Lily Salter's Blog, page 187

Why you might want to rethink monogamy in 2018

(Credit: Getty/courtneyk)

Monogamy is difficult to maintain. Sure, it’s easy enough at times when your life is devoid of temptation. But unless you and your partner live in isolation in a cottage in the woods, there are no guarantees that an attractive “other” will not emerge — to lure you away and challenge the sanctity of your relationship.

“Oh no,” you think. “Not me. I adore my partner. Things are still so fresh. And I have so much to lose if I were to stray.”

Yes, of course. But research makes it clear that our best intentions are often worthless in the face of a compelling, and possibly unexpected, attraction to another person — someone intent on connecting with us. Those who report having had an extramarital relationship say it was with a close friend, co-worker or long-term acquaintance; these tend not to be random strangers.

What’s more, an act of infidelity is often understood as the “dealbreaker” in relationships. And few people are abhorred more than those known to have “cheated.” Movies, songs and literature are replete with stories depicting the appalling retribution believed owed to those who stray.

Despite all this, studies show that most people have in fact engaged in some type of infidelity in the past or have experienced a partner’s infidelity.

The question arises then: Is it time to ditch, or rethink, monogamy as a standard?

Optimistic expectations

Research shows that most people both expect romantic and sexual exclusivity to be in place very early in their relationships and that they denounce infidelity.

Interviews with newlyweds in the United States indicate that many people expect they and their partner will remain monogamous, despite admitting to having experienced a range of extramarital thoughts and behaviours already, such as flirting with another or feeling aroused in the presence of another.

All industrialized countries, even those purporting to have more tolerant beliefs around the importance of exclusivity, report that monogamy is the dominant pattern in their societies.

Despite strong universal disapproval of infidelity, and despite optimistic expectations, studies show that infidelity remains, year after year, the primary cause of relationship break-ups and divorce.

Now, if you factor in the distress, distrust and discord that infidelity causes to those relationships it does not destroy, you begin to understand the weight of its consequences.

Fantasizing about a celebrity lover?

Is monogamy reasonable? Can we ever reconcile the improbability of spending a lifetime (also known as many years) with a partner without ever being drawn to another?

Can we admit that our partners might not meet all of our needs at all times? That we could experience attraction to another without a complete surrender of our rights to a loving and respectful relationship or a wish to abandon our lives to race off with the other person?

These questions are more poignant in light of research indicating that intimate relationships are becoming less rewarding over time even as our expectations of what they should deliver steadily increase.

In most Western countries, belief in the importance of monogamy is strong, yet relatively few individuals actually discuss with their partner what monogamy must entail.

Is online flirting with an ex you will never see again “cheating?” Is fantasizing about a celebrity lover being untrue to your One True Love?

Jealousy and suspicion are the tools

A series of studies by psychologist Ashley Thompson makes clear that we are notably inconsistent in the monogamy standards that we hold for ourselves versus those we hold for our partners. For example, we are far more lenient and tolerant in explaining our own versus our partner’s behaviour.

Those who endorse alternative approaches — such as “consensual non-monogamy” which allows for romantic or sexual relationships beyond the primary relationship, with the partner’s consent — argue that monogamous relationships are far less stable because people use jealousy, monitoring and suspicion as tools to hold their partners to this difficult standard.

Individuals in supposedly monogamous relationships are also less likely to practise safe sex when they cheat (putting their primary partner’s health at risk) than are those in consensually non-monogamous relationships. And questions arise about whether you are really practising “monogamy” if you’re exclusive but in relationship after relationship after relationship — that is, for those who change primary partners after just a few years.

Rewriting the fairytale

To discuss dealbreakers in one’s relationship, it is essential for a couple to define what constitutes a betrayal, violation of trust or act of dishonesty.

If a couple can plan ahead of time for the possibility than one or both partners might have an intimate moment with another person at some point, this can reinforce the flexibility, tolerance and forgiveness required to adjust if that happens.

It all depends on the circumstances, of course, but accepting that another person might offer something that we or our partners need can leave couples better-positioned to move forward and adjust or negotiate if necessary, without an entire and irreversible relationship disintegration.

This is key: If we can admit to ourselves that a fleeting attraction, or more meaningful connection, with another partner might not irreparably harm our primary relationship — and indeed might supplement it — then our relationships might survive longer and better.

A new viewpoint requires a willingness to supplant the fairytale — a belief (often cherished) that one person can forever meet all your emotional, romantic and sexual needs.

Lunch is ok, touch is out

This is unlikely to be easy for most of us. The idea of a partner being distracted by another can induce panic in the most stalwart and confident. But insisting upon a fairly unreasonable standard (lifelong exclusivity or else!) can in fact harbour the possibility of secrecy and betrayal.

The emphasis in relationships needs always to be on openness, caring and mutual consent.

This is not to say that you or your partner will ultimately connect intimately with another person in any way despite adopting a new viewpoint about exclusivity. It also does not mean you have to agree that “anything goes,” that your relationship becomes an open relationship in the broadest sense of that term, or that anyone at all can enter your private sphere.

It is wise to negotiate some guidelines with your partner — about who or what type of person might be invited to look in on that sphere, for a moment or longer, and what might be acceptable ways to connect with another person (e.g. lunch is okay, touch is out), should the need or want arise.

If you also discuss how best to talk about it, this approach can go far in keeping your relationship truthful, transparent and trusting — making the need for a dealbreaker that much less relevant altogether.

Lucia O’Sullivan, Professor of Psychology, University of New Brunswick

Astronaut John Young dies at 87

John Young (Credit: AP/NASA)

John Young, who was the first astronaut to fly in outer space six times, passed away at 87 after suffering from complications related to pneumonia. He was known as a pioneer, and was described as an “astronaut’s astronaut.”

Young passed away on Friday, Jan. 5; NASA confirmed the news in a statement on Saturday.

“Today, NASA and the world have lost a pioneer. Astronaut John Young’s storied career spanned three generations of spaceflight; we will stand on his shoulders as we look toward the next human frontier,” NASA Administrator Robert Lightfoot said in the statement. “John was one of that group of early space pioneers whose bravery and commitment sparked our nation’s first great achievements in space. But, not content with that, his hands-on contributions continued long after the last of his six spaceflights — a world record at the time of his retirement from the cockpit.”

Lightfoot continued to recall fond memories with the astronaut in his statement.

“I participated in many Space Shuttle Flight Readiness Reviews with John, and will always remember him as the classic ‘hell of an engineer’ from Georgia Tech, who had an uncanny ability to cut to the heart of a technical issue by posing the perfect question — followed by his iconic phrase, ‘Just asking…,’” he said. “John Young was at the forefront of human space exploration with his poise, talent, and tenacity. He was in every way the ‘astronaut’s astronaut.’ We will miss him.”

Young flew into space as part of the Gemini, Apollo and space shuttle programs, according to NASA. He landed on the moon as the Commander of the Apollo 16 mission, which was NASA’s fifth mission to land men on the moon and bring them back to Earth safely in 1972. Young entered lunar orbit twice, and according to NASA, he logged 835 hours in space throughout his career. He was also inducted into the National Aviation Hall of Fame in 1988.

Many leaders around the world have expressed their condolences.

Astronaut Scott Kelly, who recently spent a year in space, wrote on Facebook: “Saddened for the loss of former astronaut colleague John Young – the astronauts’ astronaut, a true legend. Fair winds and following seas, Captain.”

Former President George H. W. Bush released a statement saying Young was “a fearless patriot whose courage and commitment to duty helped our Nation push back the horizon of discovery at a critical time.”

Young often shared his unique perspective about his experiences in space. Once, in an interview with the Houston Chronicle in 2004, he recalled his first trip to the moon on Apollo 10. “The impressive thing about the back side of the moon is how many darn craters it has,” he said in the interview. “If the back side of the moon was facing us, I think human beings would be far more adaptive, far more educated, about (asteroid or comet) impacts on planet Earth.”

The surprising upside to video game addiction’s classification as a mental health disorder

This video game image released by Bethesda Softworks shows resistance fighters battling German troops in Nazi-occupied London in a scene from "Wolfenstein: The New Order." (AP Photo/Bethesda Softworks) (Credit: AP)

The last time video games made so many headlines, Pokemon Go was causing traffic accidents and luring children into sex offenders’ neighborhoods. Here’s some more not-so-great news for those trying to escape life by disappearing into a fantasy world: you may be suffering from a mental health condition. For the first time ever, the World Health Organization has included “gaming disorder” in a draft of the International Classification of Diseases annual list.

The trend of video game addiction has been growing for years. One study from Oxford found that 2-3 percent of self-identified video gamers showed symptoms of addiction. Another poll found 10 percent of gamers admitted to spending 12-24 hours at a time glued to their consoles. Of the hundreds of millions of Americans who regularly play video games, Oxford researchers found 1 percent of their group suffered from symptoms similar to gambling addiction. For those aged 18 to 24, that percentage more than doubled. Nationwide, that number could amount to several million people.

If you’re a gamer concerned that you might be suffering from video gaming disorder, here are the signs, according to WHO:

“1) impaired control over gaming (e.g., onset, frequency, intensity, duration, termination, context); 2) increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; and 3) continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences.”

Some gamers have taken issue with the fact that WHO doesn’t designate how many consecutive hours playing video games is too many. While the lack of information is intentional, as gaming disorder can vary from person to person, this makes some people nervous. Tracy Michelle, 27, from Queens, New York, told Moneyish, “That made me scared. I’ve been playing 10 to 14 hours a day for the past five days. A lot of people in the gaming community are asking, ‘Do I have a gaming disorder?’ and trying to confirm what the qualifications are.”

WHO’s Gregory Hartl told CNN that “use of the internet, computers, smartphones and other electronic devices has dramatically increased over recent decades,” and as a consequence, “health problems as a result of excessive use have also been documented.” He also said there is “increasing demand for treatment in different parts of the world.”

Indeed, numerous video game addiction treatment centers have launched in recent years, and can include inpatient treatment for severe cases to physically separate the gamer from games. It’s possible now that WHO has formally recognized the seriousness of video game addiction, it may be easier for these treatment centers to receive funding and medical reimbursement for treating patients.

But some psychologists question the validity of the new gaming disorder classification. Chris Ferguson, a professor of psychology at Stetson University in Florida, told CNN that addiction to video games can be linked with other conditions like depression that are more easily treatable, and that gaming addiction doesn’t merit its own special diagnosis. “There are people out there who overdo video games,” Ferguson said, “but people overdo lots of stuff, so why games? Why not just have a general behavioral addiction category that can apply to anything that people overdo?”

Other therapists are happy with the new WHO classification. Amber Sherman, an addiction treatment supervisor at Mayo Clinic Health System-Franciscan Healthcare, told the Chicago Tribune, “I think that is a big step forward in treatment. We see that type of addiction, and hopefully that will help.”

The Golden Globes are irrelevant; Sunday’s awards show may not be

Seth Meyers (Credit: Getty/Paul Morigi)

Sunday, the 75th annual Golden Globe Awards ceremony will bow on NBC and, God, it seems so difficult to care at the moment.

Paling in comparison to events in the political sphere coming at us at ever-increasing speed, the contest over who will take home the honors handed out by the collection of writers, junket lingerers and open-bar loiterers that is the Hollywood Foreign Press Association seems even more irrelevant and hollow than it has in recent years.

Sure, if the 2018 edition of the awards offered a genuine and well-thought-out slate of contestants, the Golden Globes might have arrived as a welcome distraction from our grindingly manic news feeds — but it does not.

“Get Out” is slated in the Best Motion Picture – Comedy category while the “Big Sick” was left on the outside looking in. Jordan Peele and Greta Gerwig aren’t in the running for Best Director. “The Florida Project,” “Columbus,” “Phantom Thread” and many worthy others didn’t merit a Best Motion Picture – Drama nomination, but “The Boss Baby” did find placement in the Best Motion Picture – Animated category. Christopher Plummer somehow gained entry into the Best Supporting Actor in a Motion Picture slate despite the fact that his work in “All the Money in the World” was not available in final-cut form yet (truly, it’s unlikely the majority of Association members could have seen his performance at all should they have been interested).

It’s somewhat better on the television side of the program, but not by enough to create interest (besides the manufactured drama created by cynically pitting multiple women from the same shows against each other in the Best Performance by an Actress in a Limited Series or Motion Picture Made for Television).

All in all, it’s a contest so lightly tethered to what actually happened in this very exciting year of big- and small-screen work that almost reaches out and demands you not care about its outcome. Even the prospect of watching Nicole Kidman, Reese Witherspoon and Laura Dern drink too much Moët and tumble over each other on live television isn’t quite enough to change that.

For those who raise a finger and whisper, “But what about its effect on the Oscar race?,” know that this year’s Golden Globes are a poor preview of those honors. Expect to see different nominees in almost every category and a few honest-to-God Oscar winners who the Globes didn’t even consider.



And, yet, there is at least some reason to tune in. While the Globes, on paper, are more irrelevant now than ever, the awards ceremony itself comes at a particularly ripe time with potentially interesting moments in the offing.

It’s not too much to say that the Globes ceremony this year is, at least in appearance, a benefit gala for and a symposium on the ongoing, absolutely necessary #MeToo movement. This is, after all, the first major Hollywood event since the revelations about Harvey Weinstein’s alleged pattern of sexual predation opened the floodgates on the issue, sweeping away more than a few accused abusers in a righteous wave and transforming the conversation about women and their place in the industry. It’s not for nothing that Time’s Up, the most organized and well-funded reaction to the breaking issue, made its first public statement of intent the Monday before the ceremony.

With women — and men — donning all black to protest against harassment and abuse in the industry, every red-carpet shot, every peek into the audience to see who’s drunkenly giggling will underline the issue. Yes, it’s t-shirt activism, but it’s a strong visual nonetheless.

With wins likely for “Lady Bird,” Saoirse Ronan, Greta Gerwig, “The Handmaid’s Tale,” Elisabeth Moss, Issa Rae, Reese Witherspoon and, yeah, maybe Meryl Streep, expect the issue to come up on the podium as well. Don’t be surprised if the organizers let these women (and sometimes men) run long in their speeches for both content and applause breaks.

Host Seth Meyers, who will no doubt spend a significant amount of time ripping into President Donald Trump, will also be offering constant #MeToo commentary. “It’s an opportunity to be able to say some things that you wouldn’t be able to say in previous years,” he told Time. Add to that the fact that there’s at least a potential for some solid representation of people of color in the winner’s circle — though that could just as easily not happen — and it could be a good mix of relevant moments.

Yes, there’s something slightly cynical about all this. Award shows are always an opportunity for the lights of Hollywood to pat themselves on the back for not only their own perceived talent and charm, but for what they see as their essential and graceful moral leadership (George Clooney’s 2006 Oscar acceptance speech is a perfect example).

This year’s Globes give the high and mighty a chance to applaud themselves for their reaction to #MeToo, to separate themselves from the perpetrators, to appear on board with the cause. Of course, there will be many clapping in attendence who either did nothing in its wake, helped maintain the cone of silence that let predation fester and grow, or are themselves abusers in one way or another. For those individuals there, it’s goodwill bought cheap, as a Golden-Globe winning actor said in his honored role.

And, indeed, even if the Globes does become a massive and positive coming-out party for #MeToo, there’s also the large chance it could be of no consequence. Will a single male predator who happens to watch it change his ways because Streep or Williams or Ronan hammers home a point about sexual abuse on stage? It’s unlikely.

And yet, and yet, and yet, #MeToo does deserve a non-figurative moment in the spotlight, a celebration of what it’s done and what it can and will do. As objectively hollow as some of what happens on Sunday will be, as much as it will give the appearance of moral leadership to an industry that in no way deserves it, as it may give only the facade of men listening, it will at least be a moment when survivors at home can look at their screens, see someone holding a statuette while wearing a beautiful black dress and talking about abuse and say, while sitting on their couches, “yeah, me too.”

We haven’t had something quite like that and, Sunday, the Globes has at least the opportunity to offer at least a simulacrum of progress, of change, of understanding that could be not just a comfort, but an arrow pointing a way forward. In this, for at least this year and for at least one night, they could be downright worthy.

Of course, the ceremony could really blow it, which would make for some very solid train-wreck television as well.

The final “Game of Thrones” season shuts out female directors and writers

Emilia Clarke and Kit Harington in "Game of Thrones" (Credit: HBO/Helen Sloan)

By now, all good Throneys know that our watch is not due to end until 2019, when the six-episode final season of “Game of Thrones” lands at last. For some of us, that delay is more than acceptable. Torturous as the prospect of a 12-months-plus wait may be, it’s still better than the emotional void that awaits us once it’s truly finished.

Nevertheless, no news about “Game of Thrones” lands without an accompanying nagging sensation. This feeling grows more acute with each passing season, and now that we’re facing the prospect of the series’ end, it’s downright prickly. Maybe you’ve felt it too. In fact, you may have sensed it upon reading the behind-the-camera talent list for the drama’s final act.

Once again, David Benioff and D.B. Weiss are on board to direct episodes, as will David Nutter and Miguel Sapochnik. Benioff and Weiss are also writing a number of the final hours, along with Bryan Cogman and Dave Hill.

Yet again, the dudefest abides.

On Thursday, not long after HBO confirmed the 2019 date, Variety’s Mo Ryan broke down the unequal gender split in the top ranks of production over the year on Twitter. It is sobering, to say the least.

Slight correction: #GameofThrones, as prev stated, had 1 female director ever. But she directed 4 eps, not 2. Overall numbers: 19 directors, 1 woman (5%). 73 eps, 4 dir by woman (5.5%). Eps w/ woman writer credited (5.5%). Number of Daves writing #GoT: 2. Number of women: 2.

— Mo Ryan (@moryan) January 4, 2018

To put names to those numbers, “Game of Thrones” has only ever employed a single female director, Michelle MacLaren, who directed four episodes – two in season 3 and a pair in season 4. Jane Espenson penned one episode (and a pretty great one at that, season 1’s “A Golden Crown”) while Vanessa Taylor, who shares a writing credit with Guillermo Del Toro for current awards season contender “The Shape of Water,” wrote three, the most recent being 2013’s “Dark Wings, Dark Words.”

The almost-exclusively male “Game of Thrones” directors lineup and writing staff has been pointed out time and again over the years, particularly in critiques of the exploitative nature of sex and violence towards women in its narratives. Almost as much digital ink has been spilled taking apart its unnuanced portrayal of gender dynamics as blood has been shed in Westeros and Essos.

So while one can’t really claim surprise at the consistency of the gender equation among the show’s writers and producers at this point, dismay is a reasonable reaction, given where Weiss and Benioff left off with the story.

The seventh season, the second one completely unchained from George R. R. Martin’s “A Song of Ice and Fire” novels, ended with the North and Daenerys Targaryen’s forces preparing for war against the White Walkers and their undead army. Though Jon Snow bears the title of King in the North, the seat of power at Winterfell is under the stewardship of his half-sister (and in truth, his cousin) Sansa Stark.

Further south, Cersei Lannister is clinging to her title of Queen of the Seven Kingdoms and has ordered a mercenary army to fight for her claim, unbeknownst to the rest of the nobles. In other words, although Jon, Ser Davos Seaworth, Tyrion and Jaime Lannister and dear old Bronn are important members of the Great Game, the major power of this world rests in the hands of women.

And in these final acts, their actions, motivations and characterizations will be determined and illustrated by male writers and directors. Men who, to be fair, have created some incredible episodes of television. Sapochnik directed “Battle of the Bastards” and “Hardhome,” for example. One of Cogman’s episodes is “Oathkeeper,” which was directed by MacLaren. Cogman also wrote the first sexual encounter between Grey Worm and Missandei which desperately could have benefited from a woman’s point of view.

And a number of the major female characters in the series have been written by the series producers and Martin as women defying prescribed gender roles by operating in primarily male arenas. (An episode that specifically addressed that, “The Bear and The Maiden Fair,” was written by Martin and directed by MacLaren.) But at some point in these final episodes the story must reckon with certain aspects of their lives, particularly Brienne of Tarth’s budding affections for Jaime or even the romantic overtures Tormund is making. The latter has been illustrated through humor, but tying up the former calls for a subtler touch, and subtlety has rarely, if ever, been a hallmark of this show’s production.

As the series approaches the finish, all of its characters deserve a decent send-off including its women — heck, considering all they’ve been through, especially its women. Ending any series in a way that’s universally satisfying is a tall, if not impossible, order, and if Benioff, Weiss and the rest of the Brotherhood under the “Game of Thrones” banner can find a way to do that, few will take umbrage. But one suspects the odds of success would be improved if they had invited some female heavy hitters to carry the show home.

Guess we’ll have to pin those hopes on the spinoffs.

The top-20 most anticipated albums of 2018

The music industry generally takes the first week of a new year to ease back into business. That wasn’t the case with 2018: January 2 brought word of a new Justin Timberlake solo album, “Man of the Woods,” that came complete with an intense, nature-heavy teaser video (and an abundance of Bon Iver jokes) and the decidedly non-rustic single, “Filthy.“

From there, the week just got better. Bruno Mars released an updated version of “Finesse” with a Cardi B feature and New Jack Swing-inspired retro grooves. News broke that Kendrick Lamar was co-curating the “Black Panther” soundtrack, which he previewed by releasing a duet with R&B upstart SZA. And wiry punks Titus Andronicus announced a new album, “A Productive Cough.”

In other words, 2018 is already shaping up to be a fantastic year for music — and that’s just taking into account the records that are officially confirmed. Dozens of other artists — including country star Kacey Musgraves, rap upstarts Migos and Rae Sremmurd, and ’90s indie icons the Breeders — are still sorting out their release plans for the year.

Of course, another part of the anticipation equation involves prognostication about what might happen. Will Tinashe’s long-gestating album, “Joyride,” finally see the light of day? Is Kevin Shields’ promise of a new My Bloody Valentine album more than idle talk? Will Nicki Minaj finally release a new record in 2018? Nile Rodgers promised in December that the Chic record he’s been working on, “It’s About Time,” is due this year — can we dare hope so? And what exactly is the status of Kanye West’s “Turbo Grafx 16″?

So, because so much is still up in the air in this very young year, the list below of the 20 anticipated records includes entires whose existence and release dates have actually been confirmed. As for the rest, well, we’ll just have to see what happens, won’t we?

tUnE-yArDs, “I can feel you creep into my private life” (January 19)

Merrill Garbus has kept a low profile since releasing the last tUnE-yArDs album, 2014’s “Nikki Nack.” Judging by the forthcoming “I can feel you creep into my private life,” which a press release described as “protest music you can dance to,” that’s only because she’s been gathering trenchant societal observations and sculpting rhythm-heavy electro. The album’s first single, “Look At Your Hands,” is a glossy ’80s dance-pop number whose implied message is that we need to face up to our role in various forms of oppression, while “ABC 123″ examines the emotional and political divisions currently dominating our communities. Smartly, however, the record contains a multitude of approaches and styles. The desolate “Who Are You” incorporates glittering keyboard sweeps and wailing saxophone, which lends gravitas to solemn proclamations such as, “My thoughts are not my own,” while the sonic pastiche “Home” incorporates plodding piano, church-like ethereal harmonies, red-hot perforated beats and jazz-soul vocal scatting.

Pre-order it here.

Mudhoney, “LiE” (January 19)

In the pantheon of bands hailing from the Pacific Northwest, Mudhoney always seems to be overlooked, or at least not given as much credit as they deserve for releasing some of the region’s most indelible work. It’s long overdue: Thirty years into their career, the Mark Arm-led group still raise a ferocious ruckus revolving around bluesy garage rock and abrasive scuzz-punk. The forthcoming “LiE,” which was recorded on the band’s 2016 European tour, is the band’s first widely released official live record. Older tunes such as the Stooges-esque “Suck You Dry” and churning “Broken Hands” are still rabble-rousing, while newer numbers, like the dirge-like funk of “What To Do With the Neutral,” embrace more sophisticated ways to exude aggression. To top it off, there’s the band’s take on Roxy Music’s “Editions of You,” a stomping howl which upends the original’s snarling glam veneer. Keep “LiE” cranked at full volume for maximum enjoyment.

Pre-order it here.

Calexico, “The Thread That Keeps Us” (January 26)

It’s far too easy to take Calexico for granted. The Arizona-based desert-folk group, which is headed by two principal members, vocalist/guitarist Joey Burns and drummer John Convertino, is remarkably consistent and prolific. In fact, on their ninth studio album, “The Thread That Keeps Us,” described as having “less polish and more grit than ever before,” Calexico are reaffirming that laurel-resting is not in their vocabulary. Recorded in Northern California, the record is a melting pot of eras, approaches and influences. “Bridge to Nowhere” resembles Radiohead soaking up some Southwestern musical flair; “Under the Wheels” hints at both loping dub and brassy mariachi; and “The Town and Miss Lorraine” is lovely indie-folk with Jon Brion-caliber orchestral sparkles. Even better is the bustling “Another Space,” which boasts stuttering funk grooves, conspiratorial speak-singing and a vibrant sonic underbelly mixing together organ, keys and brass. “The Thread That Keeps Us” is a classic, headphones-worthy record full of intriguing nuances.

Pre-order it here.

Brandi Carlile, “By The Way, I Forgive You” (February 16)

When Salon checked in with Brandi Carlile last May, upon the release of a re-imagined version of her breakthrough album, “The Story,” the singer-songwriter was already excited about her next studio album. She had good reason to be: That effort ended up being the stunning “By The Way, I Forgive You.” Sonically, it’s a marvel. Carlile teamed up with producers Dave Cobb (Sturgill Simpson, Chris Stapleton) and Shooter Jennings, and recorded the album in Nashville’s famous RCA Studio A, which means that every instrumental detail is crisp and deliberate. Highlights include the soaring, orchestra-burnished “The Joke,” on which Carlile channels Chrissie Hynde’s ragged-but-tender vocal delivery; the vintage-crackled country ballad “The Mother” and its honeyed acoustic guitars; and the opening track “Everytime I Hear That Song,” on which Dolly Parton-caliber introspection pairs with the haunted harmonies of Simon and Garfunkel. If there’s any justice in the world, “By The Way, I Forgive You” should catapult Brandi Carlile into music’s upper echelons.

Pre-order it here.

Brockhampton, “Team Effort” (2018)

The eclectic Los Angeles hip-hop troupe Brockhampton, which splices together disparate genres and sonic approaches with gleeful energy, released a whopping three albums in 2017. Expect this momentum to continue apace. Near the end of the year, the group announced that another new album, “Team Effort,” would be coming sometime in 2018.

Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, “Wrong Creatures” (January 12)

The long-running California trio Black Rebel Motorcycle Club has built a career by cultivating noir-ish, atmospheric rock ‘n’ roll. The band’s latest, “Wrong Creatures,” is once again full of tough-as-black-leather psych-rock and smoldering shoegaze.

Pre-order it here.

Shopping, “The Official Body” (January 19)

The music crafted by U.K. band Shopping is the next best thing to crate-digging for early ’80s dub and minimalist post-punk LPs. The group’s taut, Edwyn Collins-produced “The Official Body” is focused and danceable, and contains an abundance of roiling bass, buzzy keyboards and speak-sing vocals.

Pre-order it here.

First Aid Kit, “Ruins” (January 19)

The Swedish duo First Aid Kit is known for frosty, folk-rooted indie-pop. On album number four, “Ruins,” expect more of the same, thanks to meticulous production from Tucker Martine (My Morning Jacket, Laura Veirs) and contributions from Peter Buck and Wilco’s Glenn Kotche.

Pre-order it here.

Rick Springfield, “The Snake King” (January 26)

Before he was an ’80s star — or a “General Hospital” heartthrob for that matter — Rick Springfield was learning the music ropes by listening to great rock ‘n’ rollers. His latest studio effort hews toward the blues and is a showcase of his (underrated) skills as a guitarist.

Pre-order it here.

The Wombats, “Beautiful People Will Ruin Your Life” (February 9)

The title of the Wombats’ fourth album is a bit cheeky, just like the U.K. band’s music itself. Still, it’s that hint of an edge which makes the group’s sugary indie-pop so irresistible.  

Pre-order it here.

Franz Ferdinand, “Always Ascending” (February 9)

Despite the departure of guitarist Nick McCarthy, dapper U.K. post-punks Franz Ferdinand show no wear and tear on their forthcoming studio effort, which contains the band’s usual mix of pogo-punk, propulsive electro-pop and arch humor.

Tune into SalonTV live on January 19 at noon ET / 9 a.m. PT when Salon interviews Franz Ferdinand about the new album. SalonTV streams live on Salon.com, Facebook and Periscope.

Pre-order it here.

Brian Fallon, “Sleepwalkers” (February 9)

It’s good to be Brian Fallon. At June’s Governors Ball Music Festival, the singer-songwriter is reuniting with his band, the Gaslight Anthem, to perform their breakthrough record, “The ’59 Sound.” But before that, he’s issuing the solo record, “Sleepwalkers,” an amalgamation of classic rock grit, bluesy R&B and Jersey swagger.

Fischerspooner, “Sir” (February 16)

The New York duo Fischerspooner has always embraced avant-garde performance and electro techniques. Produced by R.E.M.’s Michael Stipe — and featuring contributions from Chairlift’s Caroline Polachek, producer BOOTS and Now It’s Overhead’s Andy LeMaster — “Sir” is no different: It’s a 21st-century synth-pop excursion boasting sinewy grooves and new-wave seductions.

Laurie Anderson & Kronos Quartet, “Landfall” (February 16)

It’s almost preposterous that this effort is Laurie Anderson’s first-ever musical collaboration with the adventurous string quartet. Naturally, the results are predictably inspired: Initial tracks released from “Landfall,” which sprang from Anderson’s “experience of Hurricane Sandy,” are moving and thought-provoking.

Pre-order it here.

Superchunk, “What a Time To Be Alive” (February 16)

Looking for a loud, raucous punk record bristling with frustration about our current political and social climate? Look no further than Superchunk’s forthcoming album, which assesses the ongoing frustrations and oppressions with an incisive eye.

Pre-order it here.

Screaming Females, “All At Once” (February 23)

One of America’s best rock bands, Screaming Females, returns with their first album in three years. It’s worth the wait: Marissa Paternoster’s commanding vocals and charred guitar elocutions are bruising.

Pre-order it here.

Buffalo Tom, “Quiet and Peace” (March 2)

The erstwhile Boston band’s first studio album in seven years is a moody and introspective joy from start to finish, full of melancholic rockers (the brisk “All Be Gone”), sublime sonic progressions (the gospel choir-augmented “Overtime”) and a barn-burning cover of the Who’s “The Seeker” for good measure.

Pre-order it here.

Fanny Walked the Earth, self-titled (March 2)

Three members of the pioneering ’60s all-female rock band Fanny — Brie Darling and sisters June and Jean Millington — have reunited under a slightly different name. With any luck, the group’s forthcoming self-titled effort will finally give the musicians the wider audience (and respect) they deserve.

Pre-order it here.

Manic Street Preachers, “Resistance is Futile” (April 6)

The U.K. rock demigods have a low profile in the States these days, although they’ve never stopped cranking out (rather excellent and ambitious) records glinting with pop smarts. The Manics latest studio effort, introduced by the glammy, string-skewered “International Blue,” promises much of the same.

Pre-order it here.

Belly, “DOVE” (May 2018)

The beloved ’90s alt-rock band reunited in recent years for some well-received shows. In even more exciting news, Tanya Donelly and co. are also making a new record, which is slated to emerge in the spring.

Pre-order it here.

Ohio Republicans scramble after leading Senate candidate suddenly drops out

Josh Mandel (Credit: AP/David Kohl)

Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel upended his state’s political landscape on Friday when he told his supporters in an email that he would no longer run against Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown in November’s election. The announcement came as an abrupt blow to the GOP as Mandel was seen as the likely nominee.

Mandel had already challenged Brown in a close 2012 race and was regarded by both parties as a strong candidate this year. Democrats had feared Brown would be a prime target since he defeated Mandel by 6 points in their earlier contest while Donald Trump had pulled off an 8-point margin in Ohio in 2016, meaning that the state might be more open to a Republican without the corporate executive profile of the GOP’s 2012 nominee, Mitt Romney. Aside from Brown, Ohio voters have generally preferred Republican statewide officials in recent elections even though they did vote for Barack Obama during his two presidential campaigns.

In his message to supporters, Mandel said that his wife, Ilana, had a medical condition which required such extensive treatment that he could not be absent at home for the amount of time required to run a successful Senate campaign.

Thus far, the only other official candidate in the GOP primary is Michael Gibbons, a banker from Cleveland who had attracted little popular support before Mandel’s announcement. On Friday, Politico reported that Rep. Jim Renacci, who had been running for the Ohio governor’s office, is now leaning toward getting into the Senate race instead.

Whoever decides to jump in will have to move quickly. The Ohio deadline for candidates is Feb. 7.

Multiple pundits tricked into believing Trump spends all day watching gorilla news channel

(Credit: Twitter/pixelatedboat)

With all the inconceivable Trump administration’s absurdities revealed by Michael Wolff’s White House just-released exposé “Fire & Fury,” it is infuriating, yet almost understandable, that a fictitious passage about Donald Trump watching “the Gorilla Channel” was believed by some to be true.

Beloved Twitter comedian @Pixelatedboat tweeted a Photoshopped passage — purported to be from Wolff’s book “Fire & Fury” — that said that President Trump was upset that the television in his bedroom didn’t carry a “gorilla channel.” In an effort to placate Trump, the White House staff compiled a bunch of documentaries and created an improvised one, the joke passage explained.

Wow, this extract from Wolff’s book is a shocking insight into Trump’s mind: pic.twitter.com/1ZecclggSa

— the gorilla channel thing is a joke (@pixelatedboat) January 5, 2018

The tweet went viral, leading some prominent figures in the Twitterverse—including Farhad Manjoo of the New York Times— to express confusion over its legitimacy.

I’m sorry I have a question

Is the gorilla channel thing real or fake?

I thought it was clearly fake but people are talking as if it’s real and I don’t know who’s mistaken.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about don’t look it up because it might be fake.

— Farhad Manjoo (feat. Drake) (@fmanjoo) January 5, 2018

This is my favorite part of Wolff's book so far. Amazing for what it says about this administration! (It's worse than you think!!). So amazing, I can barely even believe it. It's *literally* incredible@Pixelatedboat caught it first (he's a quicker reader than I). Reproducing: pic.twitter.com/qtOaNDxnx2

— Shadi Hamid (@shadihamid) January 5, 2018

https://twitter.com/samanthamaiden/st...

I did not realize it was a joke until I read the comments!! We're so far down the rabbit hole, this seemed completely believable. What's happening to us????

— Christy (@cameobraid) January 5, 2018

For some, there was a disappointment when they found out it wasn’t—and that a Gorilla channel doesn’t really exist.

https://twitter.com/ericgarland/statu...

Americans want the gorilla channel

— Manimal (@Gormanimal2000) January 5, 2018

Cable channel Animal Planet played off the joke themselves.

What makes for a Gorilla Channel? A lot of eating, sleeping, and, of course, playtime! pic.twitter.com/cnXOSSY07z

— AnimalPlanet (@AnimalPlanet) January 5, 2018

With some of these tweets from journalists, it is hard to tell whether they were joking about their gullibility. Whatever the case, PixelatedBoat’s tweet revealed a disturbing trend — namely, that truth has become highly subjective and distorted, such that even obvious parodies can easily pass as real.

While the Gorilla Channel prank is hilarious, it’s also alarming and showcases a bigger contemporary problem: people believe what they want to believe. As Washington Post writer Molly Roberts said, “the same inclination [a]llowed Russian propaganda to spread like a virus through social media leading up to the election.” “There’s a volatile chemistry between a president who stirs disbelief each day and critics ready to suspend their own,” Roberts mused.

On a lighter note, it’s clear that many Americans desperately want a Gorilla Channel — and lucky for those who’d like to see it, Vice News went ahead and created one here.

Meanwhile, @Pixelatedboat has since changed their Twitter account name to “the gorilla channel thing is a joke.”

This slim portable battery keeps all your devices charged

The worst thing is to be out on the go when your (much-relied on) device happens to die. Make that an issue for 2017 with this Mophie Powerstation 8X Battery Pack, and keep all your devices fully charged once the new year hits.

The biggest problem with “portable” batteries is that they tend to be bulky, making them more cumbersome to haul around than to wait around for an outlet. But this Mophie Powerstation makes that a thing of the past — it’s thinner than your phone and packs a whopping 15,000mAh of power in a lightweight frame. It can even charge two devices at once with its massive output.

In fact, the battery is so highly efficient, it can recharge a smartphone up to eight times — and when your phone is finished juicing up, all you need to do is connect the battery pack to a power outlet, and it’ll automatically start to recharge itself. If you tend to be a little paranoid about being trapped without a charge, you can even use the Mophie Power app to monitor and manage the battery life of your phone as well as your Powerstation battery.

Make 2018 a year where no outlets are required — usually, this Mophie Powerstation 8X Battery Pack is $149.95, but you can get it now for $79.95, or 46% off the usual price.

“Crash” director Paul Haggis accused of sexual misconduct by 4 women, 2 claiming rape

Paul Haggis (Credit: AP/Dennis Van Tine)

Four women have come forward accusing filmmaker Paul Haggis, 64, of sexual assault. Two of the women allege that Haggis raped them, according to a report published Friday by the Associated Press.

The allegations started with a civil lawsuit filed against Haggis for rape in 2013. Subsequently, three additional women shared their own allegations of sexual misconduct against the filmmaker. One publicist says Haggis forced her to perform oral sex, then raped her. Another woman told the AP that Haggis tried to sexually assault her. “Another of the new accusers said Haggis held down her arms, forcibly kissed her on a street corner, then followed her into a taxi,” the AP wrote. “She said she later escaped his clutches.”

These women reported their accusations to the attorney of Haleigh Breest, Haggis’ original accuser. The AP said that Friday, “Breest’s attorneys filed an amended complaint that includes details of the allegations lodged by the three new accusers.”

Christine Lepera, an attorney for Haggis told the AP, “He didn’t rape anybody.” Haggis has also countersued Haleigh Breest, claiming that she and her lawyer attempted to extort him for $9 million in order to avoid legal trouble.

In light of the new round of accusations, Lepera said in a statement to Deadline: “No one has reached out to anyone on Mr. Haggis’ team other than the press to report this.” She added, “He views the fact that these reports appear to be spearheaded from the law-firm representing Ms. Breest, as a further tactic to try to harm him and continue their effort to obtain money. Mr. Haggis also questions whether Scientology has any role here, which he notes has been attacking him for years with false accusations.” (All of the women told the AP that they had no connection to Scientology.)

“We view Mr. Haggis’s claims against Haleigh Breest as ludicrous, and a further act of aggression. In our system of justice, those who have been wronged have the clear right to seek redress and hold those responsible accountable for their misconduct,” Breest’s attorney told the AP. “In an act of remarkable hubris, Mr. Haggis has the temerity to claim that he, not her, was the victim. It is a preposterous and transparent PR stunt that will not succeed. Ms. Breest will not be intimidated or deterred from seeking justice.”

In Breest’s lawsuit, she alleges that Haggis forced her to perform oral sex and then raped her after a film premiere in 2013. But the new set of accusations are equally as troubling. The AP reported:

In separate interviews with the AP, the three new accusers provided detailed accounts of encounters they say occurred between 1996 and 2015. The women were early in their careers in the entertainment business when, they say, the Hollywood heavyweight lured them to private or semi-private places under the guise of discussing productions or a subject of a professional nature.

They all said Haggis first tried to kiss them. In two of the cases, they said, when they fought back, Haggis escalated his aggression.

The other woman accusing Haggis of rape says the assault occurred when she was 28 and working as a publicist on a show he was producing in 1996. She says Haggis asked to come to her office to discuss work-related tasks. The woman, who remains anonymous, says everyone had gone home for the evening. When Haggis arrived, he insisted their conversation take place in a back office. Once there, she said, Haggis began kissing her.

“I just pulled away. He was just glaring at me and came at me again. I was really resisting. He said to me, ‘Do you really want to continue working?'” the woman told the AP. “And then he really forced himself on me. I was just numb. I didn’t know what to do.” Then, she said, he forced her to perform oral sex then “pushed her to the floor and raped her.”

Professionally, Haggis is best known for writing, directing and producing “Crash,” which won both Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay at the 2006 Academy Awards. The previous year, “Million Dollar Baby,” which he also wrote and produced, earned four Oscars including Best Picture. He has remained active in filmmaking since, writing a script for “Casino Royale,” producing HBO’s “Show Me a Hero” and working on many other high-profile projects.

Haggis has also garnered significant attention for not only defecting from Scientology in 2009, but for an intense public crusade against the religion via a 2011 New Yorker article, an HBO documentary and a book.

In recent months, Haggis has held nothing back in his condemnation of producer Harvey Weinstein. “A lot of people are compromised by Harvey’s alleged actions,” he told the Guardian. “Although everyone thinks it is vile behaviour [sic], you have got to focus on those who may have colluded and protected him. For me, they are as guilty as he is and in some cases more so, if I can say that. I mean, he was a predator and a predator is a predator. But what about those who would rather look the other way?”