The Nightmare Continues

Three weeks without my computer now.

It is apparently lost in the post (that's there by the way, not on its way back but on its way there...). One day I hope to return to the real world.
They have promised that i shall be with a computer again one day.
Here's hoping.

Nightmare

My computer is currently getting repaired and I am without... pretty much everything.

I have spent this morning round my parent's house attempting to get my mother's computer operating at a pace slightly above snail like. Possibly succeeded. Non too sure.

It refuses to charge my MP3 player anyway, it knows it is there, it goes through the motions of charging, but doesn't actually share its power.

I am unimpressed.

I can't work like this.

Please Mr Computer Repair Man. Hurry. Hurry.

Hurry.

Get A Job

Just a quick word on this Perez story.

Isn't it odd that a guy earning like no money is trying to get custody of some kids? He can't pay his legal fees but he's going to look after the kids yeah? And it's not like he's defending in the case, isn't he the actual aggressor? It's like "I'm taking you to court for custody of the kids and you're sure as hell going to pay for my lawyers".

K-Fed is a dick.

I remember, what, this time last year? when all the news was saying the same thing "well done Britney for getting rid of that dick".

Oh how I yearn for those halcyon days...

Finding Avril in the Most Unexpected of Places

I've just finished reading The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch, a novel I was given by a friend to read to try and convince me that fantasy novels are where it's at. Not that I have anything against genre fiction you understand but fantasy novels always seem to be so long and involved, caught up in their own created worlds in a way which (generalization alert; based on my own limited involvement with the genre) seems wholly insular, rather than using alternate worlds to look at our own.

On the one hand I did quite enjoy the book: it's well written, good plot (once it knows where it's going), larger than life characters; on the other hand it didn't really change my opinion of fantasy writing: for the first 100 or so pages I found myself wondering (as I always do when reading fantasy novels) who on earth can be bothered to come up with so many names for things? I know its not as bad as coming up with a different language for your fantasy world but still ... surely there's more productive things to be done.

So that's a bit of a crap point, i accept it, and I did get over it to enjoy the book, but I think it demonstrates the point adequately on insularity.

And, to the main point of my post, though it still has to do with naming; at a point late on in the book Locke Lamora uses the name Galdo Avrillaigne, which, if it's not immediately apparent, is Avril Lavigne with the space and the 'v' missing.

You see how hard naming so many things is?

Linkin Park?

Here there was going to be a kinda congratulatory post about Avril winning two MTV Europe awards last night. A post saying that the people of Europe have spoken and fuck you Perez. If I could have been arsed to write it last night then that would have been it.

But on reflection some of that company she's keeping makes me wonder...

I mean Linkin Park? Best Band? Is that a sick joke (and I say this as someone who has defended them in the past when people have slagged them off in conversation but frankly some of the last album was completely indefensible)?

And then Justin Timberlake not winning a thing? Come on... Although the thought had occurred to me that his album was released last year and so maybe that's fair enough on a lack of product basis (tho he has been killing us with singles from the album...)

And Girlfriend beating Umbrella for "most addictive track"? What the ?

Her performance was cool enough. It must be a little boring going round the world promoting, playing one song repeatedly, trying to look fresh, interested, even when there's no cool Japanese guys backing you... But she pulled it off.

Why she thought joining that guy from the Foo Fighters whose name escapes me even though he's the most famous guy in Rock (how come the Foo Fighters weren't nominated in any category? costheyreshit?) (Dave something?) in the "VIP Bar" would be a good idea I don't know. Not that anything bad happened it was just so awful and pointless and banal. She should have remained her famously aloof self...

Japan Rocks

Here's an absolutely amazing performance by Avril Lavigne being backed by some boy band(?) on some Japanese(?) show:




How fucking cool is that?

And the all round video on the background...

Cool as.

Why ain't British TV like this anymore?

Idiocy Part 3

So he finally gone and done it. Following on from previous posts, it turns out Lewis Hamilton is leaving the country:

Formula One superstar Lewis Hamilton is to move to Switzerland to escape the excessive public and media attention he has had in Britain over the last year.

The McLaren driver, who came second in the drivers' championship in his debut F1 season, will join Fernando Alonso and Kimi Raikkonen in Switzerland.

"Over there people don't come up to you, they leave you alone and give you space," the 22-year-old told BBC Sport.

Nothing to do with tax then.

Oh no.

He just wants some peace. Doesn't like people talking to him.

Perfectly happy to pay his tax.
Honest.

Between the Lines

I've found myself reading Bill Clinton: An American Journey by Nigel Hamilton recently (and I only add the Amazon link as a guide to what I'm up against, rather than any endorsment, of either the book or Amazon), I had nothing else in the house to read and while scanning the shelves I noticed this book which I'd, mistakenly (due to some dodgy advertising by mail order book company and some idiotic wishful thinking on my own part), bought ages ago and never got round to reading.

I'm not a big fan of biography anyway, if it's someone I really like (which Clinton isn't) I can get away with them, but otherwise I generally try and avoid them. The writing style always seems so bloody functional: fact, fact, fact, opinion, opinion, fact, revised opinion, fact, tenuously connected fact, definitive opinion. So flat. They are biographers rather than writers.

Which is of course a massive generalization. But still.

This biography utterly conforms to type.

There is one reason I'm continuing to read (this isn't strictly true, I'm taking a break from it to read something else someone suggested I should read, but I have every intention of going back to it, every intention...), and that is because of its bizarre insistence on defenses of adultery. Of course, when looking at Bill Clinton's life, one can't really avoid talking about adultery but this book takes it to extremes, not so much in its chronicles but in the discussions of male sexuality. There is constant mention of some biological imperative forcing the male into promiscuity and this same imperative forces the female into clinging to the man no matter what. I don't really have the relevant background to critique these claims, and I don't really want to. I shall just say that I always find such theories rather self serving and, coming from a school of thought which gives primacy to language, unconvincing,which is to say that any biological (or genetic) imperative is always put through the lens of the symbolic, even the biological becomes symbolically loaded: I have sex, but how I have sex is determined, not by biology, but by the symbolic.

He doesn't only use this biological thing though, oh no, he also explains it away by reference to psychoanalysis, Clinton's upbringing, changing American culture, etc.. We can see in this Freud's Borrowed Kettle, where mutually exclusive reasons demonstrate exactly what he's trying to be denied, in this case: that Clinton was personally responsible for his own infidelity.

My way of continuing to read this book then is to view the entire thing as a long letter from the author to his wife after being found out having an affair. I don't have any information to this end, and I really don't care to look for any biographical information on the author, for that would ruin my reading enjoyment. What I mean is that I am reading the book as a fictional account of the authorial voice's marital problems. The actual living author doesn't come into it, doesn't interest me, and he's taken any interest I might have had in the life of Clinton away with his plodding prose, so what I'm left with is a book that only exists between the lines. And I'm quite interested in seeing how it ends.

DumbleBORE (Cheap tabloid headline probably at odds with post content)

I have never read a word of Harry Potter and, frankly, never will, but I just saw this piece and thought it was a pretty cool use of the whole is Dumbledore gay thang:

even if some of Us the People think that the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause is best read in 2007 to permit Dumbledore to marry whomever he chooses, regardless of sex, the Supreme Court might nonetheless decide not to recognize his right to do so until it sees a clearer social consensus on the point. The one thing the Court should not say, however, is that Dumbledore cannot marry a man in 2007 simply because same-sex marriage was not allowed in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.

Panda Vs Koala

Thought I'd keep a track of Avril's Stardoll interview, I'm just gonna post the most interesting answers, without the questions, the question should be pretty obvious I think:

I think Pandas are cute. But i think Koala bears are way cuter.

She goes down in my estimation, pandas are obviously way cooler than koalas

My favorite color has always been black. Now i'm really into hot pink.

Nice combination.

Next few questions are uninteresting, she picks her nose, like pizza, Lost and 24. The problem with this type of interview is the time it takes to update.

I really like I'm With You. I love singing that song. My other favorites are: My Happy Ending, Girlfriend, Hot.

Not a bad choice of songs there I guess, she could certainly have chosen worse.

I kick butt.

...takes a sentence out of context.

I love makeup.

I'm pretty tidy.

I like dogs

There's something about this type of interview that is pretty cool, it cuts to the chase, no messing about with, well, anything really, no bullshitting, no dull standardized questions about touring, promotion, etc.; no earnestness, no feigned interest. Simplicity rocks.

Yes i like to play pranks on my band when we're on the road. It keeps me entertained. I often get the keys to their rooms while their asleep. Sometimes i throw ice on them.

3 words to describe myself- creative, deep and sensitive.

And that was that. Short, sweet, and w/r/t Pandas, a bit disappointing. Compare:

A Panda

Ahhhhhhhhh, so sweet.

A Koala


What? That face, that's not cute. And that was the cutest photo of a Koala I could find. I did try.

The Hours Pass Sweetly This Night

I'm a little late on this, both in the fact that it's an album that released back in Febuary and in that i've had it on my hard drive for ages but only just got round to listening to it. I'm talking about The Hours album, Narcissus Road. On listening I can see why it took me so long to get round to it, but having said that, now I've got over my indie rock prejudice, i think it's an amazing album.



I just noticed it when I was looking for something to put on my MP3 player to get me through work and I'm now listening to it for the 4th time in maybe ten hours. I haven't been this into an album since I rediscovered Rainbow's Rising last weekend (but before that, and admittedly before the previous week's infatuation with Midlake's The Trials of Van Occupanther, another album I was stupidly late on, but before those albums i hadn't been that excited by an album for like months).

Why so good? Firstly I should mention that on the odd song it flirts with Coldplayesque rock. Flirts, but just about gets away with it. Indeed, maybe this goes someway to explaining the album's genius - it dares to risk the stigma of Coldplay, it is a record with balls. Not only in the coldplay thing. It risks pretentiousness with references to artists, films, historical figures, Icarus, the creative process, works of art. It risks naivety with exhortations to beauty, art, rock 'n' roll, risks feeling, risks feeling without irony, wears its heart on its sleeve, unafraid.


The comparison I came up with was with Adorable who, for those who don't know, were just about the greatest band of the 90's and who had arrogance and naivety in equal measure and created one of the greatest albums like evah with Against Perfection, a record that I almost put on a bit ago but I couldn't bare to not listen to The Hours. Anyway, Narcissus Road reminds me so much of Against Perfection that I pretty much don't need to go back to it.
There's also a connection with Spritualized, not in any musical sense, but in the use of cliches. I've always loved the way Spritualized write songs made up entirely of cliches but despite of/because of this still make records that feel. The Hours are similar, not so many cliches but when they're used they certainly have an effect. This is a topic I've often meant to write about. Maybe one day I'll get round to it...

The highlights: "Ali in The Jungle", a great starter and the only track I'd heard prior to the album (used to listen to it on BBC Radio 6 during the Ashes last winter - when the days play was over i'd put on Radio six and this song just always seemed to be on - and of course it's sentiments are the opposite of the England Cricket team that winter); "Love You More", a simple love song, a list of things he loves, a great tune, a song of feeling, some quality swearing; "I Miss You", the Coldplay track, maybe it's the lyrics, maybe it's the sentiments, maybe the singing, but it just about gets away with it; the last half of the album is all a highlight, particular mention to "Murder or Suicide" - more quality swearing, rock 'n' roll cliche in full effect, tennis reference(?), and to "People Say", with it's wonderfully old school finish, "Who's the richest man or woman listening to this record right now? Who gives a flying fuck", Brilliant, art over money and use of the words "flying fuck" - beat that.

That Peace Prize

Following on from this post, I noticed this on another blog.

Quoting, another blog, from there:

“When Gore goes to get the prize [… he] should be forced to march through a gauntlet of widows and orphans, Serbs, Iraqis, Palestinians, Colombians, and other victims of the Clinton era.”

And while we're off the subjects I generally blog about how about this story, newly released photos of Fidel Castro, wonder if Perez will now retract his death of Castro report...

Shut it.

John Lydon slags off Green Day for being unoriginal??

This from a guy who had one one idea thirty years ago (oh, sorry, that was Malcolm McClaren...) and is still rehashing it. And then, "The current state of music is dour -- it's lifeless and listless and mediocre", he says?! A Sex Pistols reunion (again), that just what's needed isn't it?

A bad year for peace?

Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Price? Does that mean that we've had such a crap year at actually bringing peace to any part of the world that we had to give the peace prize to someone campaigning on climate change?

On Laziness

I haven't been posting much lately which is primarily down to the fact that I've been anti-busy. I've been having one of those spells where I feel like there's not enough time in the day to do anything so I end up just not doing anything. So I've decided to just get on with it.

The other reason I've not been posting is that I don't see the point in the whole posting links thing. It just seems so pointless, seeing something cool and then just posting a link with the words, "this is cool, watch/read it!" I started posting to this blog because I wanted to force myself to get into the whole habit of writing to improve my writing and because writing creates thought, working through ideas, putting them down, making them coherent, changes the nature of the initial thought.

The reason I say this will become obvious.

Perez has once again entered the fray on the subject of Avril. And, like so much else that Perez posts, his thoughts are pointless. I'm not sure why he posts on her.

There was this one. And then this:

Avril Lavigne's most hardcore fans are HATING the singer and “songwriter”’s new video.

Click here to watch the vageinous clip for Hot.

Then click here to read what the kids over at Avril Band Aids are saying.

Here’s a sample!

Banana_Republic:

“I’ve only seen it once but I have to say I’m quite disappointed with it. There’s no concept and nothing but close up shots of Avril for 90% of the video. It’s annoying. I want something else to look; at a background of some kind with other people. And I have to admit seeing her in the corset get-up was a bit uncomfortable for me. When I first read the concept I didn’t think much of it but seeing her dressed like that actually bothered me. Yeah she looks hot and all but….I dunno it was pushing it a bit for me. There’s a fin like between being sexy and sleezy and this was pushing that line. I was hoping it would be a little more classy than it was.”

wertzui:

It gets ridiculious when you turn into the total opposite of what you used to stand for. And that’s what’s happening here. It’s like a virgin getting married, after 3 months divorcing her husband, and then becoming the biggest slut in town, banging the entire football team. Excuse my language, and I’m by no means calling Avril a slut, this is just a comparison to how extremley she has changed! And nobody can tell me that this was “her just growing up”…. if the “grown up” Avril likes to act slutty and be a “punk-rock” version of Britney Spears, then uuuhh, I surely dont wanna have anything to do with her anymore.

Phili:

The video lacks class and taste. At one point she’s wearing a corset and barely anything else. At another point she’s CARESSING A MIC POLE. This is an official video, Steph, and whether she is or not, she looks very serious about it. I love funny videos. I love witty videos. This video doesn’t look like it is supposed to be either.

A fan forum posts remarks from fans disliking a video?! This is news? This is Perez-worthy?

I insist to you go to the forum mentioned and look at the posts, you'll see that, yeah, some of them (possibly the majority) are critical, some of them aren't. OMG! People have opinions. I hadn't realised.

I'll even post one, from DanieL: "I love it, best video ever". Huh.

Another site, an Avril fan blog, Avril Groupie, posted this Perez story without comment, okay so his intro was different but he "chose" the same comments. Recently this site had been commenting on the lack of Avril news recently, and to be fair there hasn't been a lot, but, as I suggest above, isn't posting nothing better than posting lazily? Why, when Perez is number one Avril hater take a story from his site and post it without comment? Especially if you're a fan site?

If you're a fan site why not post this story from the same forum?

I understand why Perez wouldn't post that. But...

Not that I think Avril Lavigne fans shouldn't criticise her, but taking "news" from Perez seems a little treacherous.

To the video itself:



I'm not sure why the Hot fuss.

It's not the greatest video, but then again, aren't all Avril videos a little substandard? And to single out this video for criticism seems a tad bizarre.

Certain things occurred to me when watching it:

Is it a continuation of themes which we saw in that Q interview? We see the red carpet, the fans, the photographers and Avril, immune in the middle of it all. Is it a comment on celebrity in ivory tower? Like in that interview I can see how this might be construed as a certain egotism, Avril walking through a door with a star on it for instance, but would it be any better if she pretended otherwise, pretended to be something she's not? Would that not have more of the smell of selling out? An accusation I saw bandied about on my brief trawl through the forum.

In contrast to the Britney video there is a dominating male presence - photographers, police, doormen, members of the crush of fans, members of the audience in the club. In light of a song that could be seen as anti-feminist, "Girlfriend", it is certainly interesting that she is placed in the centre of this male dominated world and dressed in a way that seems designed to recall Moulin Rouge ( i remember one of her earlier videos harking bark to 80's music videos, is this a purposeful strategy she has adopted?). Again I think we should see this as commenting on her new "sexy" role and reaction too it, reactions which we see on the forum, fanboys decrying her for showing them precisely what it is they want. Is it just too close?

The last thing is that in one of the sections of the video is filmed with a border which suggests an old style TV. That is to say, she is emphasised as performing to us, she is seen singing the song to us. In a way I reminded of the song "Thankyou" from the last Christina Aguilera album in which she serenades her fans. In the Avril version, of course, this whole idea is shown as faintly ridiculous.

One for the Ladies

Just watched Britney's new video and, the song's still pretty good, the video is certainly not as bad as the press it's been receiving, not that i've gone out of my way to look at the press, but the three things I have seen have both been, shall we say, sneery. Anyway, here it is:



One interesting thing seems to be the presence of the male. Or lack of presence. For a representation of a, I guess, pole dancing club, it seems very devoid of men. On the other hand the video features two short shots, one, a close up of a guy watching, and another of this guy sat with his friends drinking. What do I want to make of this? The fact is that the men feel tagged on, or if not tagged on, an afterthought. They are inessential. There is no feeling that the dancing is towards them, that it is a dance designed for male eyes. Indeed, the dance is directed exclusively to the women. So it feels as if, as a nod to heterosexuality, the director has just put in these shots of men, but this insertion can not hide the fact that the dance is not for them.

Sonic Bucks

Just read this brief interview with Thurston Moore (which I came to via Idolator) in which I found out that Sonic Youth are putting out an album with Starbucks. Now, while Thurston is obviously kind of right when he says, "There's no difference between working with Starbucks and working with record labels like Universal and Geffen", he is, in one sense, absolutely right, and yet, in another sense, he is of course completely wrong, simply because Starbucks stands for shit that Universal and Geffen don't. And then he says some shit about there being a great independent underground. Which obviously Sonic Youth are not a part of, they actively seek out Starbucks, am I right Thurston? "The Starbucks thing was our idea". Yes I'm right.

The best bit of the interview is this bit:

I thought, "Why don't we get some of the people in the media who name-check Sonic Youth to choose their favorite songs, and then put them on a CD?"

Yeah, so what's Dave Eggers's favorite Sonic Youth song?

I forget.

Poo Fighters

Read this in The Sun:

HE may have a reputation for being the nicest guy in rock, but it turns out that there's at least one person who can turn DAVE GROHL nasty in a heartbeat.

Apparently, one mention of the name PARIS HILTON sends the FOO FIGHTERS frontman utterly ballistic.

Dave rages: "Paris is f***ing lame."

And, warming to his theme, he continues: "She's more offensive to me than anything.

"She's a total, raging, disgusting, rich, lazy party slut. I pray that my daughter will not turn out like her.

First off, I'm not going to bother slagging him off for saying that there's nothing more offensive than Paris Hilton because obviously I spend far too much time on celebrity shit rather than concentrating on more serious "issues", but still...

No, the thing I will slag him off for is the pathetic reason that he hates her:

Dave and Paris fell out in spectacular style after meeting in a restaurant years ago, when Dave claims that the pampered heiress put on "the full princess attitude with the nose in the air".

What a fuckwit he is.

A different view

Just read an interview of Avril Lavigne by Nelly Furtado (not sure why this happened) which I think goes some way towards proving that the Q interview was some sort of joke on her part. Here she's much more normal though her talk of markets and stuff always pisses me off, but I guess it's this - unconscious - conflict between the "business" and the "art" that creates the tension in her music so...

Anyway, here's some scans I picked up from Superiorpics


It's not the most interesting of interviews to be fair, so i'm not bothering typing this up and going through it, but I guess that's almost the point: this is so the opposite of the Q interview that the Q interview must have been a gag.
And the other point being that here she's not talking to a journalist.

Avril's Q Interview Dissected

I've had a few days with that Q interview now and I've calmed down a bit about it. For one thing, now I've transcribed it I'm finding that there is some bizarre punctuation which leads me to question it's veracity. Which is my way of saying that I'm not convinced there hasn't been some editing/paraphrasing of a spoken interview to make her sound like a rock stereotype, rather than my original thought/hope which was that Avril was satirizing this position.

Anyway, here's the transcript, from which I've removed Q's editorial comments, primarily because they were useless, for instance telling us that she's referring to Hurricane Katrina a sentence before she tells us herself (Q really rates the intelligence of it's readers...). I've added my own comments after each “commandment”:

1 DEAL WITH IT. Selling 24 million albums hasn't really affected me, but it has changed things. I can't walk into a room full of people any more without everybody turning their heads and I can only eat in certain restaurants where I know I won't get hassled. But that's OK. I was born to do this, and I've learned how to cope.

[Self-satisfaction about selling lots of records and the attention she gets and, having just been watching several clips of the whole Kanye vs 50 Cent thing, I think this must be seen as pretty standard. It perhaps paves the way for the more bizarre moments later and this raises the question of editing again, is this numbered interview in the order it was given? Was it given as a series of bullet points?]

2 DEVELOP AN IMAGE. Someone like Kelly Clarkson is beautiful and has a pretty voice, but with me you get a much stronger image. I'm tough, I have a look that girls want to copy, and I sound a particular way. It's good if you're not easily ignored. And I'm not.

[This follows quite a lot of the themes that are in Avril's songs where the notion of image as opposed to some “eternal soul” or united “self” is often to the fore, and, following the third album's more confident posturings, we see (throughout the interview) the image taking over, it is not “I have a tough image”, but “I'm tough”.]

3 DON'T GET MAD GET EVEN. I was 17 when my first album came out, and all of a sudden I had to spend my days doing interviews. Listen, when you are 17 you don't know how to hold a conversation with an adult, and you pretty much don't want to. But I learned to channel that into my music.

[17 year olds don't know how to talk to adults? This could of course be a signal that this whole interview is an example of her strategy to cope with the media. At 17, not liking to talk to the media, she came up with a persona to deal with it, a persona which she can still use, and which, given her testy relationship with the media, she wouldn't, presumably, be afraid to play to the worst of her image.]

4 PARTY HARD, BUT NOT TOO HARD. When I go to a party, I am the party! I'm the girl doing shots. Jumping on tables, screaming and getting wasted. Am I advocating drugs? No! When I say wasted, that doesn't mean go crazy. Drink in moderation. Be responsible, yeah?

[I think this is genius just the way it runs away and then gets pulled back. Here, I think the use of exclamation points, tells us that whoever wrote this interview thinks he (I assume it's a male journalist) is taking the piss out of Avril, whereas, given my comment after point 3, the reverse may well be true]

5 PRACTICE GOOD KARMA I am a very giving person. When the hurricane thing happened, I went to my closet, filled six boxes of stuff and said to my assistant, “Take it to Katrina!” I also like to give stuff to people who are my “workers”, especially if they don't make much money.

[This, again, is genius. How anyone can actually take this as anything other than satire on the whole Bono school of rock condescension is beyond me. And again the bizarre punctuation makes me wonder who on earth wrote this? Why put quotations around “workers”? And why the exclamation point after Katrina?]

6 BE GRATEFUL. It's important to be thankful, even if you're poor. I mean, come on, we all have clean water – well OK, not people in the developing world. It's important to remember where we came from, and just how how lucky we are to be here.

[Again the Bono-ism comes in and again the quick turnaround. Love it.]

7 ADVOCATE SPIRITUALITY. I'm not particularly religious, but I am spiritual. What kind? Feng Shui, mostly, and energy. I'm good at picking up people's energy, like I'm receptive or something.

[Cast Iron satire on pop stars and stupid spiritual ideas]

8 FIND MR RIGHT. I got married last year, simply because I was lucky enough to find the right guy. Did I tame him? Hey, we were both party animals once, so we've tamed each other.

[Whatever. Currently trying to write something on (vaguely) this subject so I'll save thoughts for that]

9 EXTEND YOURSELF. I want to get into movies next, a lead role in a super cool indie flick. I've been looking at scripts for the past two years now and most of them have been shit, but I know I could be real good at it. I have an agent now, and everything.

[I like this expression, “super cool indie flick”, and the “most of them have been shit line”. Given that in point 1 she says, “I was born to do this [music]”, it's interesting that near the end she wants to do something else. This should be seen in the context of her lyrics where, as pointed out before, there is always tension between some “essential” Avril and the image “Avril”]

10 LOVE YOURSELF. People love me and people hate me, but I'm comfortable in my own skin and that's what counts. And anyway, if you do hate me, you're the loser, not me.

[This is again related to what I generally say about Avril's lyrics so I won't press the point here]

No News Is Good News

Spent most of the morning on the couch, unable to move, recovering from Saturday night, and due to a mysterious malfunction of my DVD player, watching BBC News 24. Now, I'm fully aware of the "demands" of 24 hour news, which news people seem to use to excuse showing a load of shit on 24 hour news channels, and I'm aware that Sunday morning isn't exactly the fastest of news days, but the coverage of Madeline McCann's parents leaving Portugal seemed excessive by any rational standard. At about 6:35 they left the pictures of journalists outside the Portuguese villa the McCann's were staying in to go to the sports news. At about 6:38 they interrupted the sports news to return to the pictures because ... oh ... absolutely nothing was happening. They were still waiting there, watching absolutely nothing at about 7:05 when I had to go and throw up (due to hangover, rather than the pictures).

I'm not wanting to comment on the newsworthiness or otherwise of this event, I was more concerned with the way the BBC distanced itself from the reporting. The number of times they referred to the huge interest of the media in the case and gaped at the amount of media people encamped outside the villa seemed to suggest that the BBC thought itself apart from all this sensationalist reporting.

The BBC had a reporter at the villa, a reporter at the airport and now they are in the McCann's hometown, not only reporting but also giving the main headlines from there. But of course the BBC are not a part of the frenzy around the McCanns.

The worst bit was the reporter outside the airport telling us about the reporters following the McCann's car, some overtaking it to get better (and she stressed that these were press photographers - not the so much classier TV news people) shots, meaning the McCann's journey took longer than it should have done (perhaps an implication that these reporters were acting dangerously?). Of course this report followed on from ... shots of the McCann's car driving to the airport which included ... close up shots of the McCann's in their car taken by an overtaking camera man.

I'm not sure I want to criticise the BBC specifically, maybe two or three years ago I may have expected better from them but probably not now, it is more the media as a whole which seems unable to comprehend it's own position in the reporting of news. Which is to say that any reporter will be reporting among a herd of reporters and they will all be reporting on the herd of reporters this event has attracted, but they will all report as if they were not included in this herd, as if they have the right to be there and it is all the others who have turned it into a circus.

Dogs Rock

Saw this and couldn't resist posting it.

Just how cool are dogs?

Avril Is Truly Genius

Much as Perez hates Avril he does at least produce the goods when it comes to posting stuff about her. The interview he links to today is pretty insane.


The first three items you maybe think - "what the fuck?!", but let's face it, by 4,5 and 6?! you're thinking "this girl is a genius!"


I'm not a reader of Q so i'm not really sure of the context of this "Ten Commandments" thing but it must be some sort of opportunity for people to take the piss yeah?

And if it isn't that just makes it even sweeter. I think there's a certain image of Avril in the media (possibly tied to her reactions to them, the finger and the spitting) of someone pretty po-faced which this interview sends up in a pretty amazing way.

And if Perez hates her she must be doing something right. I certainly have a lot more respect for her than for bleeding Beth Ditto.

Anyway, when I get round to typing out (or finding it somewhere else) the interview I'll do a bigger piece on it.

It deserves it.

Pro-lifer?

Also in The Sunday Times was this story about Avril Lavigne allegedly being a pro-lifer:

Amnesty International risks alienating some of its high-profile rock star backers in the row over its decision to support women’s access to abortion.

The group has been accused of “duping” the singers Christina Aguilera and Avril Lavigne, who have both made statements against abortion and are among contributors to an Amnesty CD released to raise money for survivors of the atrocities in Darfur.

And I was going to write something about it but then, having googled it, I came across this post on The Guardian site which pretty much dealt with the complete stupidity of the article meaning there was little point in continuing.

My googling did throw up a couple of things though. Firstly there's the change from "both made statements against abortion" in The Sunday Times article to "both of whom have made emphatic statements against abortion" in this story (need to scroll down a bit). The only citation in The Sunday Times article was of an Avril Lavigne song being used on a pro-life Youtube video, how this constitutes a statement, nevermind an emphatic one by Avril Lavigne is pretty much beyond me. I went through pages of google results looking for these statements and came across absolutely nothing.

(I'll take time out to say that I don't buy The Sunday Times. I go round my parents' house for Sunday dinner, I need a decent meal at least once a week, and read it there, along with the Mail on Sunday...)

The other thing was this site, a site for Catholic teenagers which had a helpful review of The Best Damn Thing:

Like me, you may find yourself listening to this album with a skeptical ear. And you, like me, may find yourself liking The Best Damn Thing. There may be some sketchy content, but it’s undeniable that Avril Lavigne has an energy in her music that not many artists can match. Listen to the edited, RCA version, while keeping in mind that some of Lavigne’s ideas about relationship aren’t necessarily Catholic ideas about relationships

The strangest thing being that under "objectionable content" there is this sentence "And in “I Don’t Have to Try,” you’ll hear a song about a taking full control of a relationship." It's a sin to take full control of a relationship? And on reflection the sentence is badly written as well. Now that's a sin.

Old People Are Like So Cool

This story I'm a bit late on, but still, been busy etc., worth posting on anyway I think. Thurston Moore has been slagging off Avril Lavigne:

"I am playing with Yoko Ono, and she's well past 70 and she rocks. Neil Young rocks. It's certainly not John Mayer or Avril Lavigne. Those people don't rock. If that's the young generation in the culture, then (forget) it. In the underground, the old guys are cool. I like the fact that the older we get the more we can rock."

I know next to nothing about the music of John Mayer so I'm saying nothing about that but on the Avril Lavigne thing I just want to say - Is he insane?! Of course Thurston's cool. Love Sonic Youth. Got his new solo album and it's OK, though it hardly RAWKS, and it's hardly some sort of edgy avant garde thang, but it's pleasant enough (and I'm not doing some sort of ironic damning with faint praise thing: i do like the album). It's just that the comment sounds utterly bizarre. For one thing isn't what Avril Lavigne doing completely different to what Yoko Ono is doing? Why compare? Why make a comment about old people in "the underground" and compare them to Avril Lavigne, corporate rock chick? It seems ill-fitting.

The other interesting thing is that he doesn't seem to include himself in the category of old people. He splits it into two, the "old guys" and the "young generation". Where does he include himself?

Pink Rocks

(You wait days for one post then two come ...)

Saw this and thought it suitable to post, given that the Twins are so going to win Big Brother this week.

Particularly like the bit about how the linking of Pink with girls is a modern thing:

Back in the days when ladies had a home journal (in 1918) the Ladies Home Journal wrote: “There has been a great diversity of opinion on the subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.”

The Sunday Sentinel in 1914 told American mothers: “If you like the color note on the little one’s garments, use pink for the boy and blue for the girl, if you are a follower of convention.” Some sources suggest it wasn’t until the 1940s that the modern gender associations of girly pink became universally accepted. Pink is, therefore, perhaps not biologically girly. Boys who were raised in pink frilly dresses went down mines and fought in World War 2. Clothing conventions do change over time.

Idiocy Part 2: Or The Why Lewis Hamilton Wants To Leave The Country Quiz

From The Sunday Times (and yes I know I'm a bit late, and yes I know I post very little lately, but there seems so little time in a day...) Lewis Hamilton tells us why he wishes to leave the country:

“I’m definitely contemplating living outside the UK,” he said after qualifying on the front row for today’s race. “I’ve always dreamed of living in London; I’d still do anything to own my own apartment. I’ve always wanted to do it, but it’s becoming more and more difficult. Every time I go to London, cameras appear from God knows where.

And yet, if you remember, I posted on this at the time, he also had a little problem with tax:

Already he admits that he will have to consider whether a move abroad might be necessary to preserve his sanity and finances. “At the moment I like living in the UK as I’m close to my family and friends, and I’m young, so London is the best place to be,” he said. “But I have no idea what it’s going to be like over the next two years. If there is an escalation of interest I would have to reconsider – and also of course the tax situation can be a problem, not now but in the future.”

So which is it?

a) to avoid cameras?

b) to avoid tax?

I wonder...

Proud to Be British

What a country...

A Palestinian football team has been banned from playing in Britain, because officials apparently believe they will not return to Gaza.

The Gaza under-19s team had been invited to play British football clubs Chester City and Blackburn Rovers.

The team's visa applications were rejected after every member failed to meet entry criteria, said a spokesman for the British consulate in Jerusalem.

The consulate said it regretted being unable to support a worthy cause.

'Players depressed'

The players were told the visas were blocked because of the risk they would not return home to Gaza, says the BBC's Mike Sergeant in Jerusalem.

The team's manager told BBC News the players had expected to be welcomed in Britain, and were depressed about the decision.

Arranging football matches in Gaza is hard enough, says our correspondent.

There are few proper football pitches and Israeli forces bombed Gaza's main stadium last year.

Tour organiser Rod Cox, from Chester, said the ruling was unfair, as the players had overcome difficult circumstances to qualify for their national team.

"Here's a bunch of kids who've worked their entire life to be selected to be the 22 best players and to play for their national team," he said.

"What's the point of all that work if you're told: 'Yes, everybody else can go and compete in England but you can't.'"

Twinned With Paris

In last night's Big Brother the Twins used Paris Hilton as one of their words similar in meaning to beautiful!

Love It!

Hawking Up The Past

(So. I just saw two adverts in a row which started with the word "So" and I was right in the middle of a tirade (one of the adverts featured Jamie Oliver) against this trend in starting sentences with unnecessary words when I had to stop dead - wasn't I guilty of this myself? Yes. I vowed to stop. Never again will I start a post with some word just there to ... to what exactly? Exactly. Unnecessary words.) I watched the Hawkwind documentary on Saturday night. Pretty good, cool sounds - been listening to Space Ritual all the rest of the weekend and it's brilliant - some interesting interviews - not really knowing anything about them beforehand, I got into them when a friend gave me an unwanted Best Of and I thought it had some good tracks on but wasn't too into it until I went back a few years later (earlier this year actually) and loved it and got another couple of albums, but I never really knew anything about the band itself, when I checked them on allmusic the vast array of albums, line-up changes, compilations made me dizzy, I had to look away, unable to cope - where to begin? So the documentary was a blessing, explaining the feuds (Lemmy being hit over the head by muggers and the rest of the band unable to find him just leaving him there and continuing on their way being my favourite story) and giving pointers to the "essential" albums.

One odd thing was the appearance of Sam Fox in some sort of reunion show that happened. After some (approximately 30 seconds) research i discovered this page which runs through the documentary and says of Sam Fox's appearance:

Sam Fox’s appearance seems to be an example of Dave’s possibly misguided view that collaborating with minor league “celebrities” will somehow further the cause. On the other hand, she sang on the “Gimme Shelter” single so is a bona fide Hawkwind vocalist.

I like this understated "possibly misguided".

This site also points out that it was also probably misguided for the main Hawkwind geezer not to appear in the documentary, something I thought, especially as he seemed to know that the others would be appearing and therefore his side of the story would be pretty much ignored.

One of the strangest things I got from the documentary was the way they casually mentioned how they had influenced Punk Rock. Now, this may or may not be true, like I say I'm not up on the history of Hawkwind so couldn't really comment, but my main query was with the way the notion of influence was used. It seemed as though the members of Hawkwind claimed influence on Punk Rock by a simple preceding it in time, the argument was something along the lines of, "We were around in the seventies, at the same time as the future punk rockers were growing up so they obviously knew our music therefore they must have been influenced by them."

This, in a way, is a genius way of thinking about influence. It ignores individuality and personal genius in culture - Malcolm Mclaren created punk rock, but he stole everything off the New York Dolls who were the true geniuses, yeah but what about ... arguments, instead looking culture as a part of the wider society: nothing is born solely from genius, everything must be created out of what has gone before. So that Punk Rock, as a reaction against Prog rock, can be said to be influenced (if only negatively) by it.

There are two things worth thinking about from this:

1) The relationship between Prog Rock and Punk Rock. This is nothing new, isn't Television's "Marquee Moon" pretty much a Prog album disguised as Punk Rock? It's one of those subjects that I often mean to write about but never get round to (like those hundreds of other things I mean to write). Not only Prog's influence on Punk but vice versa, for instance viewing Pink Floyd's albums through the prism of punk-rock one sees themes that were previously obscured (as far as I was concerned anyway, but that's for the piece I may get round to one day...), plus Pink Floyd's "Animals" while being an album I love demonstrates a simplistic politics to match anything by The Clash.


2) By placing the development of Punk Rock in this context we can see that it is not in itself radical. This is important because now isn't it prog rock which is actually the most radical? Here we should point out this idea is already present in 1978 with punk at its height - Rock in Opposition noting the money involved in Punk rock, its radicalness already defeated (bought). This from a pamphlet handed out at the first RIO concert:

National borders do not matter any more. The struggle is between classes & ideologies & not nations. Organised culture industries creating pap & jamming it down everybody; throats have a vested interest in stifling all opposition. Preventing groups from working has been effective - until we start to organise our own work- buying up musicians & then putting the screws on has been a good second line of defence... but when they refuse to be bought?

How will an industry which can CREATE nothing survive when it can't steal anything any more... or will they steal our brains altogether instead?

The Punk Rock template of short catchy songs was always a fertile ground for the money men, for commercial use (both as product and as advertising accoutrement). And isn't it perfect for our current climate of superficial cultural consumption, taking and leaving, nothing to be taken seriously, whereas Prog Rock, with a certain amount of seriousness, of the need for immersion into long tracks, into ideas, into whole albums of ideas, is nothing if not counter to the spirit of the age where irony and simplicity rule.

I was always into punk rock, too young at the time but my musical education revolved around listening to old punk rock records, I still love many of them. It wasn't till I heard The Mars Volta that I began to catch up on some Prog Rock, and that mainly because it can sound so fresh. The Mars Volta blew me away when I first heard them, I became so immersed in their first album, it didn't wash over me, i had to put the work in, and, in modern rock terms, this came as a refreshing change.

Twinned with Liverpool

Thought I'd spend my skint saturday night in writing about Big Brother. It's been a while since i've posted on it, but as i'm here with only Match of The Day for company (and I want an excuse to keep away from the "Stevie G" free kick later) thought I might as well catch up (until theHawkwind documentary comes on later, looking forward to it).

So Big Brother. I'm getting a bit bored with people going on about how boring this series of Big Brother is. While I think it's a valid point that after 8 series the concept might be coming a little tired, could possibly do with a whole revamp, I do think that this series has been something of a return to form. It's the first series since, if my memory serves, series 3 that I've not stopped watching about halfway through. It was close. The new housemates thing always pisses me off (it goes back to the need for a revamp, instead of sticking with the format or completely renewing it, they use the stopgap of some new housemates, adding nothing but somehow it must make them feel that they are in some way addressing inertia), but I weathered the storm and I'm back into it.

Of course that's all to do with the twins.

I thought Charley leaving might ruin it, but no, the twins the thing (that's a Shakespeare reference if I've mangled it beyond recognition.)

I've been a fan since the beginning and they haven't let me down. They relentlessly refuse the ridiculous self examination that goes on all around them. The genius of Amanda resolutely refusing to comment on her relationship (or not) with Brian is an amazing contrast to the dithering, deliberation, analysis and general stupidity of everyoneelse's attempts - Liam and Amy and Ziggy and Chanelle and the constant worrying over perception. Of course it might be argues that Amanda's refusal is all about her worrying about perception but I really can't agree. Isn't it just that she doesn't like him (in that way) and rather than going hot/cold/hot/cold, getting drawn into somewhere she doesn't want to be, she just lets him bounce off her. The bit in the diary room where she refused to name Brian and instead cited Liam as her favourite housemate and the one she felt closest too: GENIUS.

Must one feel sorry for Brian. Please no. He knows, but he denies. The way he walks about the house trying to be a big shot like Liam, but failing miserably will hopefully cost him first place. Add to this his constant demand to talk about his "relationship" with Amanda to all and sundry and we have a stark contrast to Amanda's ... serenity.

And let's not forget Sam. Frankly I think I prefer Sam, quieter but with a certain dignity, she is perhaps even more of an enigma, giving nothing away ... "I love it!"

Plus the Diary room conversations together. Moments of true brilliance.

They must win.

Simple as.

(Darn! Finished too early, just as the Liverpool game comes on, must ... write ... more ...)

Had a nightmare on seeing the front page of the Daily Star yesterday which announced that Channel 4 were thinking of letting Chanelle back in the house. That would be a huge mistake surely and I really hope it's not true (these highlights seem to be a little biased, just all Liverpool, not how I remember the game...). Her hysterics are an interesting (and intensely annoying) contrast to the Twin's energy. And on a purely entertainment level do we really want to watch her and Ziggy constantly laid on beds talking shit? NO.

("Stevie G, Stevie G, Stevie G, Stevie G..." I hate football commentators. And Mike Riley, that was never a free kick, but "Stevie G" always gets his way. How I despise him, most overrated player bar none. As soon as I saw Mike Riley was the referee I regretted putting my money on Villa, although to be fair Steve Bennett was meant to be reffing it apparently and he lurves "Stevie G")

Hope this all makes sense cos I've been facing away from the PC and watching the football (and now Alan Hansen et al. crow on about "Stevie G" and even Hansen, part of the BBC Scouse Mafia, knows it wasn't a free kick) so haven't really read this through. Sorry if it's rubbish.

(Bring on Hawkwind!)

Beyond the cynicism

In some mighty coincidence after I finished the last post I saw this over at TMZ, demonstrating how the whole cynicism thing can sometimes be broken down, even if it's reporting doesn't manage to evade it

Celebrity Hypocrisy

Just a few thoughts on this survey which discovered that people are suffering from celeb fatigue.

I found the fact that the 2 per cent difference between those paying close attention to a Paris Hilton story and those paying close attention to a Lindsay Lohan story is cited as possible evidence that people may be getting sick of celebrity news coverage is itself, in some sort of marriage of form and content, indicative of a a certain ridiculous shallowness of news coverage no matter what the subject.

Which to me is precisely the point. It is not that there is too many celebrities on the news, the problem is the news itself and the fact that any news story covered is covered as a celebrity news story. If news networks suddenly decided to end all celebrity coverage would the news improve? No. Obviously not. The coverage of other stories would just be stretched in more ridiculous directions than it already is. Take the coverage of the US bridge collapse where on numerous channels there was an interview with a woman who had narrowly avoided the collapse. The story was nothing: she had avoided it by 'inches' on her way to collect her 6 week old baby [this from memory], the story seemed to involve her describing what might have been had she been in the collapse, how difficult it would have been for her husband to raise the baby alone. Now, that, to me, isn't in any way news. It hasn't happened, it won't happen. So maybe he has thought about it and to her it may be distressing or whatever, but it isn't news. Is it? Is it more newsworthy than Paris Hilton going in and out of prison?

Another example being the case of missing Madeline where the lack of any police media relations is causing great consternation among the media: no daily briefings, no inspector to focus on, just an awful crime. And an awful crime with (sadly) little to report. So the media snipe about how the portuguese police are rubbish for not playing the game and then they (the media) flail about looking for a suspect to celebritize. And of course, to keep the story in the public eye the parents have no choice put to become celebrities themselves, going on a european tour and appearing in (at least one, cos I saw the advert on the tv, maybe more) celebrity magazines.

And of course built into the news coverage of celebrities is the very idea that we are somehow above this. And this is why I think any critique of celebrity culture which attempts to stay aloof from it, ignore it, or deem it trivial misses the point entirely: this aloofness is already inherent in the reporting of celebrity (as anyone who spends anytime on TMZ or Perez Hilton (but especially Mollygood, which I have had to stop reading, so sanctimonious and hypocritical has it become) knows).

Whether or not my own response,embracing it, is in anyway better, is debatable, but at least it lacks hypocrisy.

Girl Talc

Most humorous newspaper correction, like, evah!

Because of a typographical error, a story on the Virgin Festival in the Aug. 6 Style section referred to Girl Talk's Greg Gillis as a one-trick phony instead of a one-trick pony.

Missing presumed male

M.I.A. was interviewed by Pitchfork and had this to say:

And I just find it a bit upsetting and kind of insulting that I can't have any ideas on my own because I'm a female or that people from undeveloped countries can't have ideas of their own unless it's backed up by someone who's blond-haired and blue-eyed.

First off I should say that I'm not really a big fan of hers, or more accurately I've not really heard anything by her. I've heard one song, and it was pretty cool, but I wouldn't like to voice an opinion based on hearing one song. Obviously I'm posting this story because it bears such a resemblance to the whole Avril Lavigne songwriting business that was popular a few weeks back.

The first thing that actually occurred to me when I was reading this story was that I had no idea about the 'identity' of Diplo. I've got a Diplo album, a couple of mixes and a few remixes, all of which I think are superb. I love Diplo. And yet I have no idea 'who' he is. It became apparent to me that until reading this interview with M.I.A. that I had just defaulted to the position of Diplo's maleness. I guess when reading stuff about him they were probably using the male pronoun but I had given it no thought. Ditto his ethnicity. I'm now assuming Diplo is blond and blue-eyed. Though by this point of the interview I think she's talking more generally but it seems like a fair assumption. Here of course it could be well be of interest that in my mental defaulting I had never thought of him this way - white. What does that say? That I have a hard time with the idea of white males making decent music? Possibly.

So is M.I.A. right? The female question we'll come onto but just a few words on the 'people from undeveloped countries' thing first. It's the ghetto of 'world music' isn't it? We can give people the right to make 'world music' and stroke our chins at the 'exotic' but it takes a Damon Albarn or (looking further back because i'm too lazy to give this section any major thought/research) a Paul Simon to bring this into mainstream consideration. (The phrase 'give people the right to make 'world music'', which I realise might be misconstrued, is accurate in the sense that we lump everyone's music outside of the established US/UK tradition into the barrel marked 'world music', in a sense saying this is your music and this is ours, thus marking off the other, separation) Thus M.I.A.'s point is that the crossover can only happen when their is a figure from the US/Uk tradition acting as chaperone, as guarantor if you like. We can only allow such music out of the ghetto if there is someone to accompany it (back, being implied, like a visa which expires after a month or so). Thus we see that whereas postmodernism is meant to be about diversity, the picking and choosing of absolutely equal cultural elements to create something new, it is a myth and that certain cultural elements still have dominance - that while other elements can be included, they can only be included on our terms - in a similar way that we continuously stress the need for free trade, but that free trade always means free trade on our terms.

As for the other thing, the question must be: are we still in the grip of the myth of the (male) solitary genius creating art? I think there's an interesting comparison to made with the career of Justin Timberlake, whose part in the creation of his music is (I presume) in as much doubt as Avril Lavigne's/M.I.A.'s and yet who is now (seemingly) considered a genius, so that when the story of Timbaland working with Duran Duran began circulating it became the story of Justin Timberlake producing the new Duran Duran record. The only exception allowed being the figure of the mystical female artist a la Joanna Newsom. Why the difference if all things are equal?

And yet isn't the bigger point that, for whatever reason, we are not yet prepared to leave this myth behind? It is not so much that x bloke takes the credit for y's record, it is more that when y is making a record she has to employ one already recognisable male creator to work on the record (in fact it can be argued that this applies to males as much as females, cf. %0 cent's new single featuring Timberlake). It is as if this creator becomes some entry into the world of serious art, whereas before I was just making music, now I am making Music, now you'll see how serious I am.

And isn't this why Avril Lavigne becomes some sort of subversive figure? In that she (so far) refuses this x, this one figure (father figure?), this artist - and at the same time refuses the responsibility of her own creativity, keeping the process of the creation of her music in the ether (and I accept I exaggerate), always open to speculation because it refuses the authority that comes with either x (the male creator) or y(the mystical female artist)?

Machine Music

Just read this in a Patricia Highsmith Novel:

Worst for Ralph to endure was the nonstop music, not plain noise, not merely one banal and blaring song, but two or three mixed. Even this had a bright side, relieved it of the label of music, which Muzak still had, music with a beginning and an end. This was insane mankind piling disorder upon disorder. If it deafened and killed people, more people were born every day. The cacophony never had to stop, because machines created it.

Give me some of that music!

News Flash

A post on Avril's myspace blog has this interesting news item that Perez seems like he's going to ignore:

Girlfriend is YouTube's most viewed music video of all time!

Because of all of YOU the Girlfriend video is now the number one viewed music video
of all time on YouTube with over 45 million plays! Thanks so much for everyone's support and for making the video the most watched!!

Which is nice.

Anyway, what with the whole Lindsay Lohan thing going down I guess Perez has more to worry about today than posting Avril stories.

A Dream Of Something

So. A few days ago, energised by the news that the Super Furry Animals had a new album out in August, I decided I'd write a post about how amazing the Super Furry Animals are. I even started it, I started it with this quotation -

"People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal of constraints, such people have a corpse in their mouth."
Raoul Vaneigem

- and at the time, though I really love this quote, I thought isn't this a little bit passe, a little bit too obvious a quote to go with what I was going to say - and I was reminded that years ago, it was just after the second album was released, i had written quite a lot on SFA, attempting to work out my political position through the skewed version of everydayness represented by them - and I still have those writings somewhere, but I'm not going to get them out and go over them, not because I believe them to be hopelessly naive or anything, but because I think it will inevitably lead to nostalgia, that the writings will have taken on an existence over and above their abstract musings and that I will not be able to escape this if I were to pick them up - I was reminded that I had also used this quotation at the time, as if the quotation was now embedded in my idea of SFA - but doesn't the quote sum up the idea of SFA : the (theoretical - how many times does anything escape the theoretical to become practical?) subversion, the romance, the idealism, positivity, possibility, simplicity - all deeply entrenched in the world of the quotidian.

So I start writing the piece, and I don't get too far - why? because i started listening to the albums and I stopped writing because I was too busy listening, too close to the listening to write. And then ... and then ... and then I started listening to the new Battles album ... and then ... the new Justice album and the post was forgotten for a few days - started contemplating a Battles post, started contemplating a justice post (then decided I should maybe combine them two posts, for the two albums seemed to inform each other - they both seemed to be taking prog rock ideas and updating them - perhaps update is not the word, updating being what The Mars Volta do, keeping essentials of prog but updating the rock whereas Justice especially (but Battles too) drop the rock but lay ideas of prog onto other genres - listening to the Battles album I wondered about the possibility of watching the Wizard Of Oz with it as the soundtrack - so much like the Floyd did it remind me, but also it summoned, in places, to my mind very strong images of the Wizard of Oz - there was a Yellow Road running through it...) - until today, today when I remembered what I was in the middle of ... but, realised, I had lost the desire to finish it, lost the direction of the post, couldn't remember why I was writing it. This isn't to say that I had fallen out of love with SFA, but...

What I had been writing in the original post was that there was a certain quality in SFA which allowed them to escape nostalgia. I suggested that the danger of thinking of the bands of our youth ten years later was the possibility that one's memories of the time would make one mistaken about the music, that the music and the memories were inseparable, the Rosy fingers of memory making rubbish music sound good

-at work they always have a radio station on which plays old tunes pretty much constantly and so many times I hear a tune which transports me back and I think I love the tune, but i really don't, I love the times I had while the tune was playing. More striking is the way even the most awfully sentimental and just plain bad sad song can move deeply when it brings back memories of a love gone wrong. How can one judge the worth of a song in such circumstances? -

I had argued (in my original post) that a song like Ice Hockey Hair which has so many memories of the girl I loved at the time, so many times in the pub together putting it on the jukebox, at home together, lipsynching it, feeling it, soundtracking our lazy days together, still managed to transcend the merely nostalgic. It had a certain quality (which I was arguing was inherent to SFA rather than in my own mind) which allowed it to escape, which allowed it to still sound/feel fresh today, feel like it was the first time today. I argued that this was due to a certain future tense, a looking forward in SFA that didn't tie it to the present, didn't root it in time but made it timeless -

of course this isn't to say that SFA do not sit in a precise time, far from it, for aren't their songs completely of their time? Which is to say they include contemporary references ("Hanging out with Howard Marks", "Wherever I lay my Phone (that's my home)" etc.), they do not attempt to hide the time they were created to create a false timelessness. And isn't this how great art becomes timeless - it takes contemporariness and makes it eternal (and here again we are mixed up with the everyday because of course what separates us from people who lived a hundred years ago (or ten years ago) is the nuance of our everyday life rather than the bigger picture, which remains essentially the same)? Could one argue that the opposite, the ignoring of the contemporary in an attempt to create eternity fails because it is it becomes too ideological - it refuses change, refuses progress - like capitalism it posits itself as natural, immovable?

- SFA are both of the present but looking to the future. But this is only on the one level. And it was here that I realised my problem with writing the post lay. The fact that I was drawn to the same quote to introduce my thoughts on them ten years (?) apart was possibly not just caused by my lack of imagination. What if it was caused by a lack of imagination on SFA's part? Which is to say, is there any surprise in an SFA album anymore? The problem is not one of content but one of form (if the two can be so separated, but anyway I'm not sure the content is as inspired as it used to be, perhaps more formal experimentation would lead to a return to more interesting content): the music fits the blueprint (SFA) too well. There are no surprises anymore.

And the simple solution presented itself to me: the solo projects ruin the band. The solo projects are where the excitement lies, where they are free to experiment, just plain free. SFA have become like wikipedia - where all the individual inputs lead to an anodyne final version.

Of course it is hard to fall out of love with them. But perhaps, in a final irony, it is only nostalgia that keeps me listening,

Lindsay Lohan is a bit ... (?)

So Lindsay Lohan is arrested for drink driving and caught in possession after being out of rehab for like not very long and the question is that is on everyone's lips is?

what is going on with this video?!




I enjoyed it ... but I have no idea why...

Food for thought

The radio station i'm forced to listen to at work is currently loving the new Mika single. I, it must be said, am not. "Big Girls (You Are Beautiful)". Hmmm. I have a few questions that I want to pose based on listening to this song over and over (like three times a night they play it) and attempting to think the pain away:

1) The marketing angle? Is this song just some cheap attempt to get in on some of the burgeoning "big girl" market action? I'm suggesting some cynical ploy whereby mika (and/or advisors) sat and wondered how to corner the saturday-night-cheesy-nightclub-loving crowd: "So, we have a load of overweight woman dancing to any old rubbish and a load of pissed up blokes trying to score with anything that moves, how on earth do we get them to join our project, noting, no offence, your peculiar, how do i say this, feyness?", "do we need these people?", "Need? Need is strong, but this a HUGE demographic, please ... pardon that almost unintentional gag. Seriously though, this is the demographic that still actually buys cds, we ne... could do with their love", "well I guess I could write an uptempo dance number about dancing itself, has that been ...", "I've got it! uptempo dance number, fine, but uptempo dance number about how great fat birds are!!!! "Are you sure?", "Yes! It's genius. The girls love you, for obvious reasons, you make them feel good about themselves, plus, the lads get into it because they have a way into the fat birds' knickers, and this feeling they carry through, still humming your tune on monday morning, when they decide to, get this, actually BUY THE CD!!", OK I'll buy into that. Just give me a moment ... need to get my artists head on ... how can i do this with artistry, integrety and subtlety ... let me think ... ummmm, fat girls ... no, too obvious ... YES Big girls, that the word! Big! 'I love Big girls', that's what I can call it ... too unsubtle? ummm, I know 'Big Girls you are beautiful'", "Brilliant! you've done it again. This is gonna be huge" (Everyone rubs their hands together and licks their lips, dreams of martinis by the pool...)

2) I thought Mika was gay? I mean, fair enough, i got this info off Perez (and yes, I do read other websites, honest), but it is, after all, his job to know this shit. This obviously ties in with question one, because it becomes even more insane if he actually doesn't like big girls in that way (though I should probably admit here that I haven't actually listened with anything like attention to the lyrics, maybe he sings of a more pure love, and here I imagine the opposite of the more homoerotic passages of Walt Whitman; the abstract, pure love in Whitman as (official) heterosexual coming over as gay - in Mika, (officially, or whatever (the argument would be that in celebrity culture only the rumour is ever taken to be 'official')) this pure love is hetero), and with question three...

3) Is it possible to imagine a song entitled "Big Boys (you are Beautiful)" about fat blokes? By either a male or a female? It's imaginable as the title of a song about muscley blokes, or big cocked blokes, but fat blokes? I'm not even sure it's a possibility that it could be released as something tongue in cheek with a video of disgusting (and they'd probably be represented as working class) sweaty and hairy topless blokes eating burgers etc. I somehow think not...

I haven't given this a lot of thought, maybe there's a song already existing like this, but I can't think of it and this lack of male version leads us nicely to question four...

4) Why celebrate fatness? And i'm sure there's a load of people saying that because there's so much pressure on women to conform to an image of the perfect woman as thin anything that redresses this balance has to be a good thing. But that's not it is it? That would be "Girls, you are beautiful", woudn't it? Irrespective of size I love women, that would be the message wouldn't it? And a good message too, I imagine.

Except the modern version of this would have to be "Girls, you are beautiful, unless you are pretty thin, and a model, OK?" The only size woman it is now acceptable to slag off is thin women. And I don't really think that this point needs a whole lot of commentary, so obvious is it, all I will say is that it seems a little bizarre, given the huge amount of time the government spends telling us to exercise, eat healthily; and the proposals to ban the advertising of "junk food" on childrens tv; and the pressuring of food manufacturers to "traffic light" their products, that they should a) at the same time tell us it's great to be fat; and b) not use these very thin people as examples of model citizens.

No news is ... news?

New Avril story on Perez today:

The singer and “songwriter” just posted the following message Tuesday on her official blog:

“Hey everyone.

I wanted to take this time to thank you, my fans for all your undying support. You have been amazing and i can’t express how much i appreciate it. Thank you all so much. I am so proud of this record and grateful for the response it has been getting from all of my fans. You made it go 1!!

also, there is another great record i’ve been listening to lately. And i want you all to hear it too. The new SUM41 album called Underclass Hero comes out in 1 week on july 24. You can hear the whole album now for free here:

http://www.mtv.com/music/the_leak/sum_41/underclass_hero/

my favorite songs are “With Me”, “Walking Disaster”, “Best of me” “Confusion and Frustration”

It rocks you have to check it out. And of course you can also check out myspace.com/sum41 for more info.

Thank you all again, you mean so much to me.

Avril Lavigne"

If it wasn't for those oh so humorous and "unexpected" quotation marks around the songwriter this would be (and in many ways still is) quite a bizarrely non-insulting story for Perez writing on Avril. Even the picture is, well, relatively non ruined by insulting white marks:

What is wrong with him today, is he ill?

One for the haters

Have you heard the exciting news?

Less than a month removed from her sojourn in a Los Angeles lockup, Paris Hilton is itching to make the transition from jailbird to songbird.

"I'm already working on my new record," Hilton tells E! Online. "I've been in meetings with Scott [Storch] and we've been working on it."

How cool is this news?!

And also in the article was the myth busting fact that the first album was actually quite successful:

Hilton's debut album, entitled simply Paris, debuted in August 2006. Released via her Heiress Records and Warner Bros., the album opened at number six on the Billboard 200 and sold more than 600,000 copies.

So there.