Gina Harris's Blog, page 150

Band Review: Above It All

I found Above It All - like most of the bands I review - by them following me on Twitter. When that happens, my first exposure is usually whatever they link to in their Twitter profile. In this case, the link goes directly to their song "Anchors", even though they have seven songs available on Soundcloud.
I normally think it makes more sense to go to the general Soundcloud address, and that's what I am including in the links, but I can't fault them for doing it. There is something so engaging about "Anchors" from the intro on, that it seems like the best possible introduction.
I enjoyed listening to the rest of the songs and I enjoy the band. They are a pop punk band from Dallas who - despite being chronologically young - have been playing for a long time. There is a good spirit to the music and they are worth listening to.
You could make a good case for listening to "First Rate Fiction" before any other tracks. It is their first official release off the new EP, and the possessor of a strong hook.
Still, there is something special about "Anchors".
http://aboveitalltx.com/
https://www.facebook.com/AboveItAllTx/timeline
https://soundcloud.com/aboveitalltx
https://www.youtube.com/user/AboveItAllTx
https://twitter.com/AboveItAllTx

The 2016 Election

Sanders did win Oregon. As white as Oregon is, I am not surprised. (I am disappointed.)
It is unlikely to have any impact on the race in November, which should be between Clinton and Trump. Today I want to write about how that will look.
First of all, I expect it to be ugly and bitter.
I may at some point do a post about "Those Idiots at Malheur", though they are not at Malheur anymore. If I don't get to it, let me say now that one of the most frustrating things for we was when they said they held a successful non-violent protest, referring to the Bundy Ranch standoff. Maybe no one died there, but it drew bloodthirsty people to the area. Five people died at the Wal-Mart shooting. That included the shooters, yes, but if there had been no standoff, would it have happened at all?
You may be able to say hateful, violent, and paranoid things without shooting anyone, but that doesn't mean that other people aren't closer to the edge. If your audience consists largely of those likely to feel threatened and powerless, the risk goes up.
That has been especially noticeable this year. The people listening may be more volatile than in the past, but it's nothing compared to how irresponsible politicians are becoming. So Carly Fiorina goes on about "baby parts" - apparently referencing one completely different video to criticize a doctored, lying video - and that exact phrase is murmured by the clinic shooter, killing three people and injuring nine more.
Trump uses ugly language against Mexicans and Muslims. Beyond the violence at his rallies, a homeless Mexican man is beaten by Trump supporters. Muslim and Mexican students are beaten by a Trump supporter, and a shop owner is attacked. We don't even know everything that Trump has "inspired", but here is one story:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/09/donald_trump_and_the_rise_of_anti_muslim_hate_crimes.html
It is not limited to the Republican side. I am used (especially during election years) to having conservative acquaintances get pretty rude, but the worst harassment this year has been from progressive Bernie supporters. (The worst attacks came from when I posted an article about how some Bernie supporters have been abusive, but they did not seem to appreciate the irony.) Bernie has had many opportunities to tone down this behavior, but has generally chosen to focus on how aggrieved he is that the DNC - after letting him run as a Democrat - have not changed things enough that his smaller amount of votes will let him win. Sure enough, the Nevada convention got ugly, and even in disavowing it Sanders focused on how the Democratic party needs to be more welcoming.
There are a lot of factors that contribute to anger finding such a receptive audience, but at this point, it's here, and it's a problem and the most frequent targets will be women and minorities and especially women of color. So, keep an eye out for the vulnerable. Even if they seem really strong, be supportive. We need more of that than the anger.
I didn't even mean to write that much on that aspect, but more on the course of the campaign. I saw someone predict that Trump will move more center, trying to frame himself as a moderate, and I see the logic in it. He has at times appeared more liberal, and people like him for being a wild card - not for how conservative he is.
The GOP doesn't like that wild card aspect, but they've lost control. Not getting behind Trump means being shut out. I don't see that happening on a party-wide level, though I would love to see a few members of Congress with consciences pull a Jim Jeffords.
(I did like this, but Mike Murphy is only a consultant: http://bluenationreview.com/gop-consultant-trump-has-a-chimpanzee-level-understanding-of-national-security-policy/)
I expect big donors to be split. Adelson has come out in favor of Trump, but the Kochs have said that Hillary might be better, and they're right. That's not because their values are good, but - and I have said this before - they are doing very well under the current system. They could easily decide that continuing with a liberal in the White House who faces congressional deadlock is better than potential Trump chaos.
If the Kochs do endorse Clinton, anyone running against her will use that against her, regardless of her having said she would not value their endorsement. Sanders has claimed that he would not run as an independent, but he has also promised not to be a spoiler, and you could argue that he has gone long past the time when he should start supporting Clinton instead of fighting her.
http://bluenationreview.com/bernies-solemn-promise-i-will-not-be-a-spoiler/
Trump would love a third-party candidate.
Here's one of the things that bothers me the most. If Trump does try to portray himself more moderately, and more presidentially, he could not put on more than a thin veneer. That should crack easily under a little pressing. That should be the job of the press itself, and I have no reason to believe they will do that. They have been courting Trump's favor, giving him free publicity, and not doing their job.
Now imagine that deference to Trump combined with their coverage of Clinton: A Sanders win is a win, but Clinton "didn't lose". They imply her support is weak, when her votes say otherwise. They focus on those who find her unlikeable, but people who have dealt with her overwhelmingly do like her. Even the photos that are chosen to accompany stories are always the worst ones.
Ultimately, that means that my hope comes down to her. The media might not press Donald, but Hillary will. He will push back but she has weathered worse. The odds against her include factors that really shouldn't be there, but if anyone can overcome it, I believe she can.
I'm with her.

Hot Sauce

I wanted to do something a little light today. It's election day, and in a few hours the votes will start being counted. Polls show Clinton in the lead, but polls and votes are not the same thing. We shall see.
(Also, tomorrow's post might be kind of a bummer, so today we'll meander and learn some cool things.)
It started with Hillary Clinton's appearance on a morning show, The Breakfast Club, hosted by Charlamagne Tha God, DJ Envy, and Angela Yee. (No, I had not heard of it before, but I think I had heard of Charlamagne before.) They asked her to tell them something she always carries in her purse, which is a very common interview question. She answered "hot sauce".
http://time.com/4297996/hillary-clinton-hot-sauce/
This set off a whole thing, with accusations about Clinton pandering to Black voters, along with many defenders proving vigorously that Clinton has a long history of loving hot sauce, including having a collection of 100 bottle of hot sauce during her time as First Lady, and remembering that it was used in the 90s to make her look low class.
That is all somewhat interesting, but not necessarily the part that I find most interesting.
First of all, the accusations of pandering tended to focus on the line in the Beyoncé song "Formation":
"I got hot sauce in my bag, swag."
The morning crew seems to focus on this, saying "Are you getting in formation" and "swag". Clinton looks completely blank. So when they say people will say she's pandering and she answers, "Okay. Is it working?" that strikes me as her completely missing the reference, but she does get accused of pandering a lot, so she tries to handle it in that manner, but keeping it light.
And that's fine. Beyoncé is pretty big, and the video and Super Bowl performance got a fair amount of publicity, but Clinton is also a 69-year old woman running for president. It is completely possible to know there was a song without knowing the lyrics. (I'm sure someone has explained it by now.)
My mind went - and it would have been the main destination if I had not read the "Formation" lyrics - to the 2002 Eddie Griffin film Undercover Brother, where he had a hot sauce dispensing watch to help him tolerate mayonnaise.
I remember thinking that as someone who had to travel a lot, where sometimes the food might not be that good, or it might be high quality but geared toward a completely different palate, then the hot sauce could come in handy. Then it got more interesting.
The defenses for Hillary's love of heat (which pre-dates Undercover Brother too) included her responses to earlier questions. There are multiple incidents, including even her Breakfast Club segment, where she says that she believes hot sauce and peppers keep her immune system strong. It keeps her going.
That really interested to me. I remember hearing back as far as high school that cayenne is good for your immune system, and various types of spicy foods are frequently mentioned as boosting your metabolism. A strong metabolism and immune system is a definite benefit for someone always on the go, but I know a lot of people who would never take advantage of it because they hate hot foods.
That's why I was also interested in this recent question and answer in Ask Marilyn:
http://parade.com/470706/marilynvossavant/what-causes-different-senses-of-taste/
The cilantro example resonated for me. A lot of Lao food uses cilantro. I never thought about it one way or another, but there was another sister who hated it, and she got so tired of eating it in everything. This explains it; it made everything taste soapy to her. (And then once some people took her to Marie Callenders, and she ordered a dish with cilantro in it without realizing until it came!)
I never use mayonnaise, but I never use hot sauce either. My family thinks of me as liking spicy foods, because some foods I really like are spicy, but it's not the heat that I like. They are savory and I like that enough that I can deal with the heat. (Yes, I like umami, and yes, MSG gets used in a lot of Lao food also.)
But I have friends who love spicy, like one who tried to grow her own ghost peppers and one I gave a bottle of Sriracha to one Christmas, because that was his great love.
So all of that, all of those reactions can relate to how many taste buds we have, and which variants of them, and which receptors are working, and yet there are still more factors that go in to whether or not we enjoy them.
I have talked about complexity in some of my political writing, because it is a thing that exists in the world and has some perils, but complexity can be found all over the place.
I think of the taste issue in conjunction with The Psychopath Inside on brain function. It wasn't just nurture and nature, but also different parts of nature, because there are the genes that build the brain, but also the ingredients that work in the brain function. Is the serotonin there? Are the receptors set up to grab it? Is there anything that could be blocking it?
Complexity gives us a lot of things that can go wrong, but it also gives us mystery, and fascination, and makes things more interesting.
One of my misfortunes is that it seems like the healthiest foods - fish, walnuts, and cruciferous vegetables - are the ones I hate most. There are lots of other foods out there, and certainly other vegetables. Maybe if we all like some, no one has to like all of them. People who think roasted Brussels sprouts taste like candy, I don't understand get that at all, but rock on anyway. You do you.

Foreign policy

For criticisms against Hillary Clinton, I take those on foreign policy most seriously, and yet they are not enough to dissuade me. I'm not sure it is possible to get foreign policy right.
I'm sure it's possible to get foreign policy horribly wrong. For example, considering nuclear proliferation to be a good idea because it keeps people in line shows a strong lack of understanding.
Allowing people to adapt brainwashing techniques into torture methods to produce false information, thus fabricating "evidence" to convince Congress to authorize war with a country that you are only interested in because of Daddy issues is clearly wrong. I feel comfortable labeling those things bad. Still, in foreign policy, that something is not egregiously wrong does not mean it is right either.
For example, many foreign policy decisions post World War II were based on standing against Communism. The Soviet Union was actually trying to increase their influence at one point, so it may not even have been completely ridiculous to fight communism, but fighting it often went badly. Vietnam may be the most obvious example, but one thing you can see with both that and the Korean conflict is that there were a lot of deaths and you still end up with communist countries there. Sometimes you get rid of a monarchy, but if you end up with a hereditary dictatorship, it may not be much better. At least, I think that's how we feel about Kim Jong-Un.
At one point, working against Russian influence in Afghanistan seemed like a good idea. They even made a Tom Hanks movie about it: We are going to end the Cold War by weakening Russia's grasp! And then you will have the Taliban repressing people and sheltering Al-Qaeda when they launch attacks against us that kill thousands of people.
I have written about this before, kind of, but years later it is just more entangled. Before World War II it wasn't about communism, but there was still King Leopold plundering the Congo for rubber, and US fruit companies exploiting the Amazon, and everyone wanting a piece of the oil in the Middle East.
You can look at conflict between Hutus and Tutsis, or problems in South Africa, and say the tribes aren't capable of governing themselves, but that overlooks everything that was changed and upended by the colonizers, and all of the loss of life and leadership as their resources were being stolen.
History has really deep roots, and ignorance of those roots doesn't change the shape of the tree.
So, you have people being oppressed and killed. Ignoring it is horrible. Doing something will result in many deaths, and be very expensive. It is unclear how many lives you can save or how to sustain those lives once the first threat is gone, because they will need water, food, and shelter. What do you do?
I don't like drone use, especially when they are used to kill people. The last time I referred to that (about three years ago), I saw it as a continuation of the status quo by someone who had joined it - that getting power makes you automatically more invested in maintaining it, and it was understandable if not ideal.
That could still be true, but I also see the pressure to not let there be any more attacks. Are they stopping attacks? It's possible. When some things are working well, you don't know about it because you only see when things go horribly wrong.
It's just an area where I am slower to judge. I see a lot of difficulty for the things that I do know, and I realize there is a lot that I don't know.
That being said, it is meaningful to me that, as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton advocated for women's rights and children. So many of the things that went wrong in the past went wrong because it was easy to not think about protecting the vulnerable. It is significant to me that she does think about them.
I will take the candidate who is pro love and kindness. That is the direction we need to take.
Somewhat related posts:
http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/07/task-legacy-of-ashes.htmlhttp://sporkful.blogspot.com/2013/07/established.htmlhttp://sporkful.blogspot.com/2013/07/drones-and-spying-and-president-obama.html

Band Review: Blinds

Blinds is an ethereal rock band based in Nashville.
This is most evident in the first track on their self-titled EP. "Bloom (Prologue)" is instrumental and there is a delicacy to it that may not be firmly rooted to this world.
Other songs seem less ethereal, and when there are lyrics they are often dark. This is especially true for their first single, "Dana Sue Gray". It then makes sense to learn that one of the band's influences is the movie Blade Runner. Dark and moody tones are to be expected. Those may come through most clearly on "Whimper".
Between that angst and a rather ponderous feel to the band's bio, I had some concern that they might be taking themselves too seriously, but another source of inspiration listed is "artsy photos on Tumblr" and that gives me hope.
Instrumentally I appreciated what they were doing most in "Mint + Nicotine", which located some interesting textures with the guitar, as well as the percussion on "Void (Two Weeks Notice)".
I don't believe that the band will be everyone's jam, but for what they are doing they implement it well. It's at least worth listening to a couple of tracks to find out if they are for you.
http://www.blindstheband.com/
https://www.facebook.com/blindstheband
https://soundcloud.com/blinds-939872796
https://blindstheband.bandcamp.com/music
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrMGA8Tm4uAzVjEjhU1KRcg
https://twitter.com/blinds_theband

Band Review: Scott Lowder and the Vapers

Hailing from Charlotte, North Carolina, Scott Lowder and the Vapers are a 90s rock/alt country trio.
I initially didn't hear the country influence. It is there, but not overpowering.
They have some interesting takes on blue-eyed soul, with covers of Adele and Sam Smith that effectively put their own stamp on the songs.
Their own music is more compelling. "Overdue" in the lyrics says "Let's take it slowly", but it bursts forth with energy and joy that feels like it secretly wants to be completely impetuous.
"Drowning" does not have the same sense of fun, but is still energetic, this time in an almost anthemic way. And "B (The Ghost of You)" feels like a pub song, possibly because it mentions Irish charm, or maybe because people could start joining in on the chorus.
Together, they give this band its own voice, and it's a good one.
They don't need the covers.
http://www.scottlowderandthevapers.com/
https://www.facebook.com/scottlowder
https://soundcloud.com/scottandthevapers
https://twitter.com/vapersband

And the revolution

I did not think that this would be about Sanders as much, because I am assuming - and it may be a stretch - that modern socialists are more likely to seek change through elections and legal means rather than rising up and shooting the nobility.
At the same time, Susan Sarandon's comment that some people think Trump's election would bring about the revolution, implying that is a good thing, brings it close to home.
There are enough problems in the world that I can see why there are people who feel like burning the whole place down is the only answer. Under these circumstances, the popularity of both Trump and Sanders makes sense, as they channel anger with the establishment. I still can't find that to be the right answer.
When you burn the whole place down, people get injured. They get left homeless. They have difficulty finding food. That's staying within the metaphor, but I see literal devastating consequences to an actual revolution and to the Trump presidency that could inspire it.
If there were a temporary period of hardship that would resolve into this superior society where the workers control the production and partake of the profits, that would be great, but there is no reason to believe that.
There were abuses by the Czars in Russia, but then there were abuses by the ones who replaced them too. There was still great poverty and murder and dissidents being sent to Siberia. Then that seemed to get better, and organized crime took over.
In France there was a true spirit of revolution and equality. There was a firm resolve to end slavery. Then a racist bourgeois type in the middle seizes power, and it led to years of wars. Eventually they did get a more equitable society, but it was a messy path.
There are many examples of this, and many of the conflicts are deeply rooted in colonialism, and especially based in the desire of some to be able to make lots of money in ways that require a lot of manual labor, which they do not want to do.
That is certainly something capitalistic, and opposing it is reasonable. It's just once that you turn a class into enemies, that class has a funny way of getting bigger.
One thing that has been interesting to see with Affirmative Action is that while it was widely assumed to be a program to help Black people, the biggest beneficiaries have been white women. If that's what happens when you are trying to make things more equal, what do you think might happen when the people who are openly racist are in charge?


Related post:
http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/04/you-keep-using-that-word-i-do-not-think.html

Things I don't like about Bernie Sanders

My initial concern about Sanders was that he seemed to have blinders on, believing that economic equality would fix everything. Even if we assume that achieving economic equality is a something that Sanders could do, there are still problems with racism and sexism and police brutality and so many other factors that he did not seem to have any answer for. (Apparently, this makes him a "vulgar socialist", because the philosophy can encompass a greater awareness.)
It's not just that those issues matter as an obstacle to true equality. Historically as you see some people doing better economically when other groups have a reliance on feeling superior, that has frequently triggered violence. There were a lot of things that Sanders didn't seem to know because as a white man in a very white state, he did not need to know.
This was reinforced by his reaction to the Black Lives Matter disruption in Seattle, but that also looked like a potential turning point. After an initial angry reaction, Sanders did reach out and update his platform.
There was a similar situation when he stated repeatedly that his only litmus test for nominating a Supreme Court justice would be Citizens United, when Roe v. Wade challenges come up much more frequently. He did eventually adjust that to say Roe v. Wade views would be taken into consideration as well.
It was not likely that I was going to choose him over Clinton, because I felt like he should have come into the race knowing more. His plan to make college free has been shown that it would not help poor people, because there are too many other expenses. His plan to break up big banks to avoid another collapse ignores the role of smaller banks and investment firms, as well as the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Reports that he had been fairly ineffective in his time in the Senate, especially compared to Elizabeth Warren who - with some overlap in values - had done more in a much shorter time, also affected my opinion. I could not think of Sanders as particularly effective or savvy, but if he continued to respond to criticism and improve, that was something I valued. Maybe it wouldn't affect this race, but there are other races, other positions, and even if he just became a better senator, there's value in that.
Sanders didn't just stop improving; he got worse.
I would imagine that if you are going to be truly idealistic and revolutionary that you need to be able to see beyond yourself for a greater view. It's disappointing that someone with Sanders' proclaimed ideals has been so petty and narcissistic as he takes exception with anything that might mean that he won't get the Democratic nomination.
It is unfair that the superdelegates would support Hillary if he gets more votes; Hillary has more votes but he will lobby the superdelegates. Hillary's states shouldn't count because they are red states, but his red states do count. Those states shouldn't count because he didn't really try. I could accept unhappiness with the process to a large extent, but it just keeps getting worse.
Deciding the reason he is not winning over voters of color because they are not informed is wrong, and racistly wrong. My hackles were already raised, but when he said "Poor people don't vote", that's when it was rage.
If poor people don't vote, would the senator from Vermont care to explain all of the challenges to the Voting Rights Act, and the closing of precincts and the elimination of early voting hours and the increased identification requirements despite the lack of any evidence of voter fraud that would require these steps?
We are in a time period when voting rights are being threatened for people of color, poor people of all races, and the elderly. In some cases when they mess up the absentee ballots even soldiers on active duty are disenfranchised. Do you really think the most important focus is opening up primaries so non-Democrats can choose the Democrat nominee, and making sure those teenagers who will turn 18 before the general election are included in the primaries?
So after that, I can't be surprised that he calls Hillary unqualified because he thought she said that about him due to a misleading headline but didn't bother reading the article. Of course he didn't read it! Why would he?
That's where I got to loathing Sanders instead of just not wanting to vote for him. The only reason he hasn't been the most self-aggrandizing candidate out there is because there is still Trump. But if it were an ego contest between Sanders and Chris Christie, Sanders might win.
That is not a presidential temperament, and it's certainly not a wise and analytical mind, so what we have is a cranky old man who has become so focused on needing to be the one that sense and fairness are forgotten. It is not at all surprising that his supporters have frequently been abusive of anyone being even mildly supportive of Clinton. (Though they shriek like banshees when any of it bounces back.)
At this point the one thing Clinton could do to really make me angry is pick him for her running mate. If that happened I would understand it as a political move to firm up the voting coalition, but he doesn't deserve it and he would be a terrible vice president.
But he'd be an even worse president. Probably still better than Trump.

Things I like about Hillary Clinton

Back in 2008, when Obama was running for the first time, I had concerns with his lack of experience. He had only entered the Senate in 2005. It felt like the run was only possible because he had made a good speech that got people excited.
As all this was happening, I remember someone saying that nothing can prepare you for the presidency. With very difficult circumstances, the new president performed well and I started to think maybe it was true. Maybe it was more temperament than experience.
Eight years later, I have to rethink that again. With her time in the White House and as Secretary of State, it is hard to imagine anyone more prepared for the diplomatic aspects of the job than Hillary Clinton. With her time as senator and her work on drafting a plan for universal health care (though one that was rejected), she should be well prepared to deal with Congress. She will have as difficult a Congress as her predecessor, but has learned a few things about dealing with personal attacks and intransigence.
She gets criticized a lot. Some of it is reasonable, and a lot of it isn't. I have partially dealt with that, and I think I will some more next Monday, but today is going to be more about the positives.
I can start that with some criticism. Clinton was recently criticized for a comment about putting coal companies out of business, because that would put many people in that industry out of work. She did address later that there would have to be money invested in that area, and there was a meme with all of the times she misspoke, but there's a point here.
Coal used for energy is incredibly destructive. Burning coal causes problems from asthma in children to global warming; obtaining coal has led to destructive strip mining, poisoned waters, and enormous underground fires; and coal miners have historically done a very dangerous job with mine owners egregiously ignoring their safety. There are good reasons to feel like ending this industry would be a good thing; it would still be scary for the people losing jobs.
That can be worked with. If you care about people, you can look at a problem and find solutions. There might be retraining for younger workers, early retirement for older ones, and ways to have the workers involved in the process of shutting down the systems. These things can be done, but you have to be open to the complexities of different interactions where any action will have repercussions, and some very desirable results can be mixed with undesirable ones.
I have confidence in Clinton to be able to deal with this. Some have criticized her overly long answers, but what often gets repeated about that is that she hates making a promise she can't keep. Therefore, you may intend to ask a yes/no question, but she will see all the potential complications and give a measured response.
A politician who avoids making false promises is a good problem to have, but also I simply like that she does see the different aspects. Another thing I remember from the political past is a friend of mine telling me how Bill Clinton was the kind of president who would read the policy papers rather than having an adviser sum it up for him. It wasn't just that he was smart, but detail-oriented. (I can't remember if the words "nerd" or "wonk" were used, but they would have fit.) Observing Hillary now, I have a better sense of what brought them together as a couple.
Those were things that predisposed me to her in the first place, but the biggest thing lately has been reports of her referring others to places where they might be able to get help. The first time I saw it was in a Buzzfeed article, but I have seen other mentions since then. If at a town hall or a meet and greet or something like that, someone mentions in passing a problem that they have, she will try and refer them to someone who can help.
That shows me two things about Clinton: she cares about individuals, and she has the practical knowledge to back it up. I was so pleased when I was trying to find the original reference to see that they have started tracking these incidents in a spreadsheet to make sure that follow up happens. That's how I would do it. But mainly I appreciate that she does it at all.
I find Hillary Clinton to be caring and competent.
That's the kind of person that I want to see in the White House.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/hillary-clinton-wants-to-talk-to-you-about-love-and-kindness
http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2016/04/things-that-are-said-about-hillary.html

Band Review: Faded Paper Figures

Faded Paper Figures is an Indie/Electronica/Rock trio based in both Los Angeles, California, and New Haven, Connecticut. Their ability to stay together while having challenging careers on opposite coasts is part of their charm.
With four albums and an EP, listening to all of their music can cause it to blur together, especially given the gentleness of their sound.
A better introduction is to watch videos. Their Youtube channel has an official videos playlist that combines performance footage and a few charming cinematic videos. Playing through these can give a good idea of both the personality and the sound of the band.
Of the genres they list, I think "indie" is the most accurate. They are pretty mellow and while they do make good use of synthesizers, it doesn't get into some of the weirdness of electronica; things are kept more tuneful.
Watch some videos, and then if you want to explore more, there is a lot to choose from.
http://www.fadedpaperfigures.com/
https://www.facebook.com/fadedpaperfigures
https://www.youtube.com/user/fadedpaperfigures#
https://twitter.com/fpfmusic