Colin Greenwood不刻意彰显掷地有声的贝斯声线，之前的主角Johnny Greenwood吉他主调不过度阐释，而是在细微和关键点到位地画龙点睛。被压抑过的情感因素不过多宣泄，而是有的放矢。Thom的嗓音更是愈加炉火纯青，放得开而不失神髓，收得回而不显凝滞。青春时的朋克意气羽化为坦荡，尽管俗世苍穹依旧，但因为有过彩虹之旅，一切都有了说服力——“陌生人带着秘密奔跑过去，踏出暂时可辨认的足迹，然后消失，那个陌生人是个哭完泪水在申辩的预言家，忏悔和告诉所有路过的人那些所有的良知和屈辱。”

栖息在苍凉的诠释之美
——小评Cat Power的《Jukebox》
　　
很少有翻唱专辑可以获得一致的好评，Cat Power的《Jukebox》却可以做到，甚至有专业媒体给这张向Bob Dylan、Billie Holiday、Janis Joplin、Frank Sinatra等前辈致敬的唱片打出5分的满分，“她栖息在别人的歌曲裡，以极具说服力的嗓音绽放光芒”。这也许就是Cat Power的魅力以及魔力，可是对于一般的乐迷来说，Cat Power是谁？这个奇怪的名字，是一支乐队还是一个人？

王家卫的《蓝莓之夜》给大家一个认识Cat Power的机会，在影片中著名的王大导演不仅选用了Cat Power的两首歌作为配乐，当演员们找不到状态的时候，王家卫还会放Cat Power的《The Greatest》让大家去听去看去感觉。而可能大部分看过电影的人也还不知道，在片中扮演Jude Law前妻的神秘女子，正是Cat Power本人。而根据王家卫的说法，《蓝莓之夜》本来没有计划安排Jude Law前妻出镜的构思，后来之所以让Cat Power亲自客串并且有和Jude Law的吻戏，全都是因为Cat Power是大帅哥Jude Law的影迷，而这个“吻戏”也算帮Cat Power完成了一桩心愿。如此看来，一个如此得被誉为“小资”标签并且非一般熟悉热衷音乐品味不低的王家卫的青睐，也隐约可见Cat Power是何许人等。

Cat Power当然不是本名，这位原本叫Chan Marshall的创作才女歌手来自美国南方的佐治亚州，和所有怀揣音乐梦想的人一样，在20岁的时候抱着一把吉他辍学来到纽约，在酒吧和先锋艺术的氛围中练就了混合Bob Dylan、The Velvet Underground、Sonic Youth的精灵才学和饱经岁月洗礼的嗓音。在一次为另类女歌手Liz Phair担任暖场嘉宾的演唱会上，被著名的独立乐团Sonic Youth的鼓手Steve Shelley相中，于是伙同几个志同道合的人开始创作，随着1995年的《Dear Sir》与1996年的《Myra Lee》等唱片的推出，她融合了蓝调、乡村、民谣以及爵士乐的音乐风格开始崭露头角。再加上一头深褐色长发、带着害羞青涩气质，独特慵懒的南方嗓音，忧郁中见洒脱，脆弱中有刚烈，烟熏火燎而又青翠欲滴，当然还有一直坚持的独立创作风格，伴随着2003年的《You Are Free》和2006年的《The Greatest》，Cat Power的国际知名度也与日俱增。“摩登版的Patti Smith、PJ Harvey”，“女版的Lou Reed、Leonard Cohen”这些称号纷至沓来。而之所以与王家卫结缘，也是因为王导在美国逛唱片店不经意间听到Cat Power的声音，而当时的唱片店还快关门了，在王家卫的恳求下店主特别网开一面让两颗相似的灵魂得以碰撞。

《Jukebox》又是一张什么样的唱片呢？作为继2000年的《The Covers Record》之后的第二张翻唱专辑，如今几近成为北美独立乐坛一姐的Cat Power没有延续自己《The Greatest》时期的流畅圆润基调，反而背其道而行之，用这张“Jukebox”（点唱机）来为自己的音乐生涯张目。据说在出唱片之前的一段时间Cat Power因为无法在舞台上控制自己一度在精神疗养院度过，好在她从崩溃的边缘悬崖勒马，也许这张《Jukebox》正是她对自己的一种参透和交待，于是请来澳洲独立名团Dirty Three（两年前曾来中国演出）鼓手Jim White与Blues Explosion的吉他手Judah Bauer，用仿佛是被烟酒磨砺过的不同以往的沙哑嗓音，借助老一辈的“经典教父”James Brown、Bob Dylan、Frank Sinatra、Hank Williams以及“传奇天后”Billie Holiday、Janis Joplin与Joni Mitchell，在爵士、蓝调与民谣的交响中完成粗粝而又抑郁、温柔并且神经质的寂寥世界。

开场曲《New York New York》曾被Frank Sinatra和Liza Minnelli等爵士歌手演绎过，在Cat Power的重新操刀编曲下配合刚劲的鼓点显得力道十足，但粗放中能听出忧郁；而翻唱自爵士名伶Billie Holiday的《Woman Left Lonely》也弱化了爵士乐的凄厉，放大了梦幻般的微醺和漂浮；改编自“灵魂教父”James Brown的《Lost Someone》以及全美蓝调音乐奖得主Jessie Mae Hemphill的《Lord，Help The Poor & Needy》，在简单的键盘和空心吉他环绕下，把灵魂乐和福音元素纳入Cat Power习惯的蓝调风情；略显特别的是向伟大的Bob Dylan致敬，不仅把他的《I Believe In You》全新以简约风格呈现，而收录了一首新歌《Song To Bobby》，描写初次和Bob Dylan见面时的虔诚心情。当然不会少了Janis Joplin和Joni Mitchel，她们在气质上是相通的，虽然Janis Joplin早已谢幕，但如果她能活到今世看到Cat Power翻唱她的《Woman Left Lonely》，不羁与孤立的心灵应该得到宽慰；而Joni Mitchel的《Blue》，钢琴和迷幻背景，两个人都喜欢绘画，这分明就是在寂静的夜让人独自品尝的夜色的画面。

说Cat Power用自己的手法和个性为这些经典名曲赋予新生命似乎还不足以表现《Jukebox》的好，当然你还可以用纵向看Cat Power较之以前似乎更向根源布鲁斯以及爵士乐靠拢，并且她的创作和演绎能力没有减退，她并没有携名气提升的机会向主流靠拢。虽然有些歌曲听起来显得过分苍白无感情，也许与她在完成唱片之前的抑郁有关，也许还与青年期的酗酒有关，但对于女人来说，这份被岁月雕刻出的嗓音才更接近世道苍凉。苍凉从来都是比悲壮更接近生命的底色，而苍凉之美更是建立在孤寂基调上的回响，所以这张《Jukebox》越发让人心碎，在越是夜深人静越是怅惘无奈的时候，越能听出味道。Cat Power不仅能够与王家卫产生共鸣，在当下大热的影片《朱诺》（Juno）里，你还是能听到Cat Power的《Sea Of Love》，饱经沧桑之后对美的诠释，就不仅仅是苍凉的美，还有刻骨的真和悲悯的善，而这一切的结合，这为叫做Cat Power的歌手还将继续自己的“Power”与挥洒。
 
《蓝莓之夜》电影原声
　　
王家卫的电影配乐已经可以独立起来作为唱片欣赏了，无论是从早期的《阿飞正传》还是《重庆森林》，到《春光乍泄》和《花样年华》的时候，王家卫迷幻疏离的镜头与背景音乐的感知和移用、拼贴、渲染、配合已经到了炉火纯青的地步，而到《蓝莓之夜》的时候借助公路题材完成的朴素中涵有华美缤纷的音乐之旅更是让人流连忘返。
许多人都在讨论爵士小天后Norah Jones在《蓝莓之夜》之中的表现的时候，在电影中还有另外一个有个性的美国独立音乐歌手Cat Power；而当大家开始把目光投向Cat Power的短暂露面以及惊艳乐曲的时候，王家卫又会告诉你他和个性小生Jude Law之所以一拍即合，是因为他们都是Tom Waits的歌迷，他们都喜欢一首叫《Rain Dog》的歌（这首歌讲的是下雨后，狗因为无法辩识自己的气味而回不了家）；而当大家开始专门研究早有盛名的电影配乐家Ry Cooder（代表作品为文德斯执导的公路片《德州巴黎》）、阿根廷人Gustavo Santaolalla（代表作品为《断背山》和《通天塔》）和日本大师梅林茂（代表作品为《花样年华》和《2046》），另一边厢的Natalie Portman早已经开出了自己的唱片清单，原来这位被称为是“奥黛丽·赫本再世”的演员是独立音乐和民谣的忠实拥趸……
这些还都是显性的被大家熟知的或者是至少站在台面上的人，那些隐匿在大屏幕背后的，那些用旋律勾连起画面的能工巧匠，那些使得影片更为调和的声响，还有美国新一代爵士名伶Cassandra Wilson异色演绎Neil Young的《Harvest Moon》，骚灵歌手Mavis Staples以美国民权运动为主题的《Eyes On The Prize》（取自2007大碟《We'll Never Turn Back》），78岁高龄在去年辞世的有“The Queen Mother Of The Blues”之称的Ruth Brown，其怨曲《Looking Back》都出现在《蓝莓之夜》，而Amos Lee的《Skipping Stones》（取自2006年Blue Note厂牌的《Supply & Demand》），其中短短一段Organ独奏更犹如惊鸿一瞥。此外还有王家卫自己的音乐顾问Steve Macklam和Guadalupe Jolicouer，这些人，和王家卫的音乐感知一起，为《蓝莓之夜》完成了一场声情并冒爵色古香的音乐旅行。
　　 　
《River：The Joni Letters》
 
献给传奇女音乐人Joni Mitchell的《River：The Joni Letters》，让爵士乐钢琴家Herbie Hancock摘得2008美国格莱美奖的年度最佳专辑。作为1964年Stan Getz和Joao Gilberto的《Getz/Gilberto》之后，第二张得到格莱美年度最佳专辑的爵士乐唱片。
《River：The Joni Letters》，大多是Joni Mitchell在《Clouds》（1969年）到《Hejira》（1976年）这个创作期间的作品，以及曾经触动Joni心灵深处的Duke Ellington的名曲《Solitude》，以及萨克斯风手Wayne Shorter在60年代中期和Herbie Hancock同在Miles Davis四重奏乐队的时期写下的《Nefertiti》。Hancock以Joni Mitchell的作品或影响她的音乐为素材，透过其辞藻及所勾勒出来的意象，在心灵沟通和跨界乐器融合后叠映出崭新的音乐样貌。
Joni Mitchell本身即有爵士乐的衷爱与素养，她自己在2007年就出了一张富涵爵士意味的《Shine》，所以《River：The Joni Letters》被看作是“一个深具灵活性的爵士音乐家和一个极其不愿妥协的、具有独创风格的天才之间的融通协作”。Hancock采纳了Joni Mitchell已有的爵士乐倾向并赋予它更广泛的阐释。既是经典的Herbie Hancock自己的概念生发，又证明了Joni的人文色彩作品能经得起不同方式的诠释以及可延展性。
当然，Hancock还是请来了一群同好得力干将通力合作，新生代女伶Norah Jones诠释Joni Mitchell最畅销专辑的经典曲《Court and Spark》，Norah Jones自己的风采在Hancock清冽甘甜触键里和Joni相映生辉；Wayne Shorter的一贯精彩绝伦的萨克斯风，优雅地出现在Joni诗歌律制鲜明的韵脚之间，仿佛是历史在诉说，而又如在田园牧歌的心旷神怡。最后一首歌《The Jungle Line》，则是Joni Mitchell的老乡Leonard Cohen，这位同样拥有诗人身份并且通透声音的老男人，他在Hancock的钢琴伴奏下吟唱Joni的诗简直是珠联壁合。这一切在Hancock的钢琴语言里得以熠熠生辉，献给Joni Mitchell，也献给诗歌，献给音乐，献给人性的闪光。

“One Two  Three  Four/Tell me  that  you  love  me  more sleepless/long nights sighs/what my youth was for……”苹果iPod Nano广告歌，那个蓝衣服的“苹果女孩”，鞠躬的样子很可爱。

“I'm a new soul/I can do this strange world/Hoping I could learn a bit about how to give and take……lalalalalalalalalalala……”苹果Macbook Air广告歌，轻灵、明朗，随口即来。

即使你不是苹果的用户，你也应该听过这两首歌，对，就是年前的《1234》和当下的《New Soul》，就是在商场，在电梯里，在电视上，不经意间听到的女声唱腔，给人留下印象的简约动听的旋律，甚至取代了所代言的产品。可是问题来了，这两首歌是哪两位歌手唱出来的呢？钱钟书先生早前曾说：“假如你吃了一个鸡蛋觉得不错，又何必要认识那下蛋的母鸡呢？”但在高科技搜索发达的今天，一定要找到“下蛋的母鸡”才过瘾，因为找到了这样的歌手，才能听到她们更多的好歌，而歌迷的这种心理正好被苹果所掌控，于是网民的这种搜索给苹果带来百万的搜索点击量，而这两名女歌手终于也见庐山真面目，她们因苹果而被人听到，因苹果广告而被人关注，她们也更是给苹果公司带来良好的广告效应和全球美誉，她们就是因《1234》红遍全球的加拿大歌手Feist和因《New Soul》被人关注的法国歌手Yael Naim，我们权且把她俩称为“苹果女郎”或者“苹果新人”。

Compete（一家北美的互联网统计公司，提供网站的流量统计等服务）最近披露了一则有趣的广告成功案例。苹果最一系列电视广告的主角分别iPod Nano、iPod Touch、Macbook Air，分别找来三个不怎么出名歌手，但歌曲却非常好听，好听到观众看完这则广告，连忙回到电脑前面去搜寻这些歌曲的名字。Compete捕捉了从2007年8月到2008年1月搜索引擎的关键字，发现其中关于这三支广告的关键字，加起来一共有100万次以上的搜索。其中iPod Nano广告中的Feist所唱的《1234》一曲，单单9月份一个月就吸引了42万次的搜索。由于观众并不知道这首歌是谁唱的，所以观众搜索的字符串大多是“iPod Nano Commercial Song”（iPod Nano的广告歌），其次是“iPod Nano Commercial”（iPod Nano广告），然后是“iPod Commercial song”（iPod的广告歌），再其次是“iPod Commercial”（iPod广告），可以感受到这些观众急于找这支好听的歌，却不知道该怎么查，只好模棱两可地去搜索“iPod那支广告的好听歌曲”之类的关键字。
苹果的这种做法不仅让这几位歌手被关注，更是极为有效地锁定了目标用户，不是强行把广告词灌输给观众，而是吸引他们去主动搜索和认知。喜欢一段美秒旋律的人，肯定远比喜欢iPod的人还多很多；想再听一次这首美妙歌曲的人，肯定比想知道iPod Nano在做什么的还多很多。所以，苹果通过这些好听的旋律和个性的歌手抓住了更大的族群，让他们”第二次”看到iPod的广告。
其实在2005年，一支超跳的广告歌在坊间就不停被询问，许多歌迷都在询问iPod Shuffle广告中那首震动全身细胞、不断反复唱着“Jerk It Out”的广告曲到底是谁唱的，答案揭晓竟然是来自北欧瑞典的摇滚乐队Caesars，搭乘这股iPod的顺风车，Caesars很神气地站在镁光灯前告诉大家，瑞典除了ABBA外还有个叫作Caesars的乐队。
2006年的时候，苹果甚至还捧红过一支金属乐队，来自澳洲的Wolfmother，凭借一首《Love Train》爆裂的节奏和iPod特有的剪影广告，一举拿下第49届格莱美音乐奖的最佳硬摇滚演奏奖。苹果的这种捧新人新歌的效果甚至要好过与诸如U2乐队、Eminem、Bob Dylan以及Paul McCartney等大牌的合作，也逐渐让苹果尝到甜头，于是把目标更多投向歌好听但还不太出名的新人。
2007年苹果iphone推出之前的预告广告，多部电影的混杂，一句简单的“Hi”，配合着冰岛的女唱作人Eberg的一首《Inside Your Head》，这样迷离的电子音乐让人对未来的科技充满期待。多次试水后，苹果在分别在2007底和2008年初别出心裁地推出《1234》和《New Soul》，也终于让Feist和Yael Naim两位“个性女声”成为“超级女声”，在全球范围大放异彩。

苹果双姝

Feist——枫叶国的民谣精灵
iPod Nano电视广告歌曲《1234》，让这位出生在1976年，来自加拿大的民谣女歌手Feist走向世界。其实她之前的一张唱片《Let It Die》，便曾被Dior、Lacoste等品牌定为广告歌曲，其中一首《Mushaboom》的甜美活泼搭配年轻化的休闲老牌Lacoste，时装品牌Dior则选用《Gatekeeper》配合成熟风情的莎朗·斯通作最新广告代言。此女颇有传奇性，学生时代曾组建朋克乐队Placebo（英伦有一支同名的迷幻乐队），并有幸为朋克老祖The Ramones暖场，后却因病失声，差点无法演唱，后来在多伦多医好，于是在租来的小小寝室中，她开始利用一台破旧的四轨机为自己录音，而此时她所演绎的音乐不再是朋克。一把吉他，还有简单的歌声，这就是来自Feist的新尝试，做一个民谣歌手，以清新路线出道。
最初藉由挪威清新民谣组合Kings Of Convenience的封面入镜与乐迷见面的Feist，到2007的唱片《The Reminder》时，已经是第50届格莱美4项提名，朱诺奖4项大奖的“红人”。更是一举打破了事业场得意、情场失利的娱乐圈魔咒，尽情的与加拿大的音乐人Kevin Drew谈起了恋爱。而这一切，在相当程度上归功于《1234》，Feist把传说中的童话那般美好的温馨在轻快的歌声里面呈现了出来，这首听起来像童谣，全长3分11秒的单曲，是受英国导演阿伦·帕克的电影《名扬四海》的启发，MV拍成之后就已经光彩夺目，混合着独立、爵士、民谣以及Bossa Nova的唱法如同在耳边呢喃，像是Bjork与Joni Mitchell的混合体，时尚与清新兼具，天真与鬼魅并存，一时间让iPod Nano的网络搜索飙升350%。
到后来连美国最八卦爆料的博客人物Perez Hilton，这个让好莱坞明星们头疼的家伙也对Feist推崇备至，并在博客上大声疾呼，号召自己的粉丝应该去听Feist的唱片，而不要再去买小甜甜布兰妮的账了，“布兰妮和她无法相比，菲斯特具有不可思议的音乐才能，她是一位出色的歌手、作曲者和表演者。”此外《The Reminder》专辑中的另一首歌《My Moon My Man》还成为了美国无线网络商Verizon的广告歌。

Yael Naim——犹太族的轻盈女伶
这名创作女歌手1978年出生于巴黎，4岁去以色列生活，在一个小镇上渡过孩提时代。小时候看了电影《莫扎特》后学了10年钢琴。但听到父亲喜欢的Beatles和Aretha Franklin（灵魂歌后），尤其是听到Beatles的《Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band》和《Abbey Road》之后，她的兴趣随之发生转变，于是开始从当时的流行音乐、民谣以及爵士乐中汲取灵感，并渐渐改变自己羞涩的个性，自己作曲创作，并通过学习Aretha Franklin的歌曲来锻炼自己声音和发音。18岁那年，一个偶然的机会Yael Naim发现了加拿大民谣歌手Joni Mitchell的一张专辑，从此不再与音乐离开，她开始在以色列当地的一些爵士酒吧唱歌，并与当时到访的Wyton Marslis等爵士乐音乐家合作（有趣的是，两个跟都曾被苹果选中）。
很难想象这个温柔顺眼的女孩子和“上尉诗人”James Blunt一样服过兵役，不过在部队的时候她却组了一个叫The Anti Collision的乐队，“我的古典音乐教育，我对流行音乐、爵士乐、民俗歌曲的热爱……我不知道怎样将它们融在一起，但我知道我要写歌。”2000年的时候，Yael Naim有机会被邀请到巴黎参演一个慈善音乐会，终于因为出色的音乐悟性得以被一个音乐制作人看中，紧接着是导演Elie Chouraqui，邀请她在自己的电影中出演角色，Yael Naim更是为电影《Harrison's Flowers》配乐。
就在星途一片光明的时候，2001年，Yael Naim的处女作唱片《In a Man’s Womb》问世，然而唱片几乎没有影响的惨败让这个犹太女子开始认识世事的艰险，这个拥有金嗓子的年轻歌手陷入了一段理想破灭期。也就在Yael Naim陷入迷茫的时候，一个来自西印度群岛的鼓手David Donatien出现，他的技能和想象力让Yael Naim一度沉寂的音乐潜能再一次释放。David的音乐审美以及制作能力为Yael指引方向，两个人花了两年的时间在Yael自己家的录音室共同策划制作同名专辑《Yael Naim》，专辑在2007年10推出，歌曲以犹太语及英语演唱，主打就是这首被苹果Macbook Air采用的《New Soul》。整张唱片异国风情浓厚，独特的透明系声线波平如镜，仿佛置身大自然的纯净，时而以希伯来文夹杂法文游唱，时而用以英文坠饰。当然，苹果只是选中了这一首，而在这张同名唱片中，还有《Too Long》以及翻唱自布兰妮的《Toxic》等许多好听的歌。

如果你觉得她俩不错，还可以多听听这些

《Jerk It Out》——Caesars
1995年成军的Caesars来自遥远的北欧瑞典，与两位淡定的女歌手相比，这支被滚石杂志赞誉为“Garage Aesthetes”、融合60年代迷幻摇滚与Garage Rock四人摇滚新贵，之前还有一首《Gonna Kick You Out》被用作名酒皇冠斯米诺的广告歌。这支乐队在瑞典呼风唤雨，瑞典以外的乐迷还无缘认识，苹果刚好给了他们打开国际知名度的机会。

《Inside Your Head》——Eberg
同样遥远的冰岛，有着许多和Eberg类似的独立音乐人，孩子气的电音民谣，在纯器乐或者失真器乐的迂回中左右摇摆，在冰岛的严寒声效中浅吟低唱，就像儿童在穿梭机的感觉，冰醇但不冷漠，简单安静但有怪趣活泼，低调而又欢乐，更像是一个童心未泯的孩子表达着对世界的好奇。

《Perfect Timing》——Orba Squara
美国本土的另类乐团，算是苹果iPhone自Eberg之后的实验之作，这个清新另类的女声至今仍不为人所熟悉，但《Perfect Timing》却唯美得让人陶醉，作为纽约地下的先锋音乐力量，Orba Squara更多的在乎是自己而不是乐迷，于是只顾了表达自己，反倒是最自我最舒服，是属于那种可以独自一个人在黑夜静静品尝的声音。

《Flathead》——The Fratellis
The Fratellis是现在苏格兰最被看好的独立音乐团体，已经有评论把他们和The Libertines（凯特·摩丝前男友皮特·多赫蒂的前乐队）相提并论了，集合了英国Indie-Pop音乐的一切优点，俏皮而又别具一格。主唱Jon Fratelli有着和英国当下最红乐队Artic Monkeys的Alex Turner相似的嗓音，动感、干净而有力量。

《Ride》——The Vines
这支来自澳洲的乐队一度被看作是Nirvana和Radiohead的结合版，也许是因为不堪重负，乐队一度相当消沉，主唱Craig Nicholls打架吸毒酗酒无恶不做，甚至被怀疑有精神障碍。但好在他们终于没有自己毁掉自己，这首《Ride》也可看作是乐队重新振作后的代表作，主唱的野性爆发力和华丽的吉他噪音，在相当程度上走在了欧美“复古风潮”的最前沿。

《Music Is My Hot，Hot Sex》——CSS
巴西的CSS（Cansei De Ser Sexy）是第一支签约美国著名独立场牌Sub Pop的既而在全世界获得成功的南美乐队。乐队风格偏电子氛围下的流行，女主唱的嗓音干脆但是媚惑，别有风情。2007年随着iPod Touch广告歌《Music Is My Hot，Hot Sex》的播放，歌词中“音乐是我男朋友；音乐是我女朋友”与iPod的理念不谋而合。

《Walkie Talkie Man》——Steriogram
来自新西兰的乐队Steriogram是一支Rap-Rock的乐队，一开始他们只是业余演唱，但是对乐队的承诺和对音乐的爱好，使他们一个接一个失去了工作，只好背水一战。他们的音乐轻快有活力，在速度中体现青春的精神，乐队受到早期的Green Day的影响。单曲《Walkie Talkie Man》就是他们的经典所在，体现年轻人的疯狂与自我。

《Feel Good Inc.》——Gorillaz
前英伦大团Blur主脑Damon Albarn创立的著名虚拟乐队，曾在两三年前红遍全球，是苹果当时和找最“潮”音乐人合作的典范。Gorillaz即便是流行但音乐却好的一塌糊涂，你应该记得他们在格莱美上与麦当娜的合作。这首歌借用的是宫崎俊《天空之城》的意境，颓废的荒诞，充满未来感的动画形象，以及主唱2D散漫、慵懒的嗓音已经吸引了不少世界各地歌迷的注意力。

《Vertigo》——U2
U2和苹果是真正的相得益彰，苹果设计出iPod的U2版，U2则为苹果贡献两首歌，此外还有一首《Original of the Species》。其中《Vertigo》更是重现了U2久违的摇滚张力，即使在80后的年轻人听起来，也依然是一首激情与才华并茂的十分随性、自在，毫无矫饰的纯摇滚作品。为了纪念U2 iPod的发布，苹果电脑还发表了《Vertigo》音乐MV的广告（片中角色被改为有iPod特色的剪影）。

苹果今年推出的“新人”
苹果在今年美国偶像（America Idol）期间以及各大电视网上推出两版新的iPod iTunes的广告歌，《What I'm Looking For》和《Shut Up and Let Me Go》，也让这两首歌的演唱者开始声名鹊起，分别是来自美国本土的音乐人Brendan Benson和来自英国的The Ting Tings。

Brendan Benson——民谣书呆子
美国底特律独立唱作歌手，曾与在美国当红的乐队The White Stripes的核心人物Jack White组建超级乐团The Raconteurs。之前的Brendan Benson在美国的流行乐坛一直没有多大知名度，并且一直只是在幻想着身边有两个驾御旋律的吉他手，一个和声歌手可以给他的作品陪衬出民谣式的和谐。但其实他在美国的独立音乐圈却有着相当的好评以及地位，从Jack White能够与他合作可见一斑。这个外表穿摇滚外套的民谣书呆子，从出道1996年至今只出过两张完整的唱片，看似像游吟诗人一样淡泊名利，这首苹果新的iPod Touch广告歌来自Brendan Benson的第三张个人专辑《The Alternative to Love》。
他的音乐与他的形象一样干净洗练，不浑浊，充满了摇滚乐的率直，一般都是在讲述个人苦乐参半的生活，却也不失爱情一样的甜美和古灵精怪，所以有人比他看作是“民谣的Beck”，随时随地会用他的原声器乐的漂亮音色为灰尘尘的闲言碎语做出精妙装点。Brendan Benson本人一直在美国各地举办不插电演唱会，与主流歌坛本是“老死不相往来”，很不幸，苹果给了他一次抛头露面的机会，让更多的人认识到这样一位游走在Hip-Hop和舞曲充斥的都市的边缘，还有一群这样依靠一己之力本色演出的音乐人。

The Ting Tings——新潮电音活宝
一支被英国音乐杂志NME力捧的乐队，BBC“Sound of 2008”的第三名，鼓手Jules De Martino和金发美女吉他手兼主唱Katie White组成的英国新晋Indie-pop（独立流行）和Electro-pop（电音流行）融合的乐队。今年年前曾推出过一首大热单曲《Great DJ》，新唱片《We Started Nothing》即将面世。大家都把他们看成是“英伦音乐”的新希望，苹果在这个时候插上一脚，无疑是加装了马达。
乐队两人深受Blondie、Kate Bush、Tom Tom Club、Talking Heads的音乐熏陶，在歌曲中是80后唱的带有一点复古的上世纪80年代的味道，风格上更靠近之前被苹果相中的The Vines和Jet，但因为电气化的参与要比二者更圆滑更调皮和倔强，可又不同与主流流行音乐的油滑。对于这样的新生力量，一下子因为苹果可以得以和Bob Dylan、Paul McCartney、U2这些前辈比肩，又有Feist和Yael Naim珠玉在前，加上新唱片的推出，The Ting Tings无疑同样成名在望。
《Shut Up and Let Me Go》当然也是用极其抢耳的旋律和提神的节奏完成的一首琅琅上口的作品，容易入耳又热闹无比，听过几遍就可以跟着唱。

苹果的选歌品味和选歌标准

苹果除了拥有高端的设计能力外，还拥有非凡音乐审美的品味，从苹果的iPod以及系列产品的广告歌曲来看，苹果曾一度钟情过Hip-Hop和说唱，钟情过电子乐和的新潮的虚拟乐队，甚至还有老资格的“摇滚天团”、“民谣诗人”和“爵士教父”，有在流行乐坛主导过的红极一时的复古风。当苹果在选歌和市场运作上越来越成熟，苹果的广告歌曲甚至对主流的流行音乐趋势但有了前瞻性，从近两年的选择来看，在主流流行边缘的独立流行越来越对苹果的口味，在相当程度上代表了流行音乐的发展方向。

简约而不简单
其实无论是《1234》还是《New Soul》，以及这首很应景的《Music Is My Hot，Hot Sex》，和当下开始热起来的《Shut Up and Let Me Go》，这些歌里没有什么大道理，没有慷慨激昂的情绪，甚至没有深沉的情感，比如这首最红的《New Soul》，也不过是在说“我刚来到这个奇怪的世界不久，希望能够懂得如何给予如何索取，感到过快乐也有恐惧，希望学到什么是真实什么是信念，发现爱不是一件容易的事，想方设法与人交流却经常犯错……”；而在Feist的《1234》中，也是一个女孩子在自省，“我有时候会想，把青春交给你到底是为什么，你不在乎，可对我来说又是那么珍贵。我像个孩子一样，天真热切地来到你身边，可也没能真的给你些什么，于是发现原来我们都是自私的人，因为我和你一样，要的太多……”都是普通人都能遇到的活生生的情感体验和心灵投射，却又不同与我国那些彩铃歌曲的一味的或者哀怨或者苦情或者麻木或者盲目，因为这些歌里有清晰的自我意识和自省在。
从音乐上旋律很简单，编曲和制作都不复杂，不过是一个歌手拿着吉他或者弹着钢琴在自说自话，或者是乐队在一起调皮耍酷，然而正是这份简约却创造出非一般的意境和美，简约到让人张口即来，跳脱的画面让人忍不住参与。当然还有就是这些歌曲在副歌部分都很出彩，慵懒而又带劲，在复调的狂欢中让人印象深刻。

最好是唱作人
当65岁的“民谣教父”Bob Dylan曾背着吉他，用他越来越沙哑的嗓音唱出iPod的广告歌《Someday Baby》时，已经给出最好的象征以及标签，就是苹果喜欢这样有人文气息的创作型歌手，最好是自己能写词谱曲，自己演奏自己唱的。比如U2、The Vines这样的摇滚乐队当然是不在话下，即使是Black Eyed Peas、Daft Punk这样的说唱组合，也不是简单的偶像团体，比如Black Eyed Peas的成员之一Will.I.Am已经是整个美国最出色的制作人，包括流行乐天王迈克尔·杰克逊，天后玛丽亚·凯莉在内的新唱片他都有参与。Daft Punk自己执导的电影甚至参加了戛纳影展；Gorillaz作为最著名的虚拟乐队是走在时代最前列的，几位幕后人员更是了得，前Blur主唱Damon Albarn在英国流行音乐中的地位大约相当于华语圈的李宗盛，形象设计Jamie Hewlett更是漫画大师，制作班底几乎囊括了各地的潮流音乐玩家。
单个人的比如Eberg、Feist、Yael Naim以及Brendan Benson，不过是万千独立唱作艺人中的一员，像他们这样的音乐人，在城市的边缘唱游以及在酒吧中驻唱的歌手举不胜举。因为与主流的流行音乐以及娱乐圈保持距离，比如Yael Naim的第一张个人唱片根本就吃不开，而Brendan Benson大多数是自己和自己玩，所以他们才得以保留和延续了流行音乐中的音乐本位，没有刻意地迎合以及口水和泡沫，不会像流星一样转瞬即逝。即使是因为苹果而成名，也不过像Brendan Benson终于可以组自己梦寐中的乐队，Feist终于可以租一间好一点的录音室。

英雄不问出处
即使不考评苹果的全球策略，从被他们相中的这些歌曲的演唱者的国籍来看，苹果几乎就没有过多考虑过这些“英雄”在自哪里，都是以音乐本身的角度来选择的。比如这其中的Jet、The Vines、Wolfmother是澳洲乐队，Steriogram来自新西兰；Eberg和Caesars是从冰天雪地的北欧，Black Eyed Peas和CSS有中北美和南美背景；Daft Punk、Rinocerose和Yael Naim是法国籍，U2是爱尔兰籍，The Fratellis是苏格兰乐队；Paul McCartney、Damon Albarn、The Ting Tings都是大洋彼岸的英国，Feist则是加拿大人。其中伟大的Bob Dylan和Yael Naim都是犹太人。
从纵向看是老传统与新时代的完美结合，无论是老摇滚还是新民谣，无论是重金属还是舞曲说唱，无论是爵士乐还是电子乐；从横向看则几乎遍布全球，而这一种缺失的一环也算是苹果用户一个庞大市场的亚洲尤其是东亚，却没有自己的歌手被苹果青睐，其实在日本和华语区当下都有一批和Feist、Yael Naim相同风格的女性唱作人，比如陈绮贞和王若琳；而The Ting Tings的曲风则与新晋乐队香港的两人独立乐队My Little Airport、内地的后海大鲨鱼的取向类似，所以如果我们的歌手乐队再努力，哪一天被苹果看中主推一把也并不是完全没有可能，当然，前提条件是这些华语的唱作人能写出比欧美同行更好听的旋律。

China's All-Seeing Eye
　　With the help of U.S. defense contractors, China is building the prototype for a high-tech police state. It is ready for export.

　　Thirty years ago, the city of Shenzhen didn't exist. Back in those days, it was a string of small fishing villages and collectively run rice paddies, a place of rutted dirt roads and traditional temples. That was before the Communist Party chose it — thanks to its location close to Hong Kong's port — to be China's first "special economic zone," one of only four areas where capitalism would be permitted on a trial basis. The theory behind the experiment was that the "real" China would keep its socialist soul intact while profiting from the private-sector jobs and industrial development created in Shenzhen. The result was a city of pure commerce, undiluted by history or rooted culture — the crack cocaine of capitalism. It was a force so addictive to investors that the Shenzhen experiment quickly expanded, swallowing not just the surrounding Pearl River Delta, which now houses roughly 100,000 factories, but much of the rest of the country as well. Today, Shenzhen is a city of 12.4 million people, and there is a good chance that at least half of everything you own was made here: iPods, laptops, sneakers, flatscreen TVs, cellphones, jeans, maybe your desk chair, possibly your car and almost certainly your printer. Hundreds of luxury condominiums tower over the city; many are more than 40 stories high, topped with three-story penthouses. Newer neighborhoods like Keji Yuan are packed with ostentatiously modern corporate campuses and decadent shopping malls. Rem Koolhaas, Prada's favorite architect, is building a stock exchange in Shenzhen that looks like it floats — a design intended, he says, to "suggest and illustrate the process of the market." A still-under-construction superlight subway will soon connect it all at high speed; every car has multiple TV screens broadcasting over a Wi-Fi network. At night, the entire city lights up like a pimped-out Hummer, with each five-star hotel and office tower competing over who can put on the best light show.
　　
　　Many of the big American players have set up shop in Shenzhen, but they look singularly unimpressive next to their Chinese competitors. The research complex for China's telecom giant Huawei, for instance, is so large that it has its own highway exit, while its workers ride home on their own bus line. Pressed up against Shenzhen's disco shopping centers, Wal-Mart superstores — of which there are nine in the city — look like dreary corner stores. (China almost seems to be mocking us: "You call that a superstore?") McDonald's and KFC appear every few blocks, but they seem almost retro next to the Real Kung Fu fast-food chain, whose mascot is a stylized Bruce Lee.
　　
　　American commentators like CNN's Jack Cafferty dismiss the Chinese as "the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years." But nobody told the people of Shenzhen, who are busily putting on a 24-hour-a-day show called "America" — a pirated version of the original, only with flashier design, higher profits and less complaining. This has not happened by accident. China today, epitomized by Shenzhen's transition from mud to megacity in 30 years, represents a new way to organize society. Sometimes called "market Stalinism," it is a potent hybrid of the most powerful political tools of authoritarian communism — central planning, merciless repression, constant surveillance — harnessed to advance the goals of global capitalism.

　  Now, as China prepares to showcase its economic advances during the upcoming Olympics in Beijing, Shenzhen is once again serving as a laboratory, a testing ground for the next phase of this vast social experiment. Over the past two years, some 200,000 surveillance cameras have been installed throughout the city. Many are in public spaces, disguised as lampposts. The closed-circuit TV cameras will soon be connected to a single, nationwide network, an all-seeing system that will be capable of tracking and identifying anyone who comes within its range — a project driven in part by U.S. technology and investment. Over the next three years, Chinese security executives predict they will install as many as 2 million CCTVs in Shenzhen, which would make it the most watched city in the world. (Security-crazy London boasts only half a million surveillance cameras.)
　　
　　The security cameras are just one part of a much broader high-tech surveillance and censorship program known in China as "Golden Shield." The end goal is to use the latest people-tracking technology — thoughtfully supplied by American giants like IBM, Honeywell and General Electric — to create an airtight consumer cocoon: a place where Visa cards, Adidas sneakers, China Mobile cellphones, McDonald's Happy Meals, Tsingtao beer and UPS delivery (to name just a few of the official sponsors of the Beijing Olympics) can be enjoyed under the unblinking eye of the state, without the threat of democracy breaking out. With political unrest on the rise across China, the government hopes to use the surveillance shield to identify and counteract dissent before it explodes into a mass movement like the one that grabbed the world's attention at Tiananmen Square.
　　
　　Remember how we've always been told that free markets and free people go hand in hand? That was a lie. It turns out that the most efficient delivery system for capitalism is actually a communist-style police state, fortressed with American "homeland security" technologies, pumped up with "war on terror" rhetoric. And the global corporations currently earning superprofits from this social experiment are unlikely to be content if the lucrative new market remains confined to cities such as Shenzhen. Like everything else assembled in China with American parts, Police State 2.0 is ready for export to a neighborhood near you.
　　
　　Zhang Yi points to an empty bracket on the dashboard of his black Honda. "It used to hold my GPS, but I leave it at home now," he says. "It's the crime — they are too easy to steal." He quickly adds, "Since the surveillance cameras came in, we have seen a very dramatic decrease in crime in Shenzhen."
　　
　　After driving for an hour past hundreds of factory gates and industrial parks, we pull up to a salmon-color building that Zhang partly owns. This is the headquarters of FSAN: CCTV System. Zhang, a prototypical Shenzhen yuppie in a royal-blue button-down shirt and black-rimmed glasses, apologizes for the mess. Inside, every inch of space is lined with cardboard boxes filled with electronics parts and finished products.
　　
　　Zhang opened the factory two and a half years ago, and his investment has already paid off tenfold. That kind of growth isn't unusual in the field he has chosen: Zhang's factory makes digital surveillance cameras, turning out 400,000 a year. Half of the cameras are shipped overseas, destined to peer from building ledges in London, Manhattan and Dubai as part of the global boom in "homeland security." The other half stays in China, many right here in Shenzhen and in neighboring Guangzhou, another megacity of 12 million people. China's market for surveillance cameras enjoyed revenues of $4.1 billion last year, a jump of 24 percent from 2006.
　　
　　Zhang escorts me to the assembly line, where rows of young workers, most of them women, are bent over semiconductors, circuit boards, tiny cables and bulbs. At the end of each line is "quality control," which consists of plugging the camera into a monitor and making sure that it records. We enter a showroom where Zhang and his colleagues meet with clients. The walls are lined with dozens of camera models: domes of all sizes, specializing in day and night, wet and dry, camouflaged to look like lights, camouflaged to look like smoke detectors, explosion-proof, the size of a soccer ball, the size of a ring box.
　　
　　The workers at FSAN don't just make surveillance cameras; they are constantly watched by them. While they work, the silent eyes of rotating lenses capture their every move. When they leave work and board buses, they are filmed again. When they walk to their dormitories, the streets are lined with what look like newly installed streetlamps, their white poles curving toward the sidewalk with black domes at the ends. Inside the domes are high-resolution cameras, the same kind the workers produce at FSAN. Some blocks have three or four, one every few yards. One Shenzhen-based company, China Security & Surveillance Technology, has developed software to enable the cameras to alert police when an unusual number of people begin to gather at any given location.
　　
　　In 2006, the Chinese government mandated that all Internet cafes (as well as restaurants and other "entertainment" venues) install video cameras with direct feeds to their local police stations. Part of a wider surveillance project known as "Safe Cities," the effort now encompasses 660 municipalities in China. It is the most ambitious new government program in the Pearl River Delta, and supplying it is one of the fastest-growing new markets in Shenzhen.
　　
　　But the cameras that Zhang manufactures are only part of the massive experiment in population control that is under way here. "The big picture," Zhang tells me in his office at the factory, "is integration." That means linking cameras with other forms of surveillance: the Internet, phones, facial-recognition software and GPS monitoring.
　　
　　This is how this Golden Shield will work: Chinese citizens will be watched around the clock through networked CCTV cameras and remote monitoring of computers. They will be listened to on their phone calls, monitored by digital voice-recognition technologies. Their Internet access will be aggressively limited through the country's notorious system of online controls known as the "Great Firewall." Their movements will be tracked through national ID cards with scannable computer chips and photos that are instantly uploaded to police databases and linked to their holder's personal data. This is the most important element of all: linking all these tools together in a massive, searchable database of names, photos, residency information, work history and biometric data. When Golden Shield is finished, there will be a photo in those databases for every person in China: 1.3 billion faces.

　  Shenzhen is the place where the shield has received its most extensive fortifications — the place where all the spy toys are being hooked together and tested to see what they can do. "The central government eventually wants to have city-by-city surveillance, so they could just sit and monitor one city and its surveillance system as a whole," Zhang says. "It's all part of that bigger project. Once the tests are done and it's proven, they will be spreading from the big province to the cities, even to the rural farmland."
　　
　　In fact, the rollout of the high-tech shield is already well under way.
　　
　　When the Tibetan capital of Lhasa was set alight in March, the world caught a glimpse of the rage that lies just under the surface in many parts of China. And though the Lhasa riots stood out for their ethnic focus and their intensity, protests across China are often shockingly militant. In July 2006, workers at a factory near Shenzhen expressed their displeasure over paltry pay by overturning cars, smashing computers and opening fire hydrants. In March of last year, when bus fares went up in the rural town of Zhushan, 20,000 people took to the streets and five police vehicles were torched. Indeed, China has seen levels of political unrest in recent years unknown since 1989, the year student protests were crushed with tanks in Tiananmen Square. In 2005, by the government's own measure, there were at least 87,000 "mass incidents" — governmentspeak for large-scale protests or riots.
　　
　　This increased unrest — a process aided by access to cellphones and the Internet — represents more than a security problem for the leaders in Beijing. It threatens their whole model of command-and-control capitalism. China's rapid economic growth has relied on the ability of its rulers to raze villages and move mountains to make way for the latest factory towns and shopping malls. If the people living on those mountains use blogs and text messaging to launch a mountain-people's-rights uprising with each new project, and if they link up with similar uprisings in other parts of the country, China's dizzying expansion could grind to a halt.
　　
　　At the same time, the success of China's ravenous development creates its own challenges. Every rural village that is successfully razed to make way for a new project creates more displaced people who join the ranks of the roughly 130 million migrants roaming the country looking for work. By 2025, it is projected that this "floating" population will swell to more than 350 million. Many will end up in cities like Shenzhen, which is already home to 7 million migrant laborers.
　　
　　But while China's cities need these displaced laborers to work in factories and on construction sites, they are unwilling to offer them the same benefits as permanent residents: highly subsidized education and health care, as well as other public services. While migrants can live for decades in big cities like Shenzhen and Guangzhou, their residency remains fixed to the rural community where they were born, a fact encoded on their national ID cards. As one young migrant in Guangzhou put it to me, "The local people want to make money from migrant workers, but they don't want to give them rights. But why are the local people so rich? Because of the migrant workers!"
　　
　　With its militant protests and mobile population, China confronts a fundamental challenge. How can it maintain a system based on two dramatically unequal categories of people: the winners, who get the condos and cars, and the losers, who do the heavy labor and are denied those benefits? More urgently, how can it do this when information technology threatens to link the losers together into a movement so large it could easily overwhelm the country's elites?
　　
　　The answer is Golden Shield. When Tibet erupted in protests recently, the surveillance system was thrown into its first live test, with every supposedly liberating tool of the Information Age — cellphones, satellite television, the Internet — transformed into a method of repression and control. As soon as the protests gathered steam, China reinforced its Great Firewall, blocking its citizens from accessing dozens of foreign news outlets. In some parts of Tibet, Internet access was shut down altogether. Many people trying to phone friends and family found that their calls were blocked, and cellphones in Lhasa were blitzed with text messages from the police: "Severely battle any creation or any spreading of rumors that would upset or frighten people or cause social disorder or illegal criminal behavior that could damage social stability."
　　
　　During the first week of protests, foreign journalists who tried to get into Tibet were systematically turned back. But that didn't mean that there were no cameras inside the besieged areas. Since early last year, activists in Lhasa have been reporting on the proliferation of black-domed cameras that look like streetlights — just like the ones I saw coming off the assembly line in Shenzhen. Tibetan monks complain that cameras — activated by motion sensors — have invaded their monasteries and prayer rooms.
　　
　　During the Lhasa riots, police on the scene augmented the footage from the CCTVs with their own video cameras, choosing to film — rather than stop — the violence, which left 19 dead. The police then quickly cut together the surveillance shots that made the Tibetans look most vicious — beating Chinese bystanders, torching shops, ripping metal sheeting off banks — and created a kind of copumentary: Tibetans Gone Wild. These weren't the celestial beings in flowing robes the Beastie Boys and Richard Gere had told us about. They were angry young men, wielding sticks and long knives. They looked ugly, brutal, tribal. On Chinese state TV, this footage played around the clock.

    The police also used the surveillance footage to extract mug shots of the demonstrators and rioters. Photos of the 21 "most wanted" Tibetans, many taken from that distinctive "streetlamp" view of the domed cameras, were immediately circulated to all of China's major news portals, which obediently posted them to help out with the manhunt. The Internet became the most powerful police tool. Within days, several of the men on the posters were in custody, along with hundreds of others.
　　
　　The flare-up in Tibet, weeks before the Olympic torch began its global journey, has been described repeatedly in the international press as a "nightmare" for Beijing. Several foreign leaders have pledged to boycott the opening ceremonies of the games, the press has hosted an orgy of China-bashing, and the torch became a magnet for protesters, with anti-China banners dropped from the Eiffel Tower and the Golden Gate Bridge. But inside China, the Tibet debacle may actually have been a boon to the party, strengthening its grip on power. Despite its citizens having unprecedented access to information technology (there are as many Internet users in China as there are in the U.S.), the party demonstrated that it could still control what they hear and see. And what they saw on their TVs and computer screens were violent Tibetans, out to kill their Chinese neighbors, while police showed admirable restraint. Tibetan solidarity groups say 140 people were killed in the crackdown that followed the protests, but without pictures taken by journalists, it is as if those subsequent deaths didn't happen.
　　
　　Chinese viewers also saw a world unsympathetic to the Chinese victims of Tibetan violence, so hostile to their country that it used a national tragedy to try to rob them of their hard-won Olympic glory. These nationalist sentiments freed up Beijing to go on a full-fledged witch hunt. In the name of fighting a war on terror, security forces rounded up thousands of Tibetan activists and supporters. The end result is that when the games begin, much of the Tibetan movement will be safely behind bars — along with scores of Chinese journalists, bloggers and human-rights defenders who have also been trapped in the government's high-tech web.
　　
　　Police State 2.0 might not look good from the outside, but on the inside, it appears to have passed its first major test.
　　
　　In Guangzhou, an hour and a half by train from Shenzhen, Yao Ruoguang is preparing for a major test of his own. "It's called the 10-million-faces test," he tells me.
　　
　　Yao is managing director of Pixel Solutions, a Chinese company that specializes in producing the new high-tech national ID cards, as well as selling facial-recognition software to businesses and government agencies. The test, the first phase of which is only weeks away, is being staged by the Ministry of Public Security in Beijing. The idea is to measure the effectiveness of face-recognition software in identifying police suspects. Participants will be given a series of photos, taken in a variety of situations. Their task will be to match the images to other photos of the same people in the government's massive database. Several biometrics companies, including Yao's, have been invited to compete. "We have to be able to match a face in a 10 million database in one second," Yao tells me. "We are preparing for that now."
　　
　　The companies that score well will be first in line for lucrative government contracts to integrate face-recognition software into Golden Shield, using it to check for ID fraud and to discover the identities of suspects caught on surveillance cameras. Yao says the technology is almost there: "It will happen next year."
　　
　　When I meet Yao at his corporate headquarters, he is feeling confident about how his company will perform in the test. His secret weapon is that he will be using facial-recognition software purchased from L-1 Identity Solutions, a major U.S. defense contractor that produces passports and biometric security systems for the U.S. government.
　　
　　To show how well it works, Yao demonstrates on himself. Using a camera attached to his laptop, he snaps a picture of his own face, round and boyish for its 54 years. Then he uploads it onto the company's proprietary Website, built with L-1 software. With the cursor, he marks his own eyes with two green plus signs, helping the system to measure the distance between his features, a distinctive aspect of our faces that does not change with disguises or even surgery. The first step is to "capture the image," Yao explains. Next is "finding the face."
　　
　　He presses APPLY, telling the program to match the new face with photos of the same person in the company's database of 600,000 faces. Instantly, multiple photos of Yao appear, including one taken 19 years earlier — proof that the technology can "find a face" even when the face has changed significantly with time. "
　　
　　It took 1.1 milliseconds!" Yao exclaims. "Yeah, that's me!"

    In nearby cubicles, teams of Yao's programmers and engineers take each other's pictures, mark their eyes with green plus signs and test the speed of their search engines. "Everyone is preparing for the test," Yao explains. "If we pass, if we come out number one, we are guaranteed a market in China."
　　
　　Every couple of minutes Yao's phone beeps. Sometimes it's a work message, but most of the time it's a text from his credit-card company, informing him that his daughter, who lives in Australia, has just made another charge. "Every time the text message comes, I know my daughter is spending money!" He shrugs: "She likes designers."
　　
　　Like many other security executives I interviewed in China, Yao denies that a primary use of the technology he is selling is to hunt down political activists. "Ninety-five percent," he insists, "is just for regular safety." He has, he admits, been visited by government spies, whom he describes as "the internal-security people." They came with grainy pictures, shot from far away or through keyhole cameras, of "some protesters, some dissidents." They wanted to know if Yao's facial-recognition software could help identify the people in the photos. Yao was sorry to disappoint them. "Honestly, the technology so far still can't meet their needs," he says. "The photos that they show us were just too blurry." That is rapidly changing, of course, thanks to the spread of high-resolution CCTVs. Yet Yao insists that the government's goal is not repression: "If you're a [political] organizer, they want to know your motive," he says. "So they take the picture, give the photo, so at least they can find out who that person is."
　　
　　Until recently, Yao's photography empire was focused on consumers — taking class photos at schools, launching a Chinese knockoff of Flickr (the original is often blocked by the Great Firewall), turning photos of chubby two-year-olds into fridge magnets and lampshades. He still maintains those businesses, which means that half of the offices at Pixel Solutions look like they have just hosted a kid's birthday party. The other half looks like an ominous customs office, the walls lined with posters of terrorists in the cross hairs: FACE MATCH, FACE PASS, FACE WATCH. When Beijing started sinking more and more of the national budget into surveillance technologies, Yao saw an opportunity that would make all his previous ventures look small. Between more powerful computers, higher-resolution cameras and a global obsession with crime and terrorism, he figured that face recognition "should be the next dot-com."
　　
　　Not a computer scientist himself — he studied English literature in school — Yao began researching corporate leaders in the field. He learned that face recognition is highly controversial, with a track record of making wrong IDs. A few companies, however, were scoring much higher in controlled tests in the U.S. One of them was a company soon to be renamed L-1 Identity Solutions. Based in Connecticut, L-1 was created two years ago out of the mergers and buyouts of half a dozen major players in the biometrics field, all of which specialized in the science of identifying people through distinct physical traits: fingerprints, irises, face geometry. The mergers made L-1 a one-stop shop for biometrics. Thanks to board members like former CIA director George Tenet, the company rapidly became a homeland-security heavy hitter. L-1 projects its annual revenues will hit $1 billion by 2011, much of it from U.S. government contracts.
　　
　　In 2006, Yao tells me, "I made the first phone call and sent the first e-mail." For a flat fee of $20,000, he gained access to the company's proprietary software, allowing him to "build a lot of development software based on L-1's technology." Since then, L-1's partnership with Yao has gone far beyond that token investment. Yao says it isn't really his own company that is competing in the upcoming 10-million-faces test being staged by the Chinese government: "We'll be involved on behalf of L-1 in China." Yao adds that he communicates regularly with L1 and has visited the company's research headquarters in New Jersey. ("Out the window you can see the Statue of Liberty. It's such a historic place.") L1 is watching his test preparations with great interest, Yao says. "It seemed that they were more excited than us when we tell them the results."
　　
　　L-1's enthusiasm is hardly surprising: If Yao impresses the Ministry of Public Security with the company's ability to identify criminals, L-1 will have cracked the largest potential market for biometrics in the world. But here's the catch: As proud as Yao is to be L-1's Chinese licensee, L-1 appears to be distinctly less proud of its association with Yao. On its Website and in its reports to investors, L-1 boasts of contracts and negotiations with governments from Panama and Saudi Arabia to Mexico and Turkey. China, however, is conspicuously absent. And though CEO Bob LaPenta makes reference to "some large international opportunities," not once does he mention Pixel Solutions in Guangzhou.
　　
　　After leaving a message with the company inquiring about L-1's involvement in China's homeland-security market, I get a call back from Doni Fordyce, vice president of corporate communications. She has consulted Joseph Atick, the company's head of research. "We have nothing in China," she tells me. "Nothing, absolutely nothing. We are uninvolved. We really don't have any relationships at all."
　　
　　I tell Fordyce about Yao, the 10-million test, the money he paid for the software license. She'll call me right back. When she does, 20 minutes later, it is with this news: "Absolutely, we've sold testing SDKs [software development kits] to Pixel Solutions and to others [in China] that may be entering a test." Yao's use of the technology, she said, is "within his license" purchased from L-1.
　　
　　The company's reticence to publicize its activities in China could have something to do with the fact that the relationship between Yao and L-1 may well be illegal under U.S. law. After the Chinese government sent tanks into Tiananmen Square in 1989, Congress passed legislation barring U.S. companies from selling any products in China that have to do with "crime control or detection instruments or equipment." That means not only guns but everything from police batons and handcuffs to ink and powder for taking fingerprints, and software for storing them. Interestingly, one of the "detection instruments" that prompted the legislation was the surveillance camera. Beijing had installed several clunky cameras around Tiananmen Square, originally meant to monitor traffic flows. Those lenses were ultimately used to identify and arrest key pro-democracy dissidents.

    Zheng, an MBA from one of China's top schools, proudly shows me the business card of the New York investment bank that is handling Aebell's IPO, as well as a newly printed English-language brochure showing off the company's security cameras. Its pages are filled with American iconography, including businessmen exchanging wads of dollar bills and several photos of the New York skyline that prominently feature the World Trade Center. In the hall at company headquarters is a poster of two interlocking hearts: one depicting the American flag, the other the Aebell logo.
　　
　　I ask Zheng whether China's surveillance boom has anything to do with the rise in strikes and demonstrations in recent years. Zheng's deputy, a 23-year veteran of the Chinese military wearing a black Mao suit, responds as if I had launched a direct attack on the Communist Party itself. "If you walk out of this building, you will be under surveillance in five to six different ways," he says, staring at me hard. He lets the implication of his words linger in the air like an unspoken threat. "If you are a law-abiding citizen, you shouldn't be afraid," he finally adds. "The criminals are the only ones who should be afraid."
　　
　　One of the first people to sound the alarm on China's upgraded police state was a British researcher named Greg Walton. In 2000, Walton was commissioned by the respected human-rights organization Rights & Democracy to investigate the ways in which Chinese security forces were harnessing the tools of the Information Age to curtail free speech and monitor political activists. The paper he produced was called "China's Golden Shield: Corporations and the Development of Surveillance Technology in the People's Republic of China." It exposed how big-name tech companies like Nortel and Cisco were helping the Chinese government to construct "a gigantic online database with an all-encompassing surveillance network — incorporating speech and face recognition, closed-circuit television, smart cards, credit records and Internet surveillance technologies."
　　
　　When the paper was complete, Walton met with the institute's staff to strategize about how to release his explosive findings. "We thought this information was going to shock the world," he recalls. In the midst of their discussions, a colleague barged in and announced that a plane had hit the Twin Towers. The meeting continued, but they knew the context of their work had changed forever.
　　
　　Walton's paper did have an impact, but not the one he had hoped. The revelation that China was constructing a gigantic digital database capable of watching its citizens on the streets and online, listening to their phone calls and tracking their consumer purchases sparked neither shock nor outrage. Instead, Walton says, the paper was "mined for ideas" by the U.S. government, as well as by private companies hoping to grab a piece of the suddenly booming market in spy tools. For Walton, the most chilling moment came when the Defense Department tried to launch a system called Total Information Awareness to build what it called a "virtual, centralized grand database" that would create constantly updated electronic dossiers on every citizen, drawing on banking, credit-card, library and phone records, as well as footage from surveillance cameras. "It was clearly similar to what we were condemning China for," Walton says. Among those aggressively vying to be part of this new security boom was Joseph Atick, now an executive at L-1. The name he chose for his plan to integrate facial-recognition software into a vast security network was uncomfortably close to the surveillance system being constructed in China: "Operation Noble Shield."
　　
　　Empowered by the Patriot Act, many of the big dreams hatched by men like Atick have already been put into practice at home. New York, Chicago and Washington, D.C., are all experimenting with linking surveillance cameras into a single citywide network. Police use of surveillance cameras at peaceful demonstrations is now routine, and the images collected can be mined for "face prints," then cross-checked with ever-expanding photo databases. Although Total Information Awareness was scrapped after the plans became public, large pieces of the project continue, with private data-mining companies collecting unprecedented amounts of information about everything from Web browsing to car rentals, and selling it to the government.
　　
　　Such efforts have provided China's rulers with something even more valuable than surveillance technology from Western democracies: the ability to claim that they are just like us. Liu Zhengrong, a senior official dealing with China's Internet policy, has defended Golden Shield and other repressive measures by invoking the Patriot Act and the FBI's massive e-mail-mining operations. "It is clear that any country's legal authorities closely monitor the spread of illegal information," he said. "We have noted that the U.S. is doing a good job on this front." Lin Jiang Huai, the head of China Information Security Technology, credits America for giving him the idea to sell biometric IDs and other surveillance tools to the Chinese police. "Bush helped me get my vision," he has said. Similarly, when challenged on the fact that dome cameras are appearing three to a block in Shenzhen and Guangzhou, Chinese companies respond that their model is not the East German Stasi but modern-day London.
　　
　　Human-rights activists are quick to point out that while the tools are the same, the political contexts are radically different. China has a government that uses its high-tech web to imprison and torture peaceful protesters, Tibetan monks and independent-minded journalists. Yet even here, the lines are getting awfully blurry. The U.S. currently has more people behind bars than China, despite a population less than a quarter of its size. And Sharon Hom, executive director of the advocacy group Human Rights in China, says that when she talks about China's horrific human-rights record at international gatherings, "There are two words that I hear in response again and again: Guantánamo Bay."
　　
　　The Fourth Amendment prohibition against illegal search and seizure made it into the U.S. Constitution precisely because its drafters understood that the power to snoop is addictive. Even if we happen to trust in the good intentions of the snoopers, the nature of any government can change rapidly — which is why the Constitution places limits on the tools available to any regime. But the drafters could never have imagined the commercial pressures at play today. The global homeland-security business is now worth an estimated $200 billion — more than Hollywood and the music industry combined. Any sector of that size inevitably takes on its own momentum. New markets must be found — which, in the Big Brother business, means an endless procession of new enemies and new emergencies: crime, immigration, terrorism.
　　
　　In Shenzhen one night, I have dinner with a U.S. business consultant named Stephen Herrington. Before he started lecturing at Chinese business schools, teaching students concepts like brand management, Herrington was a military-intelligence officer, ascending to the rank of lieutenant colonel. What he is seeing in the Pearl River Delta, he tells me, is scaring the hell out of him — and not for what it means to China.
　　
　　"I can guarantee you that there are people in the Bush administration who are studying the use of surveillance technologies being developed here and have at least skeletal plans to implement them at home," he says. "We can already see it in New York with CCTV cameras. Once you have the cameras in place, you have the infrastructure for a powerful tracking system. I'm worried about what this will mean if the U.S. government goes totalitarian and starts employing these technologies more than they are already. I'm worried about the threat this poses to American democracy."
　　
　　Herrington pauses. "George W. Bush," he adds, "would do what they are doing here in a heartbeat if he could."
　　
　　China-bashing never fails to soothe the Western conscience — here is a large and powerful country that, when it comes to human rights and democracy, is so much worse than Bush's America. But during my time in Shenzhen, China's youngest and most modern city, I often have the feeling that I am witnessing not some rogue police state but a global middle ground, the place where more and more countries are converging. China is becoming more like us in very visible ways (Starbucks, Hooters, cellphones that are cooler than ours), and we are becoming more like China in less visible ones (torture, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, though not nearly on the Chinese scale).
　　
　　What is most disconcerting about China's surveillance state is how familiar it all feels. When I check into the Sheraton in Shenzhen, for instance, it looks like any other high-end hotel chain — only the lobby is a little more modern and the cheerful clerk doesn't just check my passport but takes a scan of it.
　　
　　"Are you making a copy?" I ask.
　　
　　"No, no," he responds helpfully. "We're just sending a copy to the police."
　　
　　Up in my room, the Website that pops up on my laptop looks like every other Net portal at a hotel — only it won't let me access human-rights and labor Websites that I know are working fine. The TV gets CNN International — only with strange edits and obviously censored blackouts. My cellphone picks up a strong signal for the China Mobile network. A few months earlier, in Davos, Switzerland, the CEO of China Mobile bragged to a crowd of communications executives that "we not only know who you are, we also know where you are." Asked about customer privacy, he replied that his company only gives "this kind of data to government authorities" — pretty much the same answer I got from the clerk at the front desk.
　　
　　When I leave China, I feel a powerful relief: I have escaped. I am home safe. But the feeling starts to fade as soon as I get to the customs line at JFK, watching hundreds of visitors line up to have their pictures taken and fingers scanned. In the terminal, someone hands me a brochure for "Fly Clear." All I need to do is have my fingerprints and irises scanned, and I can get a Clear card with a biometric chip that will let me sail through security. Later, I look it up: The company providing the technology is L-1.
　　
　　[From Issue 1053 — May 29, 2008]

写给中国摇滚第一刊的稿子，本来以为他得了格莱美，会有更多的人关注，可是只见杨波写了一篇，也不外乎仅是资料，也不知道我怎么就记住了Herbie，其实我根本就不懂爵士，只是觉得Jazz is Ocean，Rock is Only Rock，前者更深邃辽阔是活东西，后者其实很硬，粑粑橛子一样杵在那；本来准备一直写下去，也算一边学习，可终究不讨人喜欢，刚刚开始就又煞了尾，他到另一个世界寻找橄榄树，林生祥在菊花夜行军似乎在叫我的名字，林海山庄那个地方不错啊……

他弹奏时，变色龙在琴键上舞蹈
——小记爵士乐钢琴大师Herbie Hancock