Cri-Cri the character, Francisco Gabilondo Soler the songwriter, and Vern performing in SJC 2011
Well, I am squeezing a lot into two hours at my concert this Saturday at 5, at the Anaheim United Methodist Church (1000 S. State College, with singers Annemarie Randle-Trejo and Fred Sigala Jr.) I figured the high point would be Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition, which ends with the Great Gates of Kiev (Victory to Ukraine!) There’s other classical/romantic composers (Bach, Chopin, Debussy), rock songs (Led Zeppelin, Radiohead, Neil Young) and jazz (Thelonious Monk, Dave Brubeck.)
But many people seem to be most excited that we’re performing five songs by the great Mexican songwriter/radio personality Francisco Gabilondo Soler, better known as “Cri Cri,” the singing cricket that Mexican children (many without TVs) grew up hearing on their radios from the 30’s to the 70’s. It was really hard for me to choose just five – there are at least two dozen of them that I think are masterpieces, as good as any Beatles songs. We may have to do more in the future.
It might warm the hearts of Anaheim rebels, with our own fraught relationship with Imperial Disney, to know that Walt tried hard to buy the Cri-Cri character to put into his 1940 “Pinocchio,” and Francisco (FGS) wouldn’t sell his character for any price. “Cri Cri belongs to the children of Mexico!” FGS proclaimed. So Walt changed it a little bit to Jiminy Cricket, whom he taught to sing “When You Wish Upon a Star” and FGS celebrated his own defiance with the song “El Ratón Vaquero” – the Cowboy Mouse who speaks English and wields two pistols, which misfire as the mouse stands forlornly in a mousetrap. Fred’ll be singing this one:
The song I’ve performed for years is “El Ropero” in which a child begs his grandmother to open, once again, an old closet that’s filled with things that tell him about his long-lost parents and grandfather. It’s layer upon layer of nostalgia with this child of the 1940’s wanting to relive his grandparent’s early-20th century era (also the time of strongman Porfirio Diaz.)
I love the last lines, with the child saying (in my translation) “Hand me that ancient book with a thousand illustrations – I want to open it! Kids these days like those old stories too, you know.” I call that “KIDSPLAINING” – when kids try to explain to grownups what it’s like to be a kid “in these days.” My sons used to do that too.
Here’s me doing that song in San Juan Capistrano on a painted piano – part of the Pacific Symphony’s 2011 “OC Can You Play” project. Look at all the nice comments I’ve gotten from all over the world, about this song!
When old Mexicans hear me do that song, the first thing they ask is if I can do “La Muñeca Fea,” a beautiful waltz-time song about an UGLY DOLL. This doll has been left in a dark corner forever with a bunch of junk, and feels sorry for herself that nobody loves her. But also in that corner is a mouse (definitely not the Cowboy Mouse) who consoles her:
“Don’t cry, silly, you’re just wrong… your friends are here in this corner:
The Broom and the Dustpan love you.
The Duster and the Shaker love you.
The Spider and the Old Suitcase love you.
And I love you too, and I want to see you happy!”
Don’t worry, Fred will be singing that one!
Annemarie will be singing one of these too! (More than half of Cri Cri’s songs featured a trio of female singers.) Annemarie will sing “La Negrita Cucurumbé,” about an Afro-Cuban girl who wants to be white, and goes to stand in the ocean, hoping that it’ll bleach her as white as the sand, the shells, the foam of the waves. THIS time the deus ex machina isn’t a mouse, but a FISH in a BOWLER HAT, who jumps out of the sea, tips his hat, and tells La Negrita Cucurumbe how beautiful she is, just the way she is naturally. Francisco grew up near Veracruz, which is near Cuba, and not only knew a lot of black people, but was also familiar with danzon, the Carribean dance craze of the time, of which this song is an example.
Then I had to wrap up the set with “Las Canicas,” not one of Cri-Cri’s more famous or popular songs, but the ONLY song I know of about marbles bouncing down a staircase – an inexcusably neglected topic! “Desde el desvan” – Down from the attic tumble the marbles from step to step!” LIBRES Y LOCAS! So many that NOBODY can follow them! “TEN, TWENTY, THIRTY, FORTY, MORE THAN A HUNDRED!” “En alegre libertad!!!”
Saturday’s concert (Facebook event here) will cost an optional donation of $10. But it is free for:
- kids,
- people who can’t afford $10,
- and anybody who can sing a Cri Cri song.
See you there! And this can be your open thread…
Find Eastman.
https://www.statebarcourt.ca.gov/Portals/2/documents/notices/State-Bar-Court-Public-Events.pdf
Hmmmm. Want to cover this for us?
One of us needs to. Here’s the link, it starts at 10
https://calbar.zoom.us/j/97985435232
Well he would have to as Greg is busy with other “things”
Yeah. but my schedule will be a lot more free by mid-July.
You know, we can see that you’re the same commenter as “Big Fat Spender.” That certainly leads me to not want to take the assertions you make wearing that mask at face value.
Why is Mayor Khan spreading misinformation about the legal age for marriage in California on her official social media as Irvine’s mayor? California is not Saudi Arabia. You have to be 18 years old to marry in California and generally Childs marriage is not legal here. So sad!
https://twitter.com/MayorofIrvine/status/1667678294110765057?cxt=HHwWgoDQgdSk5KQuAAAA
She’s doing this while speaking with a group opposing global trafficking. Obviously, she’s talking about the exception of a child wanting to get married and having parental consent. (I don’t know if guardian or court consent can substitute; it’s never come up in my practice.) I’m surprised if there’s no lower age limit to the “underage marriage with consent law,” but if there really isn’t then it seems reasonable to protest that.
Note: my not being a fan of Farrah since she broke bad is well known, but I don’t want to see her take a fall for something she didn’t say or do.
The minimum age for marriage is 18. It’s codified in the Family Code. An individual under 18 may get married if emancipated or with parental consent and a court order subject to a Department of Family Child Services. Parental consent alone is not enough.
And, her position is insensitive to some religions and cultures like Islam and Hindu and even Christianity where underage age marriage is recognized and practiced.
It is a false statement for her to say there is no minimum age requirement for marriage in California. Child marriage is generally barred in California.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=FAM&division=2.5.&title=&part=1.&chapter=&article= (Domestic partners are two adults)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FAM§ionNum=301.
(Two unmarried persons 18 years of age or older, who are not otherwise disqualified, are capable of consenting to and consummating marriage.)
Do you understand, Counselor, that “generally barred” implies the presence of exceptions — and that those exceptions are the very point of this organization?
You seem to have researched this, so: what’s the minimum age for emancipation, and what’s the minimum age for a court order with parental consent? I suspect that there are minimum ages for both — and that, not the notion that 18 is a hard and fast limit in the U.S., is why Farrah is wrong.
As for her arguing that this is insensitive to various religions — look, I appreciate your baby steps towards cultural sensitivity, but this isn’t the path to tread.
An exception is not the general rule. The general rule is under age marriage is prohibited. Eh.
Do you understand the right to parent and marry are fundamental rights. And the right to freedom of religion is an individual’s enumerated constitutional right. The state’s interest in the health, safety and welfare of the child must be weighed against the fundamental and constitutional rights of the parent(s) and child, counselor. The state can place reasonable restraints on the exercise of these rights and in California, they have.
Her taking the position that there is no age requirement for marriage in California demonstrates she is spreading misinformation.
See my other comment regarding the rule and exception. No one is disputing what the general rule is in this exchange. The question is: what the exception is and what it should be.
She may be spreading misinformation, or she may have simply misspoken. If the latter, she may have already corrected the misstatement — and you are the last person in the state I would trust to accurately report that she had done so, as you are raising this to fry other fish. If she corrected herself, then she is not willfully “spreading misinformation.”
OK, fundamental rights: even to the extent that the right to parent and marry are fundamental rights, fundamental rights are subject to restriction under strict scrutiny. Because these are police powers, they fall to the state rather than to the federal government, except as that may be affected by the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. In this case, you’re wrong to say that the state can place merely “reasonable” restraints on the exercise of these rights: those restraint have to be able to survive strict scrutiny.
(N.b.: The last clause of my comment would surely apply as of a few years ago. Alas, the current Supreme Court has screwed things up so badly that I can’t say, off the top of my head, whether they may have trenched upon what was long understood to be the law.)
Why recreate the wheel or live reporting of hearing.
https://twitter.com/nhanson_reports/status/1671204974859259906?s=61&t=jhF3cKeD-1cIlr3qzgvZmQ
On Eastman trial, after some preliminary evidentiary rulings re expert testimony on controlling test re egregiousness of Eastman’s conduct, the parties gave their opening statements and then court recessed for lunch until 12:45. This matter is set to go three (3) days.
CA’s exception to the minimum age requirement is not so large that it swallows the rule. Consent of one parent and court order subject to independent investigation. So, Farrahkhan’s contention that there is no minimum age requirement for marriage in CA is PATENTLY false. No amount of hair splitting can save her.
You’re misusing “exception … swallows the rule.”
You’re right about the rule being vastly larger than the exception.
Nonetheless, it is valid for people to agitate for limitation of that exception, which is what they’re doing. Putting aside its merits, it’s a perfectly legitimate cause.
The rule remains, unswallowed.
Yes, Farrah very likely misstated the lower age limit for seeking permission for underage marriage. It may have been a simple mistake in speaking. Or it may be that there is no lowest age in the statute itself, but only guidelines that would in fact, even if not by law, establish that the lowest age is nowhere near that of neonates.
By the way: if you want to argue this point, you should not only know what the actual lower age limit for marriage with “parental + court” permission is, you should also know the lower age limit for a minor to be declared emancipated, which according to you also brings with it the right to narry.
Again, child marriage is prohibited In California. The legal age for marriage is 18.
And, again, you have identified two exceptions to this rule — emancipation and parental + court approval after investigation — that are the subject of this protest.
You may argue that an emancipated person under 18 is not a child, but an adult. The people protesting are concerned with actual chronology, not legal fictions.
So Supervisor Andrew Do has this Multi-Million pet project for #transitionalhousing. Except it’s not. Read the Fine Print. Its EMERGENCY housing.
For that much $ can’t you build semi-permanent housing? Why do we need a navigation center in Garden Grove/ Tri Cities?
Who is really benefiting from this venture that won’t even open til early 2024 at earliest!
Go and look and see who got the big fat building contract. #FollowtheMoney.
More misinformation about child marriage being legal in California and there being no minimum age requirement. Is there a minimum age for having constitutional or fundamental rights?
Cottie Petrie-Norris is another dinghy broad and a female chauvinist pig who thinks Tammy Kim is more qualified than Larry Agran to be mayor of Irvine. She isn’t even qualified to run a PTA meeting. Sheesh. Moonbats abound.
I won’t be voting for either of these dinghy broads (Petrie-Norris or Kim)
https://twitter.com/AsmCottie/status/1672003428372058112?cxt=HHwWgMDQtc2Qk7QuAAAA
https://calmatters.org/politics/2023/06/child-marriage-california/
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php/?fbid=749002033892072
Elsewhere, DUI Dave could only get an academic to testify In support of his bill limiting discovery in domestic violence restraining order cases. His wife. How many DV restraining order cases has either of these individuals tried? She is an expert witness regarding conducting discovery in DVRO proceedings? Really? Pffft.
https://twitter.com/DaveMinCA/status/1671890660440563714?cxt=HHwWhIDT7dLs37MuAAAA
https://twitter.com/SenDaveMin/status/1672325222538805255?cxt=HHwWjoDQ5b67pbUuAAAA
Yes, states and the federal government can impose some minimum ages for the exercise of some fundamental rights. Abortion rights, when they were considered fundamental up until a year ago, were one example. The right to interstate travel is not always available to unaccompanied minors. Age limits for gun ownership exist.
Did you even take Constitutional Law? I mentioned that fundamental rights are general subject to strict scrutiny, but maybe I shouldn’t have presumed that you know what that means.
Would you be saying all of this if you didn’t consider Min anti-Armenian, at least by contact? Same question goes for Kim.
On to you phrase “another dinghy broad”: a dignhy is a small boat. The term “broad” for women didn’t outlast the fedora. “Female chauvinist pig” doesn’t mean what you seem to think it does. It would be the equivalent of “male chauvinist pig” — for example, the kind of chap who calls women he doesn’t like “broads.” — rather than someone who prefers a woman over a man in a particular political race rather than trying to tar an entire demographic group with name-calling.
This is really, really weird coming from a Family Law practitioner! Do you take only male clients in divorce and custody cases? Then it would make sense, I guess — but if you want to advertise your practice as based on part of your qualification being hostility to women, then you should buy an ad.
You obviously never watched Alice with Linda Lavin.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dinghy%20broad
If Petrie-Norris thinks Kim is a better candidate than Agran, she is disparaging his public service to the city which is almost as long as Petrie-Norris has graced this earth. She is saying Agran is inferior to Kim. Hence she is a female chauvinist pig.
Oh all of a sudden you are a constitutional scholar. Strict scrutiny. That’s the toughest test for the government to overcome when legislating health, safety and welfare, right?
So if you regulate marriage it must be narrowly tailored to accomplish a compelling state interest, right?
Why does my motivation matter to you?
Next.
Your motivation matters to me because I (and I think Vern agrees) don’t like this blog being used by people to slag others for reasons that are not themselves the fundamental reason for the slagging. It poisons the environment.
You should go into our back pages and read some of our stories about Agran. He’s done some good, he’s done some bad — but the bad includes: (1) doing something much like OCPA did in catering to debased Republicans in order to get support for a dicey proposition; (2) debasing the political process in Irvine by pioneering the use of essentially vanity political newsletters dressed up as local newspapers and getting them distributed all over Irvine (including City Hall!), leading his opponents to do otherwise; (3) arguably (and that qualification is being generous mismanaging the Great Park out of, once again, hubris and the expectation that he or someone in his control would always be in charge; (4) torpedoing a perfectly good land sway proposal that would have brought the Veteran’s Cemetery to Irvine because it would have provided some benefit to his political enemy; and (5) trading on his once-good reputation to abuse the local initiative system to continue that vendetta.
I think I asked you once if you were an Agranista and you denied it. I think it is pretty clear that you are indeed one, in style and at least partially in form. I don’t hate him, but I truly dislike some of the things that he does — and for whatever faults Tammy Kim may have (and I’m not even going to listen to your criticisms of her because, as noted at the top, they will just be in the furtherance of your war against Farrah Khan), my initial inclination would be to tilt in favor of Kim, in a two-person race, because Agran is unlikely to do the good job that he is capable of doing as Mayor if he cut out all of the bullshit.
By the way: as I think some people will remember here, I actually voted for Agran in the Illinois primary when he ran for President in 1992. If we were still the Agran of 1992, rather than bitter and hubristic and bent on score-settling, I’d probably endorse him here as well.
I hope you can appreciate that some would consider you a poor candidate for clearinghouse of righteous motivation for criticizing others. Moreover, one could reasonably argue you are using the term “slagging” incorrectly.
“Some” would say anything about me, much of it untrue.
Some may not know that “an insulting and critical attack” is now the principal, not even the secondary mining-related, defining of the verb “slag.”
Fred & me doing “El Raton Vaquero” – the circa-1940 song Cri-Cri wrote to celebrate his feud with Walt Disney:
Bravo. Not bad for an honorary member of the Red Hat Society.
https://www.scottishpoetrylibrary.org.uk/poem/warning/
When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves
And satin sandals, and say we’ve no money for butter.
I shall sit down on the pavement when I’m tired
And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells
And run my stick along the public railings
And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
And pick flowers in other people’s gardens
And learn to spit.
You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat
And eat three pounds of sausages at a go
Or only bread and pickle for a week
And hoard pens and pencils and beermats and things in boxes.
But now we must have clothes that keep us dry
And pay our rent and not swear in the street
And set a good example for the children.
We must have friends to dinner and read the papers.
But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.
“I am old.
I am old.
I shall wear my trousers rolled.”
Another beautiful Cri-Cri song, sung by Annemarie and me (with Fred banging away). LA NEGRITA CUCURUMBE, from around 1950, in the Carribean “danzon” style of the time. A young black girl goes to the ocean, wishes she was white, but a wise fish wearing a bowler hat jumps out of the ocean and is having none of that.
And La Muñeca Fea. An ugly doll abandoned in the corner feels unloved, but a friendly mouse consoles her that all the inhabitants of that corner love her.