Things I Learned from Pitchfork's Sasquatch! Photos

Sasquatch! is perhaps the second best yearly music festival on the West Coast...set in the Gorge Ampitheatre in Central Washington, it is a gorgeous location in the middle of fucking nowhere. Glancing through Pitchfork's photos from the festival last weekend, I had some revelations, and thought I'd share them

1. Bjork is crazy. Also, astoundingly hot, despite being like 60 or so.

2. This chick from Arcade Fire dresses like she's from a Final Fantasy game.

3. My father's vision of hell has come to life.

4. I have a crush: On the girl on the left, and also on the person on the right (provided that is also a female, I'm only 60% sure...which means there's a 40% chance I'm now bi).

5. Lebron has his own bubblegum flavor. I couldn't for the life of me tell who it was from that picture, so I had to look it up. I thought that Lebron's mute lawnmower commercials were the weirdest thing an NBA player could be selling, but I think this unappetizing marketing push takes the cake:

6. MCA is fucking old.

7. Sometimes you just gotta take off your suspenders, kick off your shoes, and prance.

8. Apparently, Blackalicious is Black. Who knew?

9. Some band called the Tokyo Police Club exists, and uses the (almost) exact same brand of Epiphone that I used to have!!

10. Staring at this girl from Smoosh for too long will incite deep hypnosis. But it might be worth it.

11. Where Velma from Scooby-Doo ended up.

12. It is never too late to pretend that you're from 1969.

13. Sasquatch! is awesome.

age/sex/phenomenologist?

I was having some uber late-night/early-morning gmail chat with a philosophy friend of mine, where I was taking the cantankerous position of trying to belittle some philosophy greats, while my friend tries to keep me grounded....thought it was worth putting here, if just to remind myself to think on this more so I can develop a more coherent presentation of this "hunch" I've got....name changed, of course.

Here's the philosophy part of it leaving out the rest:

Me: when i'm working on plato i'm constantly dazzled by his multilayered brilliance

4:28 AM JB: yeah, it's fuckin' insane

me: but then I don't think you walk away from plato with anything you wouldn't get from nietzsche, emerson, kierkegaard.....

all three of which are heavily indebted to him, but you don't have the temporal ambiguities involved

4:29 AM JB: eeeehhhhh

well, it would seem that in order to make such a claim one would need to have fully plumbed the depths of all those thinkers

4:30 AM to be able to know that he's not offering something significant that the others are...I really couldn't say

me: you're just inventing an impossible standard!

4:31 AM JB: well, i'm just saying what I think one would need to know in order to legitimately make the claim that plato offers nothing that the others don't

me: it isn't that I know the full extent of what he's offering, it is that the essence of what he's offering is transcendent the "depths of one's thoughts" in an important way

there should be an "of" in there...

4:32 AM JB: I'm not sure I'm following...could you rephrase what you're saying?

me: that was an awful sentence, I apologize =)

I mean that there's a reason Plato never to pen a literal list of his ideology on the highest matters (7th letter, right?)

4:33 AM never put to pen

and that reason was that he wanted his writing to stimulate philosophical mind-play

4:34 AM he was much more interested in showcasing the dangers of falling prey to things like pleasure, easy cop-outs (timeaus), false assumptions about doctrines...

than he was proving x or y

to liberate from what holds the mind down and set it in beautiful motion, was what plato sought to do...I think

4:35 AM JB: that there was a reason we can be pretty confident; what that reason is, I'm not quite sure, myself (although I have some hunches)

well, i guess i wouldn't disagree, but it would seem that one could go about doing this in many different ways, some much better than others

4:36 AM me: true

JB: that is to say, depending on what one is liberating it from, and what sort of motion

me: I guess I just think....we all live in the same meta-world, or whatever you want to call it

JB: this, as far as I can tell, would be a big diff between him and Nietzsche

what is a meta-world?

4:37 AM me: I was just about to type "we all live in the same world"

but then wanted to clarify against a possible definition of "world", and said that. I should have said "life world"

4:38 AM JB: i haven't read husserl, so i'm not up on what that means either...

sorry, just my own lack of understanding

but i think i see what you're driving at

me: well, we're all human, and seem to have minds that interact in the same basic ways

4:39 AM I just think that it isn't like any one philosopher has privledged access to some kind of truth that others can't decipher

which is why Heidegger's "last god" and some of that stuff is bullshit

JB: why do you think that such a privileged access doesn't exist?

me: because to think that you've pushed beyond the limits of what others have thought so radically that you need to go inventing new things for it....is absurd

4:40 AM JB: why absurd?

isn't this the nature of genius?

perhaps inventing, or perhaps (as Plato might say)...discovering

me: well, you can be really good at listening to your genius

4:41 AM and certainly there are ways of thought that have gone unarticulated by others

but you can always tell where and how a philosopher cheats by what it is they desire

4:42 AM and Heidegger desired to get at a foundation ever-more foundational

JB: what do you mean by "cheats"?

4:43 AM me: I think that you can pay attention to the world as hard and as openly as possible, but I don't think that you'll ever come away needing to describe something as the "last god"

4:44 AM or with Kant, I don't think you can ever discover 12 categories in symmetrical groups of 4

4:45 AM i'm not against taking leaps, since the conviction to never take leaps is itself a pretty large leap

but I do think people should be very suspicious of where they land and why, and that's what Plato sought to solve through paidia

paideia through paidia

4:46 AM JB: as to the first, i don't know what the hell heid means by that, so i can't really speak to it...

as to Kant, a triad of categories such as actuality, possibility, necessity does seem -- in terms of modalities -- pretty darn exhaustive

me: but the ranking and numbering of such was absolutely subjective to his desire for symmetry

4:47 AM for instance, why not un-necessity?

JB: how do you know that that was his motivation/reason?

4:48 AM and, he does have un-necessity -- he calls it possibility

me: oops, you're right... I mean, un-actuality. aka, fictionality

4:49 AM since he has the counter-part of necessity, but not that of actuality

JB: one could just as easily accuse the person who discovered integers of stacking the deck, and only finding integers because he desired symmetry

4:50 AM well, i'd think that fiction, insofar as it is actual, is something that falls under actuality

me: I don't know that that was his organizing telos or anything, but I don't really think they're an absolute necessary means of describing human experience

4:51 AM exactly my point, possibility and necessity also have a degree relationship.

JB: yes, which kant would acknowledge

me: so why one and not the other? he liked his groups

4:52 AM JB: well, perhaps i'm not sure what you mean by degree relationships

me: i think that if you pick apart the statement "there IS a category x or y"

4:53 AM you'll find that it says nothing at all

or rather, "when we are attempting to describe fairly essential properties that things have, we tend to use one of these labels"

4:54 AM JB: i wouldn't feel comfortable saying that one of the most brilliant humans in history set up one of the central elements of his philosophy just because he liked groups, or liked symmetry, and then unknowingly (or knowingly) just went around trying to find confirmation for what he wanted

i'm not sure what youre referring to

4:55 AM me: the critique of pure reason isn't my strong point, so I picked a dumb area to make an example out of kant =)

a much better instance of him cheating is in the 2nd critique

4:56 AM where he argues from an assumption in lots of places

like, he doesn't think we can comport to the moral order because of happiness, but he thinks we have to be rewarded in happiness eventually because of that

so he posits god from that basis

4:57 AM and no philosopher's ever going to be perfect, so I don't see this as a knock on kant's brilliance!

4:58 AM JB: i haven't read the second critique, but I do know that no genuine philosopher can be 'refuted' as easily as that

The Hows, Whats, and Gwuhs? of music distribution in the future

I was thinking about what kind of model for music sales that we'll see in the future. I don't think any of the existing models are really all that viable - the notion of the physical record seems like a dead one, and the extreme DRM controls that the big companies are trying to stick to down services (I won't go out of my way to deride Apple in this post for a change, although I easily could on this front) make itunes and whatnot to be a non-starter for a large number of people. But are there any visible and viable alternatives?

I don't know if this idea has been floated before (I'm sure someone has posited it at some point), but I haven't heard anyone mention it. Isn't a somewhat likely means of resolving this issue that someday we'll move to a model where every RIAA song is available for streaming automatically, but you simply pay a small fee (like a cent) every time you listen to any song? Obviously we're not at the point technologically where you can stream high quality songs to any computer, mp3 player, car stereo, etc like that...but that's definitely coming in the near future.

Take the average song one downloads from a music service that charges $1 per song - how likely are you to listen to that song one hundred times? Even if it was a song you really liked, you probably were only going to listen, say, 30 times in the next year - that'd just be 30 cents! I think both sides would win, because people would feel free to listen to anything out there, browse around more musically, and end up getting into new types of music; listening more, paying more. And stupid things like overpriced singles would be a thing of the past; crappy EPs obviously aren't going to get repeat play, so artists would be rewarded for songs that were listened to more frequently, not just purchased once. Wouldn't that benefit a lot of indie artists? I think so. I know Rhapsody is kind of like this now, but

I'm not necessarily saying that this is a good idea, just thinking out loud on one possibility for what music distribution might look like someday. Obviously it would never be as egalitarian as I describe above - each song costing the same, low amount, all artists being available through this service, etc.

Josh M sent me this, which is well worth watching:

Acquired quite a taste, for a well made mistake

I have always been fascinated with mistakes and how we come to rework our stances on previously held positions. There is not a steady plodding progress, marching through deduction after deduction until we piece together a new viewpoint. There is always a moment of revelation, where things spontaneously appear in a new way, and the cord that connects you to the person to believed differently just a few minutes ago is severed irrevocably - a kind of death you can never see coming. The important decisions are just means of marshalling your latent psychological inertia, getting it out of the way so the leaps forward that spring out of the genius (the slightly ajar basement door of the mind, to expound on Emerson's analogy for that particular faculty).

My freshman year at Whitman, I took my first course from the professor that would end up shaping my philosophical interests and career; one of the books we read on aesthetics was On Beauty and Being Just by Elaine Scarry, who centers the book on an experience she had regarding palm fronds. Never liking the look of palm fronds, she found herself underneath one on vacation and suddenly had an experience that required her to scrap a conviction she was once quite sure about.

I had something similar earlier this week when I listened to Fiona Apple's When the Pawn Hits the Conflicts He Thinks Like a King... I had always believed that I disliked Fiona Apple. While I tend to be a sucker for female vocalists, I had never liked a certain group of singer/songwriters who I thought were more into lyric writing than interesting music. As much as I like the themes to be found in Alanis Morissette or Ani Defranco's work, I found their music to be bland, off-putting, whatever. A few songs were ok (and I really like a few songs by Tori Amos, but the rest are just ok). But I had lumped Fiona Apple in with this group, mainly just because of peripheral knowledge I had about her. I have definitely heard Fiona Apple songs before, but I've never really listened to any of her stuff before. So I was very surprised when a listening to her album found me ensnared, and while I don't think that Tidal is nearly as musically interesting, I am eager to listen to more of her stuff. Sometimes you look up so fast your preconceived notions don't have a chance to catch up with your eyes.

(Side Note 1: I think that a lot of the tendency to knee-jerkily dismiss FA is rooted in the old sexist hysteria assumptions...because she has been occasionally inconsistent on a few points, and had one stage breakdown, and admitted that she had therapy when she was young (because she was raped at 12 - shocking that she'd need some help after that!), people were very eager to be critical of her. But those same traits on a male receive very different reactions...)

(Side Note 2: The full name of the album is: When the Pawn Hits the Conflicts He Thinks like a King What He Knows Throws the Blows When He Goes to the Fight And He'll Win the Whole Thing 'Fore He Enters the Ring There's No Body to Batter When Your Mind Is Your Might So When You Go Solo, You Hold Your Own Hand And Remember That Depth Is the Greatest of Heights And If You Know Where You Stand, Then You Know Where to Land And If You Fall It Won't Matter, Cuz You'll Know That You're Right. I didn't say she wasn't quirky.)

This made me realize something else - like a boxer who discards roll after roll of disgusting flab (would this be a post without a gratuitous Simpsons reference?) - I don't need the Album du jour format anymore. My intent with that was to force myself to listen to music that I had but hadn't fully taken time to appreciate...and it worked. In fact, I found that I was suddenly spending my time listening to albums by folks like Islands, Junior Boys (thanks to a question by Nicole), Iggy Pop, etc., in lieu of doing the random shuffle thing. And Fiona Apple was the nail in the coffin - if I'm going to go out of my way to find and write about music anyways, then I don't need a gimmick to keep me going at that.

In other thoughts:
- Heroes finale, pretty bad compared to the rest of the season. Lost finale, pretty good compared to the rest of the season.

- In an interview with the avclub, Nic Offer of !!! talks about how he made up a "running on ecstasy" move the other night - which, was at the show they did at Boston! I remember that.

- Oh, and in a major coup, the Portland Trailblazers manage to snag the top pick of the 2007 NBA draft, which means they land either franchise center Greg Oden or mega-super-star in the making Kevin Durant. I personally hope they go for Durant, but either way....Portland's back on the NBA map in a big way, and it is very exciting. For a second I felt bad that the Celtics got shafted, since their future is so bleak at the moment...but then I remembered that Boston folks had the Pats and Sox to keep them going, and Portland has nothing else!

Tapes n' Crap

Nothing's smarter than accidentally coming into work to make up some lost hours on what turns out to be graduation day! Aka, nothing to do (normally this would bore me, but since I have lots of things I need to read/write...)

Music



Saturday was the Tapes n' Tapes show at the Paradise (third concert I had seen at that venue in the space of three weeks). The first opening act - Harlem Shakes - had to cancel, so we (aka, Brett et moi) had to hang around drinking overpriced PBRs for an hour (the one time I'm there on time....). Also showcased that night at the Paradise was a demo for the upcoming 2k7 MLB game for the xbox 360. I'm not sure why this demo was worthy of being mentioned on the building's marquee sign. But then again, I'm not sure why people play baseball video games either, so what do I know.

The second opening act was Ladyhawk, which is a band I've never heard of. Forceful indie rockers...don't know how to describe them really. When Brett asked me what I thought of them, I shrugged and said "eh, I wouldn't steal their music." Two guys standing right behind us had a very different take, however. They shouted "LADYHAWK!!!" while the sound guys were setting up, "LADYHAWK!!!" before and after each song, and even "LADYHAWK!!!" a few times during Tapes n' Tapes' set. They also kept screaming for some song called "on paradise" or whatever to be played. I would assume that said song was never played, but since they kept shouting for the band after they were done, aanything is possible.

Tapes n' Tapes was excellent. They played 6 new songs not from their first album..5 of which were rough and lacking energy, but the last new one they played had a real kick to it. Otherwise, it was a pretty simple, excellent presentation of their tracks from The Loon. My favourite member of the band is easily the drummer, who combines more than competent drumming, incredible energy, and looking like the lab assistant in your bio chemistry class to be one of the more charismatic musicians I've seen in awhile:

(note, the above two pictures were not taken by me, my camera ran out of batteries during the previous night's luau party. they're stolen from pitchfork's photos from their show in New York yesterday. So imagine the same people 24 hours younger to get an idea of what they looked like when I saw them).

Politics

If there's one thing that gets me pissed off, it is the electoral college. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that the vote of those people who happen to live in states that predominantly vote for one party or another are essentially meaningless, while people who happen to live in places that contain a large number (but not TOO many) retards decide our fate. Basically, someone who votes in Ohio has a far, far higher chance of affecting the outcome of the presidential election than I do. Which means that those of us in non-swing states are essentially slaves to the people who lives in Ohio, Florida, etc. What I'm trying to say here, is that I have personally undergone the same level and intensity of oppression as black slaves.

Well, that was a joke. But I am pissed off about it. Not because of the abstract principle that Ohioans ought not be in the driver's seat on this whole fate of the world thing (although if you've known many people from Ohio you'll know how true that is). But because of the following two points:
1. People who don't have a motivation to vote tend to not vote nearly as much.
B. The abstract principle of civic duty tends to compel old people and wealthier people to vote more often than it does the young or poor.

Essentially, I think that America is, by and large, fairly liberal. But a number of factors contribute to this not being reflected in the polls to nearly the extent it should be. And I think that one of the biggest factors keeping people from voting is that they feel their vote doesn't count. I can't really blame someone who lives in Massachusetts who, such as myself, doesn't know much about local politics, and doesn't bother voting because it is guaranteed that the state will chose the Dems for President and Congress. But if each and every single person's vote counted equally, then it'd be a WHOLE different story, and I think voter participation in New York, California, etc. would skyrocket.

The only argument for the electoral college as currently constituted is that candidates will only target populous areas, and not really push forward a pro-rural area agenda. But I think that is a dumb reason:
1. Since when does campaign promises have anything to do with campaign actions taken? Most of Bush's policies have been the exact opposite of things he campaigned on. Candidates will cater to rural or urban issues if their base wants them to; reaction amongst party members has far more weight than geographic ones.
2. Rural area voters aren't remarkably good at standing up for rural area concerns. Aside from a few specific points, folks in rural areas don't tend to stand up for environmental causes, for example.
3. So what? I fail to see why the states deserve justice in terms of having all being counted equally, while people don't. (Of course, the current system doesn't even do that, since the states that happen to be swing states are the ones that get the attention from candidates).



Apple-hating:

I don't mean to return to this topic again and again, but one of my bosses mentioned something about Apple winning a Smithsonian design award (partially for the iphone, a product which has yet to be released! which is ridiculous). Thinking about that helped crystallize in my own mind the problem I have with the Apple (and increasingly, Nintendo) aesthetic.

If you think about objects that you have in the house, you can fit them under three main categories:
1. Pure utility. Tools are meant for a purpose, and are designed to conform to adhere to that purpose best. Hammers are built for hammering, not looking pretty. (Note: I spent about 20 minutes trying to track down a screenshot from the Who Shot Mr Burns Simpsons episode when Jasper goes "The sidewalk's for normal walkin', not fancy walkin'!" but failed miserably).
2. Decoration.
3. Furniture and architecture. These are where it gets interesting, because one has to balance form and function. The ongoing conflict (strife, if I wanted to make an obscure and not all that accurate Heidegger reference) between the necessities demanded by the form so as to be useful, and working around those limitations is where the beauty happens. When it takes ingenuity to blend form and function into an ideal partnership, that is why architecture can have aesthetic value.

(the mind responsible for the spread of white, banal evil)

So, where should electronic gadgets fall in? They exist mainly to execute a purpose, but because of their smallness and malleability they can be put into lots of different forms. But this is not like category 3 where one must actively work to balance the decorative desires with the demands of the form; there is nothing stopping one making a computer or mp3 player case look like whatever. Electronic gadgets have almost nothing to do in terms of constituting a dwelling; this is why most people try and have unobtrusive TV and stereo sets.

The goal and telos of a computer is to produce a display and allow for manipulation of that display in myriad ways. This has nothing to do with the appearance of the case - there is no strife, no work, no difficult, and thus no craft. The reason why this problem doesn't appear to the minds of most is because no one in America is concerned with such categorical distinctions, their aesthetics is encased wholly within the notion of sociocultural issues. For instance: fine wines = infinitely more expensive than fine beers, not because they are harder or more costly to make (they aren't), nor because they are better tasting or more complex tasting (again, aren't those things either), but because they have the perception of being more fancy - a purely self-enforcing prophecy. The twisted logic of capitalism dictates that because we must pay more for things that which are valuable, things that we pay much more must thus be more valuable. The simple mistake: just because A implies B, B does not imply A. But since everything we do goes into and affects our intersubjective weighing, judging, and ranking of other people, the notion that expensive items = superiority is well entrenched in our culture. The danger becomes when one spends their entire life working hard in order to earn more money, and ends up finding that that salary bump does not come with a guaranteed increase in happiness. But then I'm just stating basic facts now (yet basic facts that are understood by almost no one, as is evidenced by how every single person you see on a daily basis goes about their lives).

Thus, the slapping on of an aesthetic front to the world of computers and electronic gadgets has nothing to do with the improvement of those products, or enabling them to go about their purposes any better...instead, it entails the bringing of the technological culture into the larger society of "normal" means of weighing people by class and wealth. Before this, in order to be a computer enthusiast you almost certainly were not very "plugged in" to popular culture. By making the imacs and i-products into a bubbly gum, candy coated shell (the Nintendo Wii and DS as well), those products have been stamped as accessible and valuable by the frothy high-culture created by the swirls of capitalism. Nerdiness becomes re-appropriated; what was once the devotion to outsider ways of getting things done or entertaining, now becomes a sociocultural fashion statement of appealing to a souless twee aesthetic. Which is precisely why the people who are real apple enthusiasts end up looking like smug, unsympathetic nimrods like this:

I don't know why

Distraction / This, traction

(UPDATE: I just remembered (a week later) what the original thought was that spawned this post - all of the Nascar stories after Dale Earnhart left his racing team/company/whatever. The thought "why do people care so much about people driving cars in a circle" was resounding through my head, and that led me on to other things I felt like complaining about, forgetting the original in the process.)

Things I have a very hard time comprehending:

- Why anyone likes ska.
- Why women obsess over shoes (ok, I understand this one, I just don't want to: it is because women are taught from an early age that accessories and capitalist consumption lies at the heart of femininity)
- Why no one else in the house can tell that the TV is still turned on even when the cable is off; I can hear the frequency of it being on from downstairs.
- Why people care so much about Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
- Why people think that music gets worse the more other folks listen to it; as if there were a finite number of sound waves, and it is best to hog them all to oneself.
- Why people who supposedly like video games buy Macintosh computers. (Or, for that matter, why anyone who has a basic understanding of how to operate computers feels the need to buy a Macintosh computer).
- Why JP, despite somehow managing to claim strong roots in the mid-west, south, and north-east simultaneously, is the only one still living in Oregon.
- Why anyone cares about what Paris Hilton has done, ever.
- Why there are gay Republicans, black Mormons, or...actually, just why there are Republicans or Mormons (I don't really mean to single Mormons out; any heavily doctrinal religious belief is equally suspect. The only difference is that Mormons somehow got away with the "whoaa...I found these magical tablets" crap centuries after that stopped being an acceptable excuse. Oh well, just fashionably late to the crazy party, I suppose).
- Why people use Twitter (all the fun of having something to update without the hard work of having to think of anything to actually say, I guess)
- Why Walter doesn't understand the brilliance of Arrested Development.
- Why many liberals have fatally confused the maxim "bad judgments are bad" with "all judgments are bad."
- Why people think whiskey tastes better than tequila.
- Why Chelsea Clinton never returns my calls.
- Why so many people in their mid twenties think that it is prime time to get married and start breeding (unless of course they have lots of crops that need harvestin' - which, in all fairness to a number of my former high school classmates, many of them do).
- Why anyone thinks that it is enjoyable to watch the slow grindings of a popularity show unfold over months, and pretend that the American Idol winner will have any meaningful impact on the music world whatsoever (it would be like being in Leadership class for 5 months nonstop - eye gougingly fun!)
- Why people, in lieu of spending every minute thankful for the absurd and inexplicable fact of their existence, make annoying comments about things they don't understand, or devote their lives to petty/vapid goals, or buckle to tradition rather than suffer the pain of reinventing oneself in the fires of possibility...or really do anything aside from stumble around in awe, looking for others to share their wonder with.


- Why I'm writing here instead of on my paper.

Big Shot Jerk

A paper on Plato and Homer has taken up my time, so much so that I was avoiding watching Heroes and the Phoenix/Spurs game to try and finish up. I was able to miss Heroes comfortably due to the wonders of bittorent, but the Suns game was another matter. I checked the score a few times, but when the 4^th quarter started, I caved, and knew that I had to watch in case Phoenix made an epic comeback. And lo and behold, they did, thanks to some amazing Steve Nash magic. But Robert Horry, out of frustration, slammed Nash into the announcer’s table, which sparked off a tense standoff, and also included Amare and Boris Diaw making moves to come off the bench to the floor – this might get them both suspended for game 5. If they aren’t, then I like Phoenix chances – just need to win two of the next three games, with home court advantage.

Another bonus to tuning in tonight was that Shaq was a guest on the TNT Inside the NBA show, to join Charles Barkley (the possible future governor of Alabama!) in providing colour commentary. It was predictably hilarious, but one thing stuck out – they had a photoshopped image of Shaq’s head on Raphael’s famous painting School of Athens, which depicts Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, and many other ancient greek thinkers in the forum. This is because one of Shaq’s many nicknames is “The Big Aristotle”. However, they put Shaq’s head on Plato’s body, not Aristotle’s! Strange that they would do the research to make that clever connection, and then not get it quite right as to who is who.

Two indisputable bits of proof on how Pitchfork is retarded:

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/16385-shut-up-you-fucking-baby

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/16386-its-not-funny

But David Cross gets his hilarious revenge:

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/feature/10279-guest-list-david-cross-albums-to-listen-to-while-reading-overwrought-pitchfork-reviews

Tomorrow night - !!! concert/date! I’ve talked about their latest album Myth Takes before…and I’m real excited to see how their live show holds up (their first show at Coachella in 2004 was a large part of their buzz).

Yacht-Onslaught (Yachtslaught) Week part 2

The below rambling refers to information that can be gotten by clicking on this link, that I'm linking too, right here, with this text, that will take you to a pitchfork story and improve your life and allow for comprehension of all.

So, that's pretty much the greatest CD release party ever, right? On a Yacht on the Willamette river, the audience provides the beats for the songs when the PA explodes, the band plays from within the audience...how is that not perfect?

Yacht Rock and Moi

Below is a list of Classic Rock songs that I am UTTERLY POWERLESS in the face of...by which I mean I am overwhelmed with such a strange combination of nostalgia and rock and high school yearning, that I can't do anything but shake my head around and look like a man possessed. If I have a significant other who is having a baby someday, and I'm driving her to the hospital, and one of these songs comes on...I'm apt to forget what I'm doing. Very much the Desperado/Seinfeld situation.


Even though this isn't the type of music I listen to most often by any means, it is the type that has the deepest roots. Somehow while growing up amidst the Northwest adoration of grunge and alternative music, I became a devotee of 70s guitar rock. When I was learning to play guitar, I would leave Portland's area classic rock station KGON on ALL NIGHT while I slept....I think the unconscious night-long listening caused me to learn the rotation patterns so well, I could usually guess what song would come next. I've just hypnotized myself when it comes to this kind of stuff. Anyway, here are the songs that I can think of that seem the most powerful to me:

BTO - Let It Ride
CCR - Susie Q
Foghat - Fool for the City
Supertramp - Breakfast in America
Neil Young - Southern Man
The Guess Who - These Eyes
Atlanta Rhythm Section - So Into You
BOC - I'm Burnin' for You
Steely Dan - My Old School AND Peg (Steely Dan rules)
Eagles - One of These Nights
ELO - Strange Magic
Toto - Love Isn't Always on Time
Cream - White Room
Fleetwood Mac - Big Love
Tom Petty - Breakdown
Heart - Kick It Out
Jethro Tull - Locomotive Breath
Santana - Everything's Coming Our Way

(OBVIOUSLY Led Zeppelin and Hendrix are in another category, both for being earlier, not yachty, and also way too good to elevate one or two songs of theirs over any others (although I almost added Zep's "In The Evening" to this list because it reminds me so much of many of these other songs in terms of just reducing me to a quivering mess beside the radio))

Listen to those 17 songs and tell me that something doesn't stir in your soul, and I'll call you a lost cause!!!


Ok, so I probably should have included the first episode...but I couldn't refuse the one where Oates tells Hall to "Get your dick out of your heart!!" Which is a line I resolve to use as often as possible.

Jazzitivity

My paper writing procrastination continues...I went on FreeDarko (perhaps my single favourite blog in existence, to be quite honest...where else would people talking about basketball bring up Zizek?!?), started commenting on their recent entry musing about the Warriors victory over the Mavs, and that comment turned into a mini-essay on its own right, so I thought I'd share it here. (And if you think that my tendency to post quasi-related humorous images in all my posts is a clear rip-off of FD's style...then you're right on point, mon ami)

In the unlikely event you want to read the following and know what I'm referring to, you'll need to see this post first

**********************************************
Myriad thoughts:

1. Interesting dynamic created by BS's essential observation and the fact that Jazz embodied are playing the Jazz, a team that, in so many ways, are the least deserving of their name. And yet...who really thinks that the Warriors can prevail against Utah?? I wanted T-Mac to prevail for personal reasons, but watching Houston being forced into the same "Ok, let's make it a three point contest" game that the Mavericks foolishly volunteered for would have been not nearly as interesting. For the Warriors to be truly deserving of the title of "Jazz", then they would have to show that they can improvise for real - the Mavericks being the one key and beat that they have practiced soloing over time and again. Houston would have been them playing in the key of B after Dallas's Bflat...let's see if they know their scales in F (Utah).

B. Despite the immense wonderfulness of GS's play, I found myself really disappointed that the Mavs didn't advance. Part of it was just because I hated the Heat SO MUCH for what happened last year that only a Mavs victory would have erased that bitter feeling...and partly because I don't think it is fair to try to shove Mavs into the "boringly dominant" box that the Spurs live in. I don't think you can boil it down to old way/new way. One of the "older" ways, though, is where each position plays to the stereotypical position strength - general PG, couple shooting options, bigs that play D...etc. But Dallas isn't that - they weren't designed to be perfect as in one cohesive machine where everyone works together for one cohesive goal (like the Spurs), they were designed to give a cornucopia of options. They don't really fit together in some beautiful whole; they are all just really different parts each with a strange assortment of strengths, like a fantasy basketball team, but a really GOOD one. What was ironic about the GS victory is that the Warriors are in some ways the same - a bunch of pieces that don't really fit together in any necessary or intrinsic ways. The difference is that instead of having different roles, they basically all have the SAME one (how that breaks down depending entirely on context, which was the breath-taking genius of it all). Maybe it is a small difference, but a big enough one to explain why I love Dallas and hate the Spurs.

3. Aren't the Pistons (which probably has a better chance of being champs than any other single team at this point) another kind of Jazz? As I watched them dismantle the Bulls...I thought about how I've always adored watching them play, yet so many others seem to hate it. I find nothing boring in the unique ways the Pistons can impose their will on an oppontent...and it isn't because they're finely tuned, it is because they MAKE THINGS HAPPEN. The way they board, and steal, and crush the opponents offensive schemes, creates offensive opportunities that are unique every time. It isn't the rote forumula of "Duncan - good post position? Y = score. N = pass to Parker. Open lane? Y = score, N = pass to open three point shooter". I will content that the Pistons are just as good at improvisation (if not more so) than the Warriors team we've seen the past few weeks, even if it is a slower, darker, moodier kind.

Album du jour #20 - Sambalicious

Cibo Matto - Viva! La Woman (1996)

Prior Relationship to Album: I can't remember how I came across Cibo Matto. I got ahold of their second (and last) major album (Stereo Type A) some 6 months ago, and it quickly became a favourite of mine...so of course I was going to track down the group's first album.

High Point: Cibo Matto is Italian for "Crazy Food," and that is certainly the theme in this album, since almost every song is named after some kind of food item. My favourite title and lyrics are "Know Your Chicken," but that's kind of an annoying song...the most interesting on that front has to be "Birthday Cake."


Low Point: The only track that isn't named in the gastronomical theme is, strangely enough, called "Theme." This has various interesting implications, and there are certainly moments in that song that I enjoy quite a bit...but at 10 minutes, it just isn't great enough overall to listen to.

What I Learned/Realized: You know I'm going to like this band, when wikipedia lists their affiliated genres as: Acid Jazz, Indie Rock, Samba, Trip-hop, and Shibuya-kei. That's a pretty fascinating combination even before you start making up new genres to throw in there. OK, just because it is Japanese and unfamiliar to me, doesn't mean it doesn't really exist...(although sometimes I wish that were the case)


Future Relationship to Album: I will listen to this probably once for every four or so times I listen to Stereo Type A. Fortunately I listen to that album quite a bit.

I just saw a commercial I liked a lot, where an insurance company was grafting rabbits feet back onto rabbits...and they had bunnies swimming!!! Wait, why am I rambling about stupid shit again? Oh yeaaaahh...finals. Back to writing about the Gorgias.

Electronicrap

So I broke the crap out of my Nintendo DS yesterday - dropped it on pavement, and now half of the top screen is dead. I don't use it all that often, and almost never for DS games - but I do like playing those Final Fantasy remakes for the GBA when on the T or watching basketball. So I guess I'm gonna get a new one.

Meanwhile, my Creative Zen Touch has been only half functional for months - the adhesive keeping the headphones contact has come loose (which is evidently a fairly common issue with Creative DAPs), so the right headphone channel fluxuates in and out. I'm going to exploit Jason's electronic genius in the near future to try and do some exploratory surgery to try and solder the part on more firmly, but I think that whether that comes through or not, I can't help myself as far as biting on the new generation of the iriver clix is concerned (the 8 GB version is due out in the next month), which is getting glowing reviews.

Of course, most people reading this will not recognize any of those terms, or if they do, they'll think "if you need an mp3 player, why not get an ipod?" On the one hand, the ipod has almost always been outclassed by a better mp3 player. In terms of features, audio formats, battery life, price, and the hideous beast that is itunes, there has always been a competitor that either met or bested the ipod in almost all of those categories. From the Rio Karma back in 2002/3, to Creative players, to the clix and Trekstor Vibez now...of the millions who are buying mp3 players, a ridiculously tiny percentage of those people realize that a much better option is available for much less money.



Because of the goddamn marketing. Apple has proven to be brilliant at making everyone think there was only one viable option. This really typifies what I dislike about Apple as a company...ever since the imac, they've been so smug about pushing overpriced items that rely mainly on an aesthetic that I think is revolting (making electronics seem cute). They are monolithic (no one really likes Microsoft, but it doesn't matter because the hardware and software is really a gigantic spectrum of options from wide sources and types); for all the shit Microsoft gets for trying to bundle everything into Windows, Apple is way worse about that. And those commercials! They'd be more humorous if they weren't just a bunch of arrogant lies (no, Macs aren't inherently better at dealing with music, movies, images, or any of that shit). There are just a handful of applications that are better at dealing with one thing versus another, and those are mainly confined to higher level editing programs that no average user is ever going to use. The transition to Intel chips has added more complications - for instance, most researchers in social sciences use a software suite called SPSS to do data calculations (I'm a tech consultant in the education department, and basically every single professor and grad student uses this program), and SPSS hasn't been yet made to work on Intel-based Macs (which means all of the new ones). And Apple really has more hardware problems than most PCs...and when those problems crop up, you can't repaire it yourself like you can with PCs, or easily replace the parts!! And while I haven't paid any attention to the iphone, it is markedly clear (or at least stated by those in the know) that it is even more absurdly overpriced than other Apple junk. So I'm rabidly anti-ipods both because they don't make sense practically, but also because I just hate the company in general.

On another note...I just said the other day that I don't like flash games, but here's yet another one I came across that is freaking amazing. Adult Swim's Bible Fight. Eve, Noah, Moses, Jesus, Mary, Satan, and God fighting each other street fighter style. Wonderful, but I got frustrated and quit because I can't seem to beat Satan no matter what I do....

Album du jour #19 - You're sucking all over me

I feel sick right now. On one hand I love what the Warriors did...but the Mavs deserved to be in the finals this year. What a clusterfuck.


This might give you all a small window into my personality: I still need to do my taxes! I think the last two years I've done them in June and August....


Dinosaur Jr - You're Living All Over Me (1987)


Prior Relationship to Album: This isn't a random choice...Josh and I like to force each other to listen to things we otherwise wouldn't, so that will be an exception to the typical "album shuffle" rule (other exceptions: when I'm listening to a band before seeing them live, whenever I'm dating a band member, or whenever else I feel like it).



High Point: I think I need to be 10 years younger and convinced that getting better at skateboarding is a good use of my time to appreciate anything about this music. If I was forced to choose one of these songs to listen to a second time...I guess I'd go with "In A Jar", which does the most to avoid the general annoyances I list below (but not nearly enough!). I didn't think I'd dislike this band so much, for all I hear of them.

Low Point: "Sludgefest". I couldn't tell when the song was ending, or just braying off into pointless distortion frenzys. I need my music to grip me, but in order for that to happen, the music has to grip itself internally, and this doesn't even get close to accomplishing that. Most all of the songs are comprised of indifferent lyrics over a "greasy" guitar track - greasy because I don't feel like it fits in any groove whatsoever, just slides along at its own self-absorbed pace - in turn over fast but yawn-inducing drums and bass lines. And no, this angry review is not revenge for Josh disliking Herbert's Scale (the album I challenged him to try out).
What I Learned/Realized: The other week I was trying to describe Tapes n' Tapes to Zach from upstairs, and we were having a hard time coming to any kind of concordance, because none of the bands I was trying to compare them to he was familiar with, and vice versa. After I described what TnT's music sounded like, he said "You mean...like Dinosaur Jr?" Now instead of "I don't know.." I can say "hell no...Tapes n' Tapes is really good, and tight, and cohesive, and not a waste of time."

Future Relationship to Album: I'm going to listen to it more to be the coolest kid in school!!

divinity; or, the sliver thin difference between Pessimism and Optimism

Many people have a "divine sense" - or whatever sensory experience it is in which something "beyond" is felt, determined, smelled...the echo of the last god ringing in one's ears. Some attribute it to a divine spirit, reincarnation, an established religion...whatever. But whence comes this sense/impression/conviction?

The problem with those enthralled by what they find in the world is that, lost in glamour, they rarely stop to consider the looking glass history has given them to look through. The prevailing assumption is that reality is....merely what is there. Science has made all substance an utterly transparent entity, always within reach, that can be made to dance to our whims. So how unsurprising is it that we have no faith that this prevailing sense of mystery that dogs us at every turn...could come from the same world we interact with everyday? We are given stories along with our mother's milk, stories both of the mind being raised up and stories where the darkness and mystery are cast away (will Conrad's Heart of Darkness even be sensible to future generations?). Of course we will feel the need to invent something else, something infinite, to try and contain our aspirations and dreams.


But how far can we assume such things? Is this feeling that there must be "something else", at its core, not essentialy just pessimism about the capacity of the world we are in to meet the challenge of our minds? What arrogance, to think that we can know the nature of Being so through and through so as to know that we have to look elsewhere for the cause of these feelings/thoughts! We are seeds, scattered or tossed rudely onto the ground. We see that these seeds can sprout high, and from there - assume that this cause must be magical? Is not the simpler and more honest conclusion to draw...that we might have been thrown into soil rich in ways we cannot see?

Heartbreak

Despite leading the entire game, the Denver Nuggets just let the game slip away from them in the 4th quarter. My dreams of a Nugs/Suns semifinals are gone....

Speaking of heartbreak, I just found out that my old friend Zena is the subject of a short story about this writer called Scott Bryan's unrequited love for her, and that story was made into a short film! The film is Yellowville. I haven't seen Zena since judging at the debate nationals tournament in the summer of 2001, but we've kept in sporadic contact. Here's an old picture that explains why I find the above news not altogether surprising: