This came up in this morning's Cynopsis and I thought it might be interesting to people outside of the industry.
-----
So much for "pilot" season at NBC. Jeff Zucker announced yesterday the network would no longer order up pilots as a matter of course each year leading into the upfront season, thereby saving the network tens of millions of dollars, reports The NY Times. Typically each year, NBC and the other broadcast networks order up a series of pilots for shows in development, choose a handful of them as potential primetime series in the upcoming season, and show the pilots to advertisers during the upfront season. No more, says Zucker. Rather, the network would order perhaps one or two pilots each season. Zucker says the reason for this decision is pure economics in light of the current WGA strike and due to the current US economy.
-----
It certainly implies that the change is permanent, but I haven't gone straight to the source (not that that would definitively clear it up) so it could just be a 'this season' thing courtesy of the writer's strike.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Future Facebook Ghosts
I recently came across a friend who has someone friended on Facebook who I know had been dead for about a year.
At first my reaction was THAT'S MORBID! But within a few seconds I have moved on to No, that's respectful and honouring of their memory.
I then started thinking about how that might carry on into the future.
Imagine Facebook remains the social networking utility of choice well into the future - well after you and I are all gone. What will happen to our accounts? As we each pass away and our friends honour us by leaving links to us as friends... what will happen?
We can't check out profiles of people more than one person removed (and few of us have our privacy settings set low enough to even allow one person removed viewing)... and of course we'll all take the passwords to our profiles with us to the grave. (Right?)
So eventually there could be this web of interconnected Facebook ghosts who no-one can actually access.
Actually that's probably not realistic at all. IF Facebook were to actually last that long I suspect that there would either be some sort of protocol put in place to either delete dormant accounts, or possibly to 'de-classify' the archive of dormant accounts after 'X' amount of time. Say 120 years after an account was created, or 30 years after it's last use? Or a certain amount of time after the declared birthdate of a user's profile - say 150 years (to allow for both the death of the user and any immediate descendant)?
I don't know.
Just musing on our digital immortality.
At first my reaction was THAT'S MORBID! But within a few seconds I have moved on to No, that's respectful and honouring of their memory.
I then started thinking about how that might carry on into the future.
Imagine Facebook remains the social networking utility of choice well into the future - well after you and I are all gone. What will happen to our accounts? As we each pass away and our friends honour us by leaving links to us as friends... what will happen?
We can't check out profiles of people more than one person removed (and few of us have our privacy settings set low enough to even allow one person removed viewing)... and of course we'll all take the passwords to our profiles with us to the grave. (Right?)
So eventually there could be this web of interconnected Facebook ghosts who no-one can actually access.
Actually that's probably not realistic at all. IF Facebook were to actually last that long I suspect that there would either be some sort of protocol put in place to either delete dormant accounts, or possibly to 'de-classify' the archive of dormant accounts after 'X' amount of time. Say 120 years after an account was created, or 30 years after it's last use? Or a certain amount of time after the declared birthdate of a user's profile - say 150 years (to allow for both the death of the user and any immediate descendant)?
I don't know.
Just musing on our digital immortality.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Defending the Music XIII: I Want You (In a Vinyl Suit)
I've been plugging away at other endeavours. Including taking a massive blow to the face. Got hit by a planet (you can probably deduce which one) and my head is still ringingBut I'm back now... at least for the moment. No doubt I'll get distracted again.
The first time I heard The Offspring, I thought to myself, Wow. We've dated the same girl. "Self-Esteem" from the biggest selling independent album of all time (pretty good for a bunch of kids who though their high-school janitor might make a good guitar player), appropriately titled 'Smash' cut to the quick. Music never seemed more promising than it did at that time.
While they never put another album together that was as awe inspiring as 'Smash' and they definitely gave in to the power of pop success, but there were many bright moments to come - even if they were more fun than inspiring. But they were consistently fun. Mixing equal parts, humour, politics and personal revelation their songs build irresistable hooks around anthemic punk cores. But wait, there's more! Offspring songs always sound like Offspring songs, but they've gone to great lengths to explore a variety of ethnic rhythms in their music as well, from the punk-ubiquitous ska, to Latin varieties & banghra to calypso.
I'll be the first to admit that I haven't had a lot in the way of personal insight since I first heard 'Self-Esteem' driving up Mt. Tolmie in Colin's car on our way to class, but I still get plenty of catharsis from chanting "Nah-na why don't you get a job?" from the song of the same name years after the fact.
And it's worth mentioning that the look of the character I play in 'Beast of Bottomless Lake' was based on Offspring lead singer, Dexter Holland.
Okay, this has been short but I gotta go contend with the concussion...
The first time I heard The Offspring, I thought to myself, Wow. We've dated the same girl. "Self-Esteem" from the biggest selling independent album of all time (pretty good for a bunch of kids who though their high-school janitor might make a good guitar player), appropriately titled 'Smash' cut to the quick. Music never seemed more promising than it did at that time.
While they never put another album together that was as awe inspiring as 'Smash' and they definitely gave in to the power of pop success, but there were many bright moments to come - even if they were more fun than inspiring. But they were consistently fun. Mixing equal parts, humour, politics and personal revelation their songs build irresistable hooks around anthemic punk cores. But wait, there's more! Offspring songs always sound like Offspring songs, but they've gone to great lengths to explore a variety of ethnic rhythms in their music as well, from the punk-ubiquitous ska, to Latin varieties & banghra to calypso.
I'll be the first to admit that I haven't had a lot in the way of personal insight since I first heard 'Self-Esteem' driving up Mt. Tolmie in Colin's car on our way to class, but I still get plenty of catharsis from chanting "Nah-na why don't you get a job?" from the song of the same name years after the fact.
And it's worth mentioning that the look of the character I play in 'Beast of Bottomless Lake' was based on Offspring lead singer, Dexter Holland.
Okay, this has been short but I gotta go contend with the concussion...
Tom Cruise: Got off the Train One Stop Past Wacko.
A follow up to my latest Enemies post.
Here's a new link to the Tom Cruise video.
I'm not going to walk you through it. I think it pretty much speaks for itself.
Here's a new link to the Tom Cruise video.
I'm not going to walk you through it. I think it pretty much speaks for itself.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Defending the music XII: A Sentimental Journey into Sight and Sound
There aren't many bands who you can blame more for emo, than Green Day.
There are precious few bands that have made it further on as much lack of talent as Green Day... but, like the Clash (You knew I couldn't last much longer, could I? C'mon I narrowly avoided mentioning The Clash entirely in the OLP entry.), they honed their understanding of their abilities into increasingly adept incicive songwriting.
I was the demographic to blame for shooting Dookie to the top of the charts in 1994. It was hardly the paradigm setting moment it's since been hailed as when Mike Dirnt had his teeth fed to himself by a security guard at Woodstock '94 - if you actually watched the incident - well, you can't see it happen. Green Day's set was over, and the director cut to long-shots of the stage as the marauding fans rush the stage. However, the preceeding band incited mud-fight was great - harmless fun. The 'band violence' (I repeat: The mud-fight was harmless, and the punching actually had the band on the victim end.) helped catapult Green Day into the stratosphere. Oh yes, we were a disenfranchised lot, us Gen-X'ers. What's new? Every second wave of adolescents gets to be angry at the opulence of the intermediate generations... gawd, can I hardly wait for that phase to swing back around... perhaps kids will start re-fucking-cycling again! But I digress....
Yes, Dookie was a lot of fun. Revitalized punk - with harmonies! Who didn't get off screaming along with 'Basketcase's "Am I just paranoid or UHh-Muh-Glaaaaauuuh!" (Which, for the record, was actually "...or am I stoned?")
But then they had to go and write that fucking song.... You know the one. 'Good Riddance.' (Oh how I wish it appropriately WOULD go away.) Changes are you know the somg by it's refrain - "I hope you had the time of your life." Would someone please kill me if I ever have to hear that song again? And don't you DARE play that song at my funeral - which I think is the real problem with it. It went from release to overplay inside of three days. Okay, realistically, three months. (Okay, so there are occasional exceptions to the 'I will listen to anything they release' rule.) Until their most recent album, this has been the flagship song of their career - fuuuuuuck....
It took me a long time to let Green Day back in. In fact, they had to actually start channeling The Clash in order to do it. I don't really know what happened, but somewhere along the line Billy Joe Armstong quit acting upon kneejerk defiance and started speaking about real problems. "Warning," while just a warm-up to what was coming, is still my favourite Green Day disc. Their next album, "American Idiot" went for the throat. It was great. And somehow the Dixie Chicks took all the heat for pointing out what a mess the USA was.
Perhaps the most complete acknowledgement of their political validity was the release last year of a collaborative effort between Green Day and the band that has best mixed music and politics ever - U2; 'The Saints are Coming.' A pretty kick ass song to boot.
Oh... and final proof: The drummer's name - is Tre Cool. Literally.
There are precious few bands that have made it further on as much lack of talent as Green Day... but, like the Clash (You knew I couldn't last much longer, could I? C'mon I narrowly avoided mentioning The Clash entirely in the OLP entry.), they honed their understanding of their abilities into increasingly adept incicive songwriting.
I was the demographic to blame for shooting Dookie to the top of the charts in 1994. It was hardly the paradigm setting moment it's since been hailed as when Mike Dirnt had his teeth fed to himself by a security guard at Woodstock '94 - if you actually watched the incident - well, you can't see it happen. Green Day's set was over, and the director cut to long-shots of the stage as the marauding fans rush the stage. However, the preceeding band incited mud-fight was great - harmless fun. The 'band violence' (I repeat: The mud-fight was harmless, and the punching actually had the band on the victim end.) helped catapult Green Day into the stratosphere. Oh yes, we were a disenfranchised lot, us Gen-X'ers. What's new? Every second wave of adolescents gets to be angry at the opulence of the intermediate generations... gawd, can I hardly wait for that phase to swing back around... perhaps kids will start re-fucking-cycling again! But I digress....
Yes, Dookie was a lot of fun. Revitalized punk - with harmonies! Who didn't get off screaming along with 'Basketcase's "Am I just paranoid or UHh-Muh-Glaaaaauuuh!" (Which, for the record, was actually "...or am I stoned?")
But then they had to go and write that fucking song.... You know the one. 'Good Riddance.' (Oh how I wish it appropriately WOULD go away.) Changes are you know the somg by it's refrain - "I hope you had the time of your life." Would someone please kill me if I ever have to hear that song again? And don't you DARE play that song at my funeral - which I think is the real problem with it. It went from release to overplay inside of three days. Okay, realistically, three months. (Okay, so there are occasional exceptions to the 'I will listen to anything they release' rule.) Until their most recent album, this has been the flagship song of their career - fuuuuuuck....
It took me a long time to let Green Day back in. In fact, they had to actually start channeling The Clash in order to do it. I don't really know what happened, but somewhere along the line Billy Joe Armstong quit acting upon kneejerk defiance and started speaking about real problems. "Warning," while just a warm-up to what was coming, is still my favourite Green Day disc. Their next album, "American Idiot" went for the throat. It was great. And somehow the Dixie Chicks took all the heat for pointing out what a mess the USA was.
Perhaps the most complete acknowledgement of their political validity was the release last year of a collaborative effort between Green Day and the band that has best mixed music and politics ever - U2; 'The Saints are Coming.' A pretty kick ass song to boot.
Oh... and final proof: The drummer's name - is Tre Cool. Literally.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Enemies III & Allies II
A quick bit of context for those of you who are now getting my blog entries as notes on Facebook... (actually no one reads the real blog!):
Ages ago I started a series of posts listing people of high profile who are either enemies or allies of my own ideological stand-point. I didn't actually get far before I forgot about the blog. (2 enemies, 1 ally) Now that I'm in the habit again, it's time to get back.
A quick recap: Enemies - Anne Coulter & Ted Nugent. Allies - Dr. David Brin.
I've got one of each for today.
Starting with a new ally:
Technically this is ALLIES. The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. It's a podcast presented by the New England Skeptical Society. I listened to a few recent episodes in early December and was immediately enamoured. I went right back to the beginning of their archive - about three years worth of weekly podcasts.
In essence, the N.E.S.S. are a group of science-minded folk of a variety of political stripes, (Perry DeAngelis demonstrates clear Republican affiliation; Skepchick, Rebecca Watson makes no bones about her leftist standing.) who vigilantly take on any subject where bad science is being practiced. From UFOs to Intelligent Design they take it all on with a hard-line of reason and logic. Psychic phenomenon, homeopathy, sasquatch... it's all in their sights. Through discussion they provide the listener over repeated listening with the tools by which to disect their own cherished beliefs, and like any good group of science-minded folks, they aren't too precious about their claims. They recognize that the flexible fallibility of science is it's greatest socratic strength. Case in point - in one early episode they took on the 'G-spot.' When, only weeks later they were owned (in part by then guest, Rebecca Watson) they were happy to back down. It was awesome to know that they practice what they preach. (The fact that it brought Watson to the show full-time was an added bonus. I laugh a lot listening to Skeptic's Guide, but she makes me laugh the most, next to DeAngelis - who passed away last year, so once I catch up with my listening I won't have his wit to giggle at.)
It's my favourite podcast hands down, and I'm not afraid to admit that a number of things I've taken as fact have been torn apart by them, much to my horror and eventual embrace.
My New Enemy:
Not that he wasn't headed this way before... Tom Cruise. The guy is completely bat-shit crazy. Earlier this afternoon a co-worker forwarded me a link to a YouTube video that had been tagged by muckraker-fabulous Perez Hilton. I'm not a follower of Hilton's blog, for the record.
The clip in question was an edited down version of a Scientology produced video interview with Tom Cruise. The complete and utter nonsense dribbling out of his mouth... "I know. I just KNOW. And I wish I could take a vacation and gallivant, but I can't. It's up to me." (I paraphrase.) Yes, Tom thinks he's Scientology's own personal Jesus. But really he comes off just a bit more like their Manson.
The post had gone up on Hilton's site about five minutes before the video was posted. I watched the ten minutes. Passed it on ONCE. That person watched it with about five extra minutes to spare... and then the video was removed for 'copyright violation.'
Now, you may know that YouTube doesn't make a habit of removing videos unless the copyright holder SPECIFICALLY REQUESTS IT. So... within thirty, forty-five minutes at the outside, of the video being posted on Hilton's excessively well read website, Scientology had very firmly pressured YouTube into removing the video. The Hilton connection is likely incidental, but even so - the video was recently posted - scary!
I should be singling out Scientology as my enemy here - and don't think I won't - but it's far more satisfying to aim at Cruise. The guy is so far off the deep end by now, he's making Britney Spears look like Barak Obama. ZOIKS!
Ages ago I started a series of posts listing people of high profile who are either enemies or allies of my own ideological stand-point. I didn't actually get far before I forgot about the blog. (2 enemies, 1 ally) Now that I'm in the habit again, it's time to get back.
A quick recap: Enemies - Anne Coulter & Ted Nugent. Allies - Dr. David Brin.
I've got one of each for today.
Starting with a new ally:
Technically this is ALLIES. The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. It's a podcast presented by the New England Skeptical Society. I listened to a few recent episodes in early December and was immediately enamoured. I went right back to the beginning of their archive - about three years worth of weekly podcasts.
In essence, the N.E.S.S. are a group of science-minded folk of a variety of political stripes, (Perry DeAngelis demonstrates clear Republican affiliation; Skepchick, Rebecca Watson makes no bones about her leftist standing.) who vigilantly take on any subject where bad science is being practiced. From UFOs to Intelligent Design they take it all on with a hard-line of reason and logic. Psychic phenomenon, homeopathy, sasquatch... it's all in their sights. Through discussion they provide the listener over repeated listening with the tools by which to disect their own cherished beliefs, and like any good group of science-minded folks, they aren't too precious about their claims. They recognize that the flexible fallibility of science is it's greatest socratic strength. Case in point - in one early episode they took on the 'G-spot.' When, only weeks later they were owned (in part by then guest, Rebecca Watson) they were happy to back down. It was awesome to know that they practice what they preach. (The fact that it brought Watson to the show full-time was an added bonus. I laugh a lot listening to Skeptic's Guide, but she makes me laugh the most, next to DeAngelis - who passed away last year, so once I catch up with my listening I won't have his wit to giggle at.)
It's my favourite podcast hands down, and I'm not afraid to admit that a number of things I've taken as fact have been torn apart by them, much to my horror and eventual embrace.
My New Enemy:
Not that he wasn't headed this way before... Tom Cruise. The guy is completely bat-shit crazy. Earlier this afternoon a co-worker forwarded me a link to a YouTube video that had been tagged by muckraker-fabulous Perez Hilton. I'm not a follower of Hilton's blog, for the record.
The clip in question was an edited down version of a Scientology produced video interview with Tom Cruise. The complete and utter nonsense dribbling out of his mouth... "I know. I just KNOW. And I wish I could take a vacation and gallivant, but I can't. It's up to me." (I paraphrase.) Yes, Tom thinks he's Scientology's own personal Jesus. But really he comes off just a bit more like their Manson.
The post had gone up on Hilton's site about five minutes before the video was posted. I watched the ten minutes. Passed it on ONCE. That person watched it with about five extra minutes to spare... and then the video was removed for 'copyright violation.'
Now, you may know that YouTube doesn't make a habit of removing videos unless the copyright holder SPECIFICALLY REQUESTS IT. So... within thirty, forty-five minutes at the outside, of the video being posted on Hilton's excessively well read website, Scientology had very firmly pressured YouTube into removing the video. The Hilton connection is likely incidental, but even so - the video was recently posted - scary!
I should be singling out Scientology as my enemy here - and don't think I won't - but it's far more satisfying to aim at Cruise. The guy is so far off the deep end by now, he's making Britney Spears look like Barak Obama. ZOIKS!
Monday, January 14, 2008
Defending the Music XI: I Must be too Dumb to be Proud
Just past the halfway mark!
I've made a point of doing a few of the shiniest gems, but for the most part I've worked my way through the items I'm least excited about. Looking at what is left over now and deciding what I'm going to tackle next I have committed myself to writing about what in my mind are the three least of the remaining five bands in this and the next two entries.
But don't be mistaken, when I say 'least' we are still talking about the 'least' bands in the list of artists I trust the most.
Though it bears saying that these least artists do kind of hammer home the point that that trust comes from an expectation I put upon their worst music, not their best. Several bands have made the list because I'll put up with their occasional crappy song in order to be there when they put one out of the park, but in many cases it's a simple matter of feeling like even their worst music would get at least three stars on my media player. This is one of those artists.
I discovered Our Lady Peace and Alannis Morrisette (as opposed to Alannis) in one ten minute window. That makes for a reasonably important 10 minutes in my personal history of Canadian rock. Alannis didn't (even come close) make 'the list' though.
I listened to that first OLP disc, "Naveed" throughout the summer of '95 on tour. The ensuing five albums have admittedly sounded very much like that first one. That has been a virtue thus far, but I have to admit that I'm hoping that the new OLP album, due this spring, takes them in a fresh direction.
I figure that a good part of the appeal of OLP is that, being 1) My age; 2) Canadian and 3) Of roughly the same musical aesthetic as me, they represent 'the band I would have been in' if that had ever been a reasonable trajectory for my life. Though I have to think that it would be inevitable that I would have written songs with more humour than Raine Maida. I mean, geez, could one person explore the feeling of being let down from more angles?
Every now and then, OLP had struck a chord running deep in me. Their debut, "Naveed," (both the song and the album) musically hit exactly where I was at at the point in my life that I heard it. But it needs to be said that the lyrics of one of their songs - "Waited" - stand as the only song lyrics that have ever changed my life in a directly quantifiable way. I was in a very toxic relationship, I was in severe denial about the damage it was causing me. But upon hearing the chorus of that song... "I must be too dumb to be proud, 'cause I waited, waited here." ...I saw myself and how pathetic that was. Needless to say I got out. Fast. There has never been any looking back on that one.
I'd be curious to hear if anyone else reading this has ever had a similar experience with any other song? Doesn't have to be a relationship thing, just a point where a song has made you look inside yourself and change a bad pattern.
I've made a point of doing a few of the shiniest gems, but for the most part I've worked my way through the items I'm least excited about. Looking at what is left over now and deciding what I'm going to tackle next I have committed myself to writing about what in my mind are the three least of the remaining five bands in this and the next two entries.
But don't be mistaken, when I say 'least' we are still talking about the 'least' bands in the list of artists I trust the most.
Though it bears saying that these least artists do kind of hammer home the point that that trust comes from an expectation I put upon their worst music, not their best. Several bands have made the list because I'll put up with their occasional crappy song in order to be there when they put one out of the park, but in many cases it's a simple matter of feeling like even their worst music would get at least three stars on my media player. This is one of those artists.
I discovered Our Lady Peace and Alannis Morrisette (as opposed to Alannis) in one ten minute window. That makes for a reasonably important 10 minutes in my personal history of Canadian rock. Alannis didn't (even come close) make 'the list' though.
I listened to that first OLP disc, "Naveed" throughout the summer of '95 on tour. The ensuing five albums have admittedly sounded very much like that first one. That has been a virtue thus far, but I have to admit that I'm hoping that the new OLP album, due this spring, takes them in a fresh direction.
I figure that a good part of the appeal of OLP is that, being 1) My age; 2) Canadian and 3) Of roughly the same musical aesthetic as me, they represent 'the band I would have been in' if that had ever been a reasonable trajectory for my life. Though I have to think that it would be inevitable that I would have written songs with more humour than Raine Maida. I mean, geez, could one person explore the feeling of being let down from more angles?
Every now and then, OLP had struck a chord running deep in me. Their debut, "Naveed," (both the song and the album) musically hit exactly where I was at at the point in my life that I heard it. But it needs to be said that the lyrics of one of their songs - "Waited" - stand as the only song lyrics that have ever changed my life in a directly quantifiable way. I was in a very toxic relationship, I was in severe denial about the damage it was causing me. But upon hearing the chorus of that song... "I must be too dumb to be proud, 'cause I waited, waited here." ...I saw myself and how pathetic that was. Needless to say I got out. Fast. There has never been any looking back on that one.
I'd be curious to hear if anyone else reading this has ever had a similar experience with any other song? Doesn't have to be a relationship thing, just a point where a song has made you look inside yourself and change a bad pattern.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Defending the Music X: Fear is not the End of this
Now as I begin writing this entry I realise that I am almost as excited to be writing this entry as I was to write about The Clash. In fact the feeling is kind of boosting my awareness of my love for this band. I can tell I'm going to be listening to them a lot this week.
Okay, who are they?
Live.
Who?
Live.
Right, but the Band is...?
Not The Band. Live.
But who is the group?
Not The Who, either.
What is their name!?
Live.
I don't care. What do they call themselves!
Live.
I'm going to punch you right in the mouth...
If there is one thing I don't like about LIVE, the band, it's their name. I've had "Who's on First?" conversations like the above - I don't know how many times. Imagine if they had been a group that was truly obscure. I think that they actually kind of blew it on the name. It has only ever hurt them. There are all kinds of people who know of their two notable hits (one of which was positively enormous) who don't know the name of the band. I'm sure that if they'd had an easier name to deal with that they'd have reached a lot more people.
Back in 1992, when I was on tour with the Juanabees, one of the four of us on tour that year bought Live's first widely released album, "Mental Jewelry," on a whim. Despite being the same year that Nirvana's 'Nevermind' was released - and similarly close on the heels of other seminal albums like "Ten," "Pretty Hate Machine" and (dare I admit it?) "Gordon," "Mental Jewelry" matched and even out-paced those albums for play time. There was something about the big sound of the music that appealed to us. Sure Pearl Jam had a huge sound, but Live wrote songs that sounded vast, like landscaping with guitars. Buddhism never sounded so massive. (Their lyrics are heavily influenced by Buddhism.) At the end of the tour everyone of us bought a copy. And this was the album before they hit it big.
Two years later when "Throwing Copper" spent a year in the top ten (back when that still barely meant something) based largely on the strength of "Lightning Crashes" ("Oooooh! THAT song! Yeah, I love those guys too.") a year after it had been released... well, I've never had more of a "What took you so long to notice?" feeling.
They hit it big briefly once again in 2001 - though not in a way anyone would really want to. You may recall someone flying a plane into a building... they had just released a new album, "V," - one of the songs from it (thank god it wasn't the actual single, that would have been too crass) "Overcome" was used in an early tribute. It was a great song that fit the circumstances hauntingly well. It was used again... and again... and again. It was practically the 9/11 theme song.
I suppose in a way I'm glad that Live have never really maintained commercial success. I feel vindicated in my love for them by the massive success they briefly enjoyed, yet at the same time I get to keep them in that special place that other 'best kept secrets' like U2 and R.E.M. left so far behind that it feels dirty to still be on the band-wagon.
In preparing to write this I had a wonderful discovery... I (shamefully) admit that I had no idea that they released a pair of new songs this fall. But the up-side of that is that I've got something new to dive into, and "Radiant Sea" at first blush is one of the best songs they've released in nearly a decade.
Bonus trivia: The waiter who warns Jack that Marla shouldn't order the soup in 'Fight Club'... Live's lead singer - Ed Kowalczyk.
Okay, who are they?
Live.
Who?
Live.
Right, but the Band is...?
Not The Band. Live.
But who is the group?
Not The Who, either.
What is their name!?
Live.
I don't care. What do they call themselves!
Live.
I'm going to punch you right in the mouth...
If there is one thing I don't like about LIVE, the band, it's their name. I've had "Who's on First?" conversations like the above - I don't know how many times. Imagine if they had been a group that was truly obscure. I think that they actually kind of blew it on the name. It has only ever hurt them. There are all kinds of people who know of their two notable hits (one of which was positively enormous) who don't know the name of the band. I'm sure that if they'd had an easier name to deal with that they'd have reached a lot more people.
Back in 1992, when I was on tour with the Juanabees, one of the four of us on tour that year bought Live's first widely released album, "Mental Jewelry," on a whim. Despite being the same year that Nirvana's 'Nevermind' was released - and similarly close on the heels of other seminal albums like "Ten," "Pretty Hate Machine" and (dare I admit it?) "Gordon," "Mental Jewelry" matched and even out-paced those albums for play time. There was something about the big sound of the music that appealed to us. Sure Pearl Jam had a huge sound, but Live wrote songs that sounded vast, like landscaping with guitars. Buddhism never sounded so massive. (Their lyrics are heavily influenced by Buddhism.) At the end of the tour everyone of us bought a copy. And this was the album before they hit it big.
Two years later when "Throwing Copper" spent a year in the top ten (back when that still barely meant something) based largely on the strength of "Lightning Crashes" ("Oooooh! THAT song! Yeah, I love those guys too.") a year after it had been released... well, I've never had more of a "What took you so long to notice?" feeling.
They hit it big briefly once again in 2001 - though not in a way anyone would really want to. You may recall someone flying a plane into a building... they had just released a new album, "V," - one of the songs from it (thank god it wasn't the actual single, that would have been too crass) "Overcome" was used in an early tribute. It was a great song that fit the circumstances hauntingly well. It was used again... and again... and again. It was practically the 9/11 theme song.
I suppose in a way I'm glad that Live have never really maintained commercial success. I feel vindicated in my love for them by the massive success they briefly enjoyed, yet at the same time I get to keep them in that special place that other 'best kept secrets' like U2 and R.E.M. left so far behind that it feels dirty to still be on the band-wagon.
In preparing to write this I had a wonderful discovery... I (shamefully) admit that I had no idea that they released a pair of new songs this fall. But the up-side of that is that I've got something new to dive into, and "Radiant Sea" at first blush is one of the best songs they've released in nearly a decade.
Bonus trivia: The waiter who warns Jack that Marla shouldn't order the soup in 'Fight Club'... Live's lead singer - Ed Kowalczyk.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Baldwin / Basinger & Baby
Okay, Ireland is NOT a baby. She's nearly a teenager.
My take - from what little I know - is as follows, and it seems to me that it ought to be reasonably apparent to anyone who has ever lived in a split family, and probably many others with the wit to think about it.
Did Alec Baldwin verbally abuse his daughter?
Yes. And she probably deserved it.
Does this make him a bad guy? Nope.
Is Kim Basinger turning her daughter against Baldwin? Probably.
Does this mean she's a bad person? Again no.
Is it any of our business? Not in the least.
Let's deal with these questions in order... except for the last one which I'll deal with first...
It's not our business. I shouldn't even be writing about it, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Sorry Alec. Sorry Kim. Ireland, I am VERY sorry. The biggest issue in this whole thing is that you are put in a position where you have to deal with a normal part of growing up in a very public way. The tapes of your father should never have been made public. Whoever did that is the real criminal in all of this - I'm going to blame your Mother's lawyer, Neal Hersh. It was a tactic which deserves to blow up in the face of the perpetrator.
Did Alec Baldwin verbally abuse his daughter? Did she Deserve it? Does this make him a bad guy?
Yes. He did. Hands up everyone whose parents never said a hurtful thing to them...
If there are any hands up, it's either toddlers, people who never met their parents, or in a rare case a newly minted adult who grew up in the era where we treated children too well for their own good.
I'm not in favour of corporal punishment, but there has been a trend over the past few decades towards treating kids like fabrege eggs. Fuck, stop it! We aren't helping them any.
Yes, my parents said some things that hurt my tiny little feelings. I'm 37 years old now. I still love them both and have loved them since any specific incident where they might have said something unkind to me - or at least from thirty minutes after such things were said. Some of those things were more than I deserved at the time. Let's face it, children are willful little egomaniacs and if they aren't shown that actions have consequences and that other people's feelings are just as capable of being hurt as theirs they are being fostered into becoming a generation-army of sociopaths. In otherwords, an occassional heated verbal dressing-down is for their own good!
Whatever she did to hurt Alec's feelings is only nominally relevant. I know I tried my parent's patience. Kids do things - often just to see if they can get away with it. In this case the answer was 'no' and he gave her than message. Should he have waited to give her that message 'til he had cooled his jets a bit? Definitely. But no-one - not anybody - not Dr. Phil - not Gandhi - is flawless on that count. It's human nature. We get steamed and we speak sooner than we should. I've got a wheelbarrow full of stones here for anyone who still has the qualifications to make the inaugural toss.
Is Kim Basinger turning her daughter against Baldwin? Does this mean she's a bad person?
She probably is. That doesn't mean she knows she's doing it. It's ultimately doomed to fail too.
My parents both said things about the other when they separated that weren't very flattering - heck, they still do on occassion, but it's become less and less the case as time has passed. Was it a deliberate attempt to turn me against the other? No - they were just speaking out of pain. Did it work - not really. There were truisms spoken in each case. Things that I would have eventually put together on my own about each of my parent's personal short-comings. But ultimately I began to look upon those comments as being a greater personal liability than the things that they were speaking about were. And here's the thing - even armed with that knowledge, do you think I can (even three years after the split) keep myself from making the same mistake when speaking about Mia? No. I can't. Thank god we didn't have kids. I'd hate to have them be used as a tool in a pointless, but unstoppable, war of nearly dead emotions.
As usual, this comment on current events has become more about myself thant he event - and so it should be. Let these people be. Let Ireland be. Using a child as a pawn, while somewhat inevitable, is elevated to egregious when it becomes a public battle. Trying to vilify Alec Baldwin for acting as any average joe would when pressed hard enough is ridiculous. No doubt he didn't feel good about himself even before the infamous voicemail was heard by Ireland, let alone the public at large.
My take - from what little I know - is as follows, and it seems to me that it ought to be reasonably apparent to anyone who has ever lived in a split family, and probably many others with the wit to think about it.
Did Alec Baldwin verbally abuse his daughter?
Yes. And she probably deserved it.
Does this make him a bad guy? Nope.
Is Kim Basinger turning her daughter against Baldwin? Probably.
Does this mean she's a bad person? Again no.
Is it any of our business? Not in the least.
Let's deal with these questions in order... except for the last one which I'll deal with first...
It's not our business. I shouldn't even be writing about it, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Sorry Alec. Sorry Kim. Ireland, I am VERY sorry. The biggest issue in this whole thing is that you are put in a position where you have to deal with a normal part of growing up in a very public way. The tapes of your father should never have been made public. Whoever did that is the real criminal in all of this - I'm going to blame your Mother's lawyer, Neal Hersh. It was a tactic which deserves to blow up in the face of the perpetrator.
Did Alec Baldwin verbally abuse his daughter? Did she Deserve it? Does this make him a bad guy?
Yes. He did. Hands up everyone whose parents never said a hurtful thing to them...
If there are any hands up, it's either toddlers, people who never met their parents, or in a rare case a newly minted adult who grew up in the era where we treated children too well for their own good.
I'm not in favour of corporal punishment, but there has been a trend over the past few decades towards treating kids like fabrege eggs. Fuck, stop it! We aren't helping them any.
Yes, my parents said some things that hurt my tiny little feelings. I'm 37 years old now. I still love them both and have loved them since any specific incident where they might have said something unkind to me - or at least from thirty minutes after such things were said. Some of those things were more than I deserved at the time. Let's face it, children are willful little egomaniacs and if they aren't shown that actions have consequences and that other people's feelings are just as capable of being hurt as theirs they are being fostered into becoming a generation-army of sociopaths. In otherwords, an occassional heated verbal dressing-down is for their own good!
Whatever she did to hurt Alec's feelings is only nominally relevant. I know I tried my parent's patience. Kids do things - often just to see if they can get away with it. In this case the answer was 'no' and he gave her than message. Should he have waited to give her that message 'til he had cooled his jets a bit? Definitely. But no-one - not anybody - not Dr. Phil - not Gandhi - is flawless on that count. It's human nature. We get steamed and we speak sooner than we should. I've got a wheelbarrow full of stones here for anyone who still has the qualifications to make the inaugural toss.
Is Kim Basinger turning her daughter against Baldwin? Does this mean she's a bad person?
She probably is. That doesn't mean she knows she's doing it. It's ultimately doomed to fail too.
My parents both said things about the other when they separated that weren't very flattering - heck, they still do on occassion, but it's become less and less the case as time has passed. Was it a deliberate attempt to turn me against the other? No - they were just speaking out of pain. Did it work - not really. There were truisms spoken in each case. Things that I would have eventually put together on my own about each of my parent's personal short-comings. But ultimately I began to look upon those comments as being a greater personal liability than the things that they were speaking about were. And here's the thing - even armed with that knowledge, do you think I can (even three years after the split) keep myself from making the same mistake when speaking about Mia? No. I can't. Thank god we didn't have kids. I'd hate to have them be used as a tool in a pointless, but unstoppable, war of nearly dead emotions.
As usual, this comment on current events has become more about myself thant he event - and so it should be. Let these people be. Let Ireland be. Using a child as a pawn, while somewhat inevitable, is elevated to egregious when it becomes a public battle. Trying to vilify Alec Baldwin for acting as any average joe would when pressed hard enough is ridiculous. No doubt he didn't feel good about himself even before the infamous voicemail was heard by Ireland, let alone the public at large.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
A LONG long weekend.
I'm still recovering from the past five days.
On Sunday night I drove up to Penticton with David, the producer of Beast of Bottomless Lake. We arrived at the Ranch after 11pm, and pretty much went to sleep.
The morning provided the sole lie-in of the weekend.
When we got up I got to have a bit of a boo around the ranch. It is our location production office in the Okanagan. Nice place. Though once we cram a dozen people in dorm-style, it's going to be a good thing that we have plenty of exterior room to escape each other in. Not that we'll be doing much more than sleep there, but still.
Over the day David and I prepped for the arrival of the others. I also got to watch the world men's curling final - Canada kicked ass.
We bought food (which I prepped for minimum maintenance over the next four days) and did a bit of organizing of space - both for accomodation and shooting.
Shari arrived around 4:30ish with her Grip, Thomas.
Last time Shari and I were up in the Okanagan we were doing some pretty unabashed flirting. We are now each variously attached. Or rather, she is. I am merely feeling overwhelmed by the time pressure of the project to the point of not being able to find the time for romance... though I feel good about a prospect who knows full well I'm heading her way as soon as the film is in the can.
We lightly addressed that and all was well. Though our friendly adversarial relationship continued through this week, just without the innuendo.
Craig arrived abound six-ish with Rob our camera op and Patrick (Location sound).
Between the early work David and I did, and Shari and Thomas did after they arrived, the set (the garage) was practically ready.
We sat down for dinner (I made pasta) and the Craig and Shari started planning the evening shoot. Gabe - an old friend of mine from university who lives in the Okanagan - was our actor for the evening. When he arrived we got him in costume and got to work. It took about three hours to shoot his scene.
It was fun and silly. It's one of two bits that are supposed to be poorly done re-creations. Such an odd thing deliberately making something badly. The trick is to not do anything to consciously make it bad. The trick is to stop yourself from doing the things that would make it good.
After a late night de-brief/production-meeting we went to bed.
Craig and I were sharing a room. We were both too excited to sleep. Add in a few well timed farts (oh the puerile humour) and we were up until dawn. Craig figured he got about 2 hours sleep. I figure I got less than one.
Easter Monday morning we were off to CATO to meet with students and to do some final auditions for the 'Young Paul'.
The turn out of student volunteers was disappointing. (Though we got a number of emails over the next few days.) The auditions were pretty clear cut. Twenty young men, only two really worked for us and even then, one of the two was clearly better suited than the other.
We then went and did a tech-scout of the boat we will be using for the shoot - it went really well. The skipper seems a great guy and seemed to like us. The boat itself is just the right level of functionality, space and just enough things that look like they need repair to give it real character.
We followed up with our biggest location - the Summerland Yacht Club. I was very impressed. It is totally as much as we could expect from a gratis locale.
Back home to the ranch for Barbecue. Mmmmm. Barbecue.
After another evening meeting it was time for an earlier bed.
An even earlier morning followed. We rushed to Kelowna to shoot a few scenes at Shelter Bay marina. It was great. Our 'Buck Rogers' arrived and we shot his main interview scene. Next we moved down to the docks to shoot some play-back footage of a reporter. Our actor, Dorothy Dalba was a bit nervous. Craig and I did what we could to loosen her up. Gradually we made our way towards what we needed. Before take 5 I told her that she was charming and delightful and that the news-item she was presenting was totally silly, and that when she was laughing at it it was sexy.
I got a lot of razzing for flirting with her, but she nailed the next take with a big smile on her face. In the last bit we had her do (which integrated 'Buck') I joked around about the flirting before take three - again she nailed it. I'm thinking it's a tactic that's going to be valuable, even if I do take some flak for it.
Clare & Lainie came down and watched some of the shooting. A few of us stopped at their place on the way back to the ranch and visited for a bit and collected the map that Clare painted for us and their investment in the film.
After a quick lunch we shot Chief Bigsky. Perry Williams nailed it in two takes. Craig was moved to tears. The shots look great.
That night we went out to a Mexican dinner and had another pow-wow including a longer meeting between Craig, David and I. We ran numbers about and looked at everything and despite being cranky as all hell, came out the other end with the promising outlook that we are within spitting distance of being able to pull this sucker off.
Wednesday morning Shari and Thomas (who I might add was awesome - too bad he's not going to be around for principal) headed out really early. Craig and Patrick and I headed back to Kelowna for a number of meetings and David and Rob hung back at the Ranch to clean up before heading back to Vancouver.
Craig and Patrick and I met with a caterer - a very nice lady named Lynn. We hope she comes through for us. We stopped by CATO again to say thanks. We nixed a connection with Rodney... who has been a bit hard to nail down anyhow.
We ran out to Bertram Park for a tech-scout. That was excellent. We met with the guy who will be custodian to us there and got really specific about where we're shooting each of our scenes there.
A few minor stops including lunch and we hit the road home.
I was really wiped out. My plan was to get home, relax and watch Game one of the Canucks playoffs and get to be early. I got in just after the game had started - only missed a little bit of the first period. Well, so much for my relax and go to bed early plan - the game became the sixth longest in NHL history. The Canucks won in the end, thank God. And Roberto Luongo not only won his first playoff game ever, but simultaneously got the record for the most shots a goalie has ever faced in a game ever - at 75.
On Sunday night I drove up to Penticton with David, the producer of Beast of Bottomless Lake. We arrived at the Ranch after 11pm, and pretty much went to sleep.
The morning provided the sole lie-in of the weekend.
When we got up I got to have a bit of a boo around the ranch. It is our location production office in the Okanagan. Nice place. Though once we cram a dozen people in dorm-style, it's going to be a good thing that we have plenty of exterior room to escape each other in. Not that we'll be doing much more than sleep there, but still.
Over the day David and I prepped for the arrival of the others. I also got to watch the world men's curling final - Canada kicked ass.
We bought food (which I prepped for minimum maintenance over the next four days) and did a bit of organizing of space - both for accomodation and shooting.
Shari arrived around 4:30ish with her Grip, Thomas.
Last time Shari and I were up in the Okanagan we were doing some pretty unabashed flirting. We are now each variously attached. Or rather, she is. I am merely feeling overwhelmed by the time pressure of the project to the point of not being able to find the time for romance... though I feel good about a prospect who knows full well I'm heading her way as soon as the film is in the can.
We lightly addressed that and all was well. Though our friendly adversarial relationship continued through this week, just without the innuendo.
Craig arrived abound six-ish with Rob our camera op and Patrick (Location sound).
Between the early work David and I did, and Shari and Thomas did after they arrived, the set (the garage) was practically ready.
We sat down for dinner (I made pasta) and the Craig and Shari started planning the evening shoot. Gabe - an old friend of mine from university who lives in the Okanagan - was our actor for the evening. When he arrived we got him in costume and got to work. It took about three hours to shoot his scene.
It was fun and silly. It's one of two bits that are supposed to be poorly done re-creations. Such an odd thing deliberately making something badly. The trick is to not do anything to consciously make it bad. The trick is to stop yourself from doing the things that would make it good.
After a late night de-brief/production-meeting we went to bed.
Craig and I were sharing a room. We were both too excited to sleep. Add in a few well timed farts (oh the puerile humour) and we were up until dawn. Craig figured he got about 2 hours sleep. I figure I got less than one.
Easter Monday morning we were off to CATO to meet with students and to do some final auditions for the 'Young Paul'.
The turn out of student volunteers was disappointing. (Though we got a number of emails over the next few days.) The auditions were pretty clear cut. Twenty young men, only two really worked for us and even then, one of the two was clearly better suited than the other.
We then went and did a tech-scout of the boat we will be using for the shoot - it went really well. The skipper seems a great guy and seemed to like us. The boat itself is just the right level of functionality, space and just enough things that look like they need repair to give it real character.
We followed up with our biggest location - the Summerland Yacht Club. I was very impressed. It is totally as much as we could expect from a gratis locale.
Back home to the ranch for Barbecue. Mmmmm. Barbecue.
After another evening meeting it was time for an earlier bed.
An even earlier morning followed. We rushed to Kelowna to shoot a few scenes at Shelter Bay marina. It was great. Our 'Buck Rogers' arrived and we shot his main interview scene. Next we moved down to the docks to shoot some play-back footage of a reporter. Our actor, Dorothy Dalba was a bit nervous. Craig and I did what we could to loosen her up. Gradually we made our way towards what we needed. Before take 5 I told her that she was charming and delightful and that the news-item she was presenting was totally silly, and that when she was laughing at it it was sexy.
I got a lot of razzing for flirting with her, but she nailed the next take with a big smile on her face. In the last bit we had her do (which integrated 'Buck') I joked around about the flirting before take three - again she nailed it. I'm thinking it's a tactic that's going to be valuable, even if I do take some flak for it.
Clare & Lainie came down and watched some of the shooting. A few of us stopped at their place on the way back to the ranch and visited for a bit and collected the map that Clare painted for us and their investment in the film.
After a quick lunch we shot Chief Bigsky. Perry Williams nailed it in two takes. Craig was moved to tears. The shots look great.
That night we went out to a Mexican dinner and had another pow-wow including a longer meeting between Craig, David and I. We ran numbers about and looked at everything and despite being cranky as all hell, came out the other end with the promising outlook that we are within spitting distance of being able to pull this sucker off.
Wednesday morning Shari and Thomas (who I might add was awesome - too bad he's not going to be around for principal) headed out really early. Craig and Patrick and I headed back to Kelowna for a number of meetings and David and Rob hung back at the Ranch to clean up before heading back to Vancouver.
Craig and Patrick and I met with a caterer - a very nice lady named Lynn. We hope she comes through for us. We stopped by CATO again to say thanks. We nixed a connection with Rodney... who has been a bit hard to nail down anyhow.
We ran out to Bertram Park for a tech-scout. That was excellent. We met with the guy who will be custodian to us there and got really specific about where we're shooting each of our scenes there.
A few minor stops including lunch and we hit the road home.
I was really wiped out. My plan was to get home, relax and watch Game one of the Canucks playoffs and get to be early. I got in just after the game had started - only missed a little bit of the first period. Well, so much for my relax and go to bed early plan - the game became the sixth longest in NHL history. The Canucks won in the end, thank God. And Roberto Luongo not only won his first playoff game ever, but simultaneously got the record for the most shots a goalie has ever faced in a game ever - at 75.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Idlely Contemplating Homicide
I know that in the chance that I become the next Darren Kliebold or Timothy McVeigh that making such off-hand comments in my blog posts as 'Idlely Contemplating Homicide' is somewhere between 'big no-no' & 'early warning sign.' But I swear, it's entirely made as a light-hearted hyperbolic statement of frustration.
Erin is driving me bananas.
My upstairs neighbour is gone for two months and the apartment is being sublet by Erin Matthews - who, like practically everyone in my building, I've known at least casually for several years.
When Patrick and Graham left I was entirely out of the loop, but I noticed the change in noise patterns from upstairs. Within a day or so, Matthew mentioned that Erin was subletting. For starters there were no really disruptive sounds.
Then, a week in I ran into her in the stairwell. We said 'hi' and I mentioned that I had heard her up there, and added that I didn't mean it in a bad way.
It was as though I gave her permission.
One morning there was yelling before 8am.
She never seems to take her shoes off (which are apparently dutch-clogs) and I never imagined that dancers could be so fucking heavy-footed. Okay to be fair - nine times out of ten it takes her in excess of a half hour to take them off after getting in the door. It also seems that she puts them on as soon as she gets out of bed - I guess she wears them in the shower? Oh... and there are hardwood floors.
She's a heavy smoker which means I'm constantly hearing the sliding door rumble open as she goes out to the balcony. I'm only complaining about this one in the context of the perponderance of other factors.
She is a very loud talker when she's excited - which luckily I usually only hear on her way into the building from the street.
I also would never want to complain about this one unless it was a regular issue - which in very nearly is and again, with everything else... Noisy sex at 6:30 in the morning. Three days in a row. Made worse by the fact that it coincided perfectly with a bout of insomnia, cutting my sleep opportunities over three days to approximately half. Oh wheee!
One morning she put the stereo on first thing in the morning and left it on after she left the house - it was on repeat. Augh!
Now we move into the more egrigious stuff...
Lucky her she got a cool voice over gig. And she does fucking vocal warm ups in the bedroom above where I sleep when she wakes up. FUCK!
And...
Two or three times now there has been this semi-rhythmic thumping (not sex, I'm quite certain). It kind of sounds as though she's sitting where her legs are not quite reaching the ground and she's swinging them. It's not that loud. If it was only ten minutes, I'd probably never notice - but for three hours at a time it gets really fucking annoying. I got fed up with it one night last week.
I've been trying to avoid opening that particular can of worms for various reasons (not the least of which is that now that I know how loud a person can be, I'm wondering how loud I am and don't really want Erin angrily complaining to Patrick and Graham about me when they return only to get into a big question of hipocracy).
So I went upstairs and knocked on her door... as soon as I did, the talking inside stopped. No answer, even when I knocked again.
She figured she could pretend she wasn't home? What the fuck?
I went back downstairs. About twenty minutes later, the noise started again.
So, I'm hoping to catch her in the stairs again so she can't pretend she's not there - she can't do that can she?
Erin is driving me bananas.
My upstairs neighbour is gone for two months and the apartment is being sublet by Erin Matthews - who, like practically everyone in my building, I've known at least casually for several years.
When Patrick and Graham left I was entirely out of the loop, but I noticed the change in noise patterns from upstairs. Within a day or so, Matthew mentioned that Erin was subletting. For starters there were no really disruptive sounds.
Then, a week in I ran into her in the stairwell. We said 'hi' and I mentioned that I had heard her up there, and added that I didn't mean it in a bad way.
It was as though I gave her permission.
One morning there was yelling before 8am.
She never seems to take her shoes off (which are apparently dutch-clogs) and I never imagined that dancers could be so fucking heavy-footed. Okay to be fair - nine times out of ten it takes her in excess of a half hour to take them off after getting in the door. It also seems that she puts them on as soon as she gets out of bed - I guess she wears them in the shower? Oh... and there are hardwood floors.
She's a heavy smoker which means I'm constantly hearing the sliding door rumble open as she goes out to the balcony. I'm only complaining about this one in the context of the perponderance of other factors.
She is a very loud talker when she's excited - which luckily I usually only hear on her way into the building from the street.
I also would never want to complain about this one unless it was a regular issue - which in very nearly is and again, with everything else... Noisy sex at 6:30 in the morning. Three days in a row. Made worse by the fact that it coincided perfectly with a bout of insomnia, cutting my sleep opportunities over three days to approximately half. Oh wheee!
One morning she put the stereo on first thing in the morning and left it on after she left the house - it was on repeat. Augh!
Now we move into the more egrigious stuff...
Lucky her she got a cool voice over gig. And she does fucking vocal warm ups in the bedroom above where I sleep when she wakes up. FUCK!
And...
Two or three times now there has been this semi-rhythmic thumping (not sex, I'm quite certain). It kind of sounds as though she's sitting where her legs are not quite reaching the ground and she's swinging them. It's not that loud. If it was only ten minutes, I'd probably never notice - but for three hours at a time it gets really fucking annoying. I got fed up with it one night last week.
I've been trying to avoid opening that particular can of worms for various reasons (not the least of which is that now that I know how loud a person can be, I'm wondering how loud I am and don't really want Erin angrily complaining to Patrick and Graham about me when they return only to get into a big question of hipocracy).
So I went upstairs and knocked on her door... as soon as I did, the talking inside stopped. No answer, even when I knocked again.
She figured she could pretend she wasn't home? What the fuck?
I went back downstairs. About twenty minutes later, the noise started again.
So, I'm hoping to catch her in the stairs again so she can't pretend she's not there - she can't do that can she?
Monday, February 26, 2007
Bride's Maid's Oscars
Well, I regularly voice my derision for the Oscars. This makes it particularly hard for me to defend watching at least a portion of them every year.
Last night I had every intention of going home from work and playing video games, but as I got to Broadway Station I was feeling both hungry and in need of a little social contract, so I decided to have a burger at Toby's Pub.
The very charming waitress and I kept each other entertained on what was clearly a very slow night for her... and we watched the Academy Awards.
It all started with a disagreement over Ellen DeGeneres's suit. The waitress thought the colour was awful. I though she looked great... but to be fair, I was wearing an orange and green t-shirt with The Hulk on it and a blue cardigan reminiscent of Kurt Cobain. It was laundry day, what can I say?
I'm not going to bother wading through each and evey moment of the night. I'm going to comment on two thematic things and the elements within, but that's all.
The smallest first:
The two major stage performances (not counting the ubiquitous best song performances). The vocal jazz choir sound effect thingy... very very cool. Very cool. The shadow dancers... just seemed dull to me. I didn't fell like the images presented were genuinely representative of the films in question... boiling 'The Departed' down to a gun? Huh? It looked like the credit sequence of a James Bond film. And the first one where they turned into an Oscar statue... cheap-o! That was totally a cut out.
Then the over-arching theme of the evening...
I'm not sure exactly how to phrase this, but I guess perhaps this was the Bride's Maid's Oscars. The biggest example is of course Martin Scorsese finally winning an Oscar for directing. I admit I haven't seen all of The Departed - with a wee bit of irony I turned it off less than halfway through the other night as it wasn't effectively overcoming my grogginess, merely adding to it. I will watch the rest, but it hardly struck me as his best. I'm not so fond of The Aviator, but all of the other four films he's been nominated for are thoroughly worthy of an Oscar. (For the record, that's Raging BUll, Goodfellas, Casino and Gangs of New York.) Hooray for finally getting recognized for work you did 27 years ago.
Similarly Alan Arkin. I actually think the look on Alan Arkin's face when his name was announced read "You gotta be fucking kidding me. You're giving me a defacto 'lifetime achievement award', not awarding me for the actual work I did in this film!"
Helen Mirren - perhaps in less, er... desperate... need for a statue - looking like the sexiest blue-hair I've ever seen, winning after three nominations (albeit this is the first as Best-Actress).
If there was one person in the auditorium in greater need of getting a make-up call... I mean that metaphor in the sporting sense, not the thespian sense, despite the venue... than Scorcese it would be, of course, Peter O'Toole. We can pretty much assume that Lawrence of Arabia will never get an Oscar. I'm not a fan of the, as I called it above 'defacto lifetime achievement award' - but if some one had it coming, it was Peter O'Toole. At least Scorcese is going to have another chance - possibly even as soon as next year, and likely with a better film!
Moving on...
Jennifer Hudson... a bit of a 'Huh?' But she fits the theme. Didn't win American Idol - won an Oscar instead. As inexplicable a win as Marissa Tomei, but a good consolation prize for an American Idol also-ran if you ask me.
And lastly - Al Gore. Do I need to explain how he fits the theme? No? Good. 'Cause if I did, then clearly the best comedy routine of the night was wasted on you. Sorry, Ellen - you too are a runner-up. Gore's routine with Leo DiCaprio (who I admit has become a pretty interesting actor in the past year) was pretty funny, but the punch line was the best. And when Inconvenient Truth won Best Documentary, his "My Fellow Americans" line was priceless. It truly would have been a historical moment if he had announced his candidacy though, huh?
Okay one last thing... as I'm talking about Al Gore. As amusing as it was, the Academy's self-congratulatory announcement about going green was infuriating. It's 2007! The Academy Awards - Liberal Hollywood's biggest night - has just managed to 'go green' this year? How long has the environment been an issue? It's been in the public eye for easily 25 years, and the past 10 or more have been really really significant. It took this long for the Academy to adopt enviromentally low-impact practices? That is retarded.
Last night I had every intention of going home from work and playing video games, but as I got to Broadway Station I was feeling both hungry and in need of a little social contract, so I decided to have a burger at Toby's Pub.
The very charming waitress and I kept each other entertained on what was clearly a very slow night for her... and we watched the Academy Awards.
It all started with a disagreement over Ellen DeGeneres's suit. The waitress thought the colour was awful. I though she looked great... but to be fair, I was wearing an orange and green t-shirt with The Hulk on it and a blue cardigan reminiscent of Kurt Cobain. It was laundry day, what can I say?
I'm not going to bother wading through each and evey moment of the night. I'm going to comment on two thematic things and the elements within, but that's all.
The smallest first:
The two major stage performances (not counting the ubiquitous best song performances). The vocal jazz choir sound effect thingy... very very cool. Very cool. The shadow dancers... just seemed dull to me. I didn't fell like the images presented were genuinely representative of the films in question... boiling 'The Departed' down to a gun? Huh? It looked like the credit sequence of a James Bond film. And the first one where they turned into an Oscar statue... cheap-o! That was totally a cut out.
Then the over-arching theme of the evening...
I'm not sure exactly how to phrase this, but I guess perhaps this was the Bride's Maid's Oscars. The biggest example is of course Martin Scorsese finally winning an Oscar for directing. I admit I haven't seen all of The Departed - with a wee bit of irony I turned it off less than halfway through the other night as it wasn't effectively overcoming my grogginess, merely adding to it. I will watch the rest, but it hardly struck me as his best. I'm not so fond of The Aviator, but all of the other four films he's been nominated for are thoroughly worthy of an Oscar. (For the record, that's Raging BUll, Goodfellas, Casino and Gangs of New York.) Hooray for finally getting recognized for work you did 27 years ago.
Similarly Alan Arkin. I actually think the look on Alan Arkin's face when his name was announced read "You gotta be fucking kidding me. You're giving me a defacto 'lifetime achievement award', not awarding me for the actual work I did in this film!"
Helen Mirren - perhaps in less, er... desperate... need for a statue - looking like the sexiest blue-hair I've ever seen, winning after three nominations (albeit this is the first as Best-Actress).
If there was one person in the auditorium in greater need of getting a make-up call... I mean that metaphor in the sporting sense, not the thespian sense, despite the venue... than Scorcese it would be, of course, Peter O'Toole. We can pretty much assume that Lawrence of Arabia will never get an Oscar. I'm not a fan of the, as I called it above 'defacto lifetime achievement award' - but if some one had it coming, it was Peter O'Toole. At least Scorcese is going to have another chance - possibly even as soon as next year, and likely with a better film!
Moving on...
Jennifer Hudson... a bit of a 'Huh?' But she fits the theme. Didn't win American Idol - won an Oscar instead. As inexplicable a win as Marissa Tomei, but a good consolation prize for an American Idol also-ran if you ask me.
And lastly - Al Gore. Do I need to explain how he fits the theme? No? Good. 'Cause if I did, then clearly the best comedy routine of the night was wasted on you. Sorry, Ellen - you too are a runner-up. Gore's routine with Leo DiCaprio (who I admit has become a pretty interesting actor in the past year) was pretty funny, but the punch line was the best. And when Inconvenient Truth won Best Documentary, his "My Fellow Americans" line was priceless. It truly would have been a historical moment if he had announced his candidacy though, huh?
Okay one last thing... as I'm talking about Al Gore. As amusing as it was, the Academy's self-congratulatory announcement about going green was infuriating. It's 2007! The Academy Awards - Liberal Hollywood's biggest night - has just managed to 'go green' this year? How long has the environment been an issue? It's been in the public eye for easily 25 years, and the past 10 or more have been really really significant. It took this long for the Academy to adopt enviromentally low-impact practices? That is retarded.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
The Evidence
I've said before on this blog. I'm going to say it again. (I haven't said it yet, but I will...)
I just came across a Pixies video that I had never seen.
(I haven't said it yet, but I will...)
Minimalist to an extreme - I'm betting the entire video cost less than a grand to produce - and yet unlike many other extreme minimalist videos, it's very watchable...
(I haven't said it yet, but I will...)
The slow motion is pretty fascinating.
(I haven't said it yet, but...)
The Pixies were fucking genius. One of the best acts ever.
P.S. For the record, as much as the sentiments above are genuine and from the heart, this entry was as much about testing embedding video as anything else... after all, I'd pretty much expressed the sentiment already.
I just came across a Pixies video that I had never seen.
(I haven't said it yet, but I will...)
Minimalist to an extreme - I'm betting the entire video cost less than a grand to produce - and yet unlike many other extreme minimalist videos, it's very watchable...
(I haven't said it yet, but I will...)
The slow motion is pretty fascinating.
(I haven't said it yet, but...)
The Pixies were fucking genius. One of the best acts ever.
P.S. For the record, as much as the sentiments above are genuine and from the heart, this entry was as much about testing embedding video as anything else... after all, I'd pretty much expressed the sentiment already.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Molly Grows Up
I'm trying to wrap my head around the YouTube phenom.
I wonder how long it's going to remain such a cultural touchstone?
How much opportunity is left to exploit with in it (and what is that opportunity / how can I get me a piece)?
Or does it represent a true paradigm shift?
Sadly it has already begun to be corrupted.
Case in point.... Molly Grows Up
I think what amazes me the most is that there are folks out there - young and old who didn't get it right away. How is that possible? Am I truly that much more media savvy than... however many folks?
I suppose it was inevitable, but that doesn't make it less crass.
The mocked ironic voices, the low-budget You Tube staple... it all makes me cringe. Once again, counter-culture co-opted by the corporations. I wonder what Naomi Klein would have to say?
Aparently it's referred to as 'Astroturf' - this faux 'grassroots' marketing.
Is it wrong? Well, so much about advertizing is wrong and this pattern has played out many many times before. I believe we are powerless to stop it, and I'm not even sure I like the greater implications of freedom of speech that would be implied by any legislation that could prevent it.
A necessary evil? Not precisely. It sure isn't necessary. But the lack of boundaries which allow it also allow so much that is necessary. So I suppose that make it a concommitant evil?
Must go... must figure out how to bend the YouTube generation to my nefarious will.
I wonder how long it's going to remain such a cultural touchstone?
How much opportunity is left to exploit with in it (and what is that opportunity / how can I get me a piece)?
Or does it represent a true paradigm shift?
Sadly it has already begun to be corrupted.
Case in point.... Molly Grows Up
I think what amazes me the most is that there are folks out there - young and old who didn't get it right away. How is that possible? Am I truly that much more media savvy than... however many folks?
I suppose it was inevitable, but that doesn't make it less crass.
The mocked ironic voices, the low-budget You Tube staple... it all makes me cringe. Once again, counter-culture co-opted by the corporations. I wonder what Naomi Klein would have to say?
Aparently it's referred to as 'Astroturf' - this faux 'grassroots' marketing.
Is it wrong? Well, so much about advertizing is wrong and this pattern has played out many many times before. I believe we are powerless to stop it, and I'm not even sure I like the greater implications of freedom of speech that would be implied by any legislation that could prevent it.
A necessary evil? Not precisely. It sure isn't necessary. But the lack of boundaries which allow it also allow so much that is necessary. So I suppose that make it a concommitant evil?
Must go... must figure out how to bend the YouTube generation to my nefarious will.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Ultimate American Idol Douchebag - Martik Manoukian A.K.A. - Eccentric
I'm not exactly sure what is at work here, but I have a funny feeling...
Last week in the LA auditions for season six of American Idol, Martik Manoukian made a complete ass of himself. He also uses the performing name 'Eccentric' - though perhaps he deliberately misspells it in some (ahem) cool way like Exentrik.
Where to begin?
The self-delusion in this guy is absolutely epic.
I'm going to assume that the current trend is going to continue... for some reason, his videos keep getting removed from YouTube at a rate unlike any other i-stick who makes a fool of themselves on that show. I don't think Fox gives a shit whether the videos stay up or not - the show really is a one-time thing except for the car-accidents like Martik. They've got a whack of in show promotion - like the drinking cups on the table - so they're happy to be able to say that the show continues to be broadcast on the 'net.
So here is my thinking... fuck-head Manoukian either by seeing the public opinion or perhaps, just perhaps, by simple assesment of the actual clip has come to realise that he looked like a complete and utter knob. And he has since made an effort to attack each and every clip that makes him appear so - he did sing a song of his own writing, so arguably it's copywrite material (though I'm sure Idol required a release). In any case there are probably any number of ways in which he could be manipulating the YouTube policy and rules to have the clips ditched.
But what he cannot do is keep people like me from giving a complete PbP and repeated using his name and tags and so forth to make sure that future google searches on him result in him being revealed as a delusional twit into posterity.
So...
(Play by Play to follow.)
Last week in the LA auditions for season six of American Idol, Martik Manoukian made a complete ass of himself. He also uses the performing name 'Eccentric' - though perhaps he deliberately misspells it in some (ahem) cool way like Exentrik.
Where to begin?
The self-delusion in this guy is absolutely epic.
I'm going to assume that the current trend is going to continue... for some reason, his videos keep getting removed from YouTube at a rate unlike any other i-stick who makes a fool of themselves on that show. I don't think Fox gives a shit whether the videos stay up or not - the show really is a one-time thing except for the car-accidents like Martik. They've got a whack of in show promotion - like the drinking cups on the table - so they're happy to be able to say that the show continues to be broadcast on the 'net.
So here is my thinking... fuck-head Manoukian either by seeing the public opinion or perhaps, just perhaps, by simple assesment of the actual clip has come to realise that he looked like a complete and utter knob. And he has since made an effort to attack each and every clip that makes him appear so - he did sing a song of his own writing, so arguably it's copywrite material (though I'm sure Idol required a release). In any case there are probably any number of ways in which he could be manipulating the YouTube policy and rules to have the clips ditched.
But what he cannot do is keep people like me from giving a complete PbP and repeated using his name and tags and so forth to make sure that future google searches on him result in him being revealed as a delusional twit into posterity.
So...
(Play by Play to follow.)
Veritable (Relative) Assault of Controversial Attention
Not sure exactly what caused it, but my last post about Little Mosque on the Prairie was the first evidence that my blog is being read.
I got comments. Five of them!
Perhaps considering the controversial nature of the responses I should be taking this more seriously, but I have to admit that I'm really still just stuck in the cycle of being giddy about actually being read!
I will wade into the fray if it seems like it's relevant when I return...
Oh yeah... I'm going away for nearly a week.
I'm actually quite excited about it.
I'm going 'home' to see my Dad.
I love my Dad. But no doubt we are very different animals. We're never going to have a 'father-son fishing trip.'
It's been over two years since I Iast 'went home.' I've seen him in that time, but I haven't made it to Prince George. For at least half a year he's been saying 'you should just hop on one of our planes and come up for the weekend.' That's nowhere near as 'Daddy's flying me to the Hamptons on his jet' as it sounds. He has worked for Northern Thunderbird Air for around forty years. Every Thursday a plane goes from Vancouver to Prince George and every Monday one comes back. It's simply a perk.
So we've been agreeing that I should just spontaneously do that for ages. It never happens.
So before Christmas we agreed that we'd pick a weekend in the New Year and stick to it.
Dad said "Any weekend but the second weekend in February. I've got a curling bonspiel."
I countered "Heck, that's exactly why I'm coming up then."
My limit in Prince George is about 3 days before I go stir crazy. But I really like watching curling - even curled with Dad when I was a teenager.
Dad is a lifer. And he's even won some significant stuff in his day. Curling is a really big deal for him, though his knees don't let him be competitive anymore.
So I'm volunteering at the bonspiel and hanging out with Dad. We'll be busy as heck, the time will fly and we'll be doing something together that has meaning to us both. We'll get in a few beers at the clubhouse - my current moratorium on beer is going to have to be tabled for the weekend - we'll probably be exhausted, but in the end I'm thinking it promises to be one of the best times we've spent together in years.
I called him last week to confirm the flight and while we were talking he said "This is going to be a lot of fun." I had a little moment of YEEES! Nailed that one!
I got comments. Five of them!
Perhaps considering the controversial nature of the responses I should be taking this more seriously, but I have to admit that I'm really still just stuck in the cycle of being giddy about actually being read!
I will wade into the fray if it seems like it's relevant when I return...
Oh yeah... I'm going away for nearly a week.
I'm actually quite excited about it.
I'm going 'home' to see my Dad.
I love my Dad. But no doubt we are very different animals. We're never going to have a 'father-son fishing trip.'
It's been over two years since I Iast 'went home.' I've seen him in that time, but I haven't made it to Prince George. For at least half a year he's been saying 'you should just hop on one of our planes and come up for the weekend.' That's nowhere near as 'Daddy's flying me to the Hamptons on his jet' as it sounds. He has worked for Northern Thunderbird Air for around forty years. Every Thursday a plane goes from Vancouver to Prince George and every Monday one comes back. It's simply a perk.
So we've been agreeing that I should just spontaneously do that for ages. It never happens.
So before Christmas we agreed that we'd pick a weekend in the New Year and stick to it.
Dad said "Any weekend but the second weekend in February. I've got a curling bonspiel."
I countered "Heck, that's exactly why I'm coming up then."
My limit in Prince George is about 3 days before I go stir crazy. But I really like watching curling - even curled with Dad when I was a teenager.
Dad is a lifer. And he's even won some significant stuff in his day. Curling is a really big deal for him, though his knees don't let him be competitive anymore.
So I'm volunteering at the bonspiel and hanging out with Dad. We'll be busy as heck, the time will fly and we'll be doing something together that has meaning to us both. We'll get in a few beers at the clubhouse - my current moratorium on beer is going to have to be tabled for the weekend - we'll probably be exhausted, but in the end I'm thinking it promises to be one of the best times we've spent together in years.
I called him last week to confirm the flight and while we were talking he said "This is going to be a lot of fun." I had a little moment of YEEES! Nailed that one!
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Head Space Sickness
This one is just so unlikely that I have to add it to the list of things I've blogged about - though I haven't got much to say about it...
ASTRONAUT CHARGED IN ATTEMPTED MURDER PLOT IN NASA LOVE-TRIANGLE
It's all over the news. It's just too strange a story on an other wise slow news day.
I have lost track of the original article I read, which is too bad as I can't find the quote that amused me the most in it anywhere else. It was a NASA spokesman - I assume James Hartsfield who is quoted in article after article as saying the parallel statement that "Nowak's status as an astronaut is unchanged; I cannot speculate on what may happen in the future" - who said something to the effect of "As far as we are concerned, Lisa Marie Nowak is still an astronaut." Practically the same thing, but something about the latter strikes me as funny.
With little doubt, Lisa Marie Nowak will be this year's Tonya Harding/Lorena Bobbit/Amy Fisher.
Hmmm. Now here's something... I was once stalked - long story not going to get deep into it here, but I'll sum it up with a few phrases: break and enter; 14 phone calls at 3AM in one night; spying through my window; reading my journal; 13 holes in the apartment wall with a hammer; and to her limited credit - ended once the police got involved - but the salient point... her name? Lisa Marie. Well, not exactly. She had changed the spelling of 'Lisa' to 'Lhesa' because it provided better numerological results.
I guess the lesson is don't name your daughters "Lisa Marie." (It's probably not a good idea to name your sons "Lisa Marie" either, but let's assume that that is academic.
ASTRONAUT CHARGED IN ATTEMPTED MURDER PLOT IN NASA LOVE-TRIANGLE
It's all over the news. It's just too strange a story on an other wise slow news day.
I have lost track of the original article I read, which is too bad as I can't find the quote that amused me the most in it anywhere else. It was a NASA spokesman - I assume James Hartsfield who is quoted in article after article as saying the parallel statement that "Nowak's status as an astronaut is unchanged; I cannot speculate on what may happen in the future" - who said something to the effect of "As far as we are concerned, Lisa Marie Nowak is still an astronaut." Practically the same thing, but something about the latter strikes me as funny.
With little doubt, Lisa Marie Nowak will be this year's Tonya Harding/Lorena Bobbit/Amy Fisher.
Hmmm. Now here's something... I was once stalked - long story not going to get deep into it here, but I'll sum it up with a few phrases: break and enter; 14 phone calls at 3AM in one night; spying through my window; reading my journal; 13 holes in the apartment wall with a hammer; and to her limited credit - ended once the police got involved - but the salient point... her name? Lisa Marie. Well, not exactly. She had changed the spelling of 'Lisa' to 'Lhesa' because it provided better numerological results.
I guess the lesson is don't name your daughters "Lisa Marie." (It's probably not a good idea to name your sons "Lisa Marie" either, but let's assume that that is academic.
Monday, February 05, 2007
Sextup... No, Quin... Okay - Quadruplets should be saved from their parents
Meet the Douchebags.
They're a nice young religious couple who believe that letting your children die when action could feasibly save them is a righteous way to live their lives.
They believe that blood transfusions can also infuse a body with sin. Yes, that's right, their definition of 'bad blood' means that you can become a bad person by accepting the blood of a bad person into your body. I think it must have something to do with the Red Cross not screening for Dark Side Midichlorians.
They also believe in the sanctity of every precious life. Or so they say. In fact, what it means is that they believe that their own souls are precious. They don't want to go to hell. They are scared that if someone else forces them to allow their children to have a life-saving proceedure which happens to be against the tenets of their specious religion, that they - the parents - will fall from grace with god. Therefore it is better for them (and supposedly the children) to allow their children to die. Perhaps the children have been spared. Not from hell, but from being raised by parents who have fallen into the Watchtower Society's trap of spiritual slavery.
It borders on hypocrisy that the Douchbags would allow themselves into a pregnancy which could only be achieved by modern medical miracle, yet not accept the added benefit of saving their children's lives via those same modern miracles.
Or perhaps the Douchebags just got in over their heads? One (or two, or five) children too many? And luckily for them their religious beliefs supported a choice that would ease their load?
Personally, I think that the Douchbags have forfeitted their right to a say in the treatment of their babies. There is a Hypocratic Oath for doctors. If you ask me there should be one for parenting.
What are the surviving kids going to think when they grow up? It's not like this is going to be something that can be hidden from them. It's simply too public. They will put it together. They'll Google (v. 11.51) it and find a backlogged history that their church cannot keep covered. They could even read this very post. (Sorry for calling your parent's 'douchbags', kids - but they are, and I hope you are recognizing that by now, because your disdain is the true hell which they deserve for reasons I shall discuss henceforth. If your real family name was not being kept secret, I wouldn't have to make up a symbolic one.) They can read that their own Mother and Father were willing to let them suffer and die so that THEY THEMSELVES might avoid going to hell... or at least avoid being ostracized by their JW elbow-buddies. Two (so far) of thier former wombmates have already died. It could have been any of them. That's how much your parents care. They are willing to let you die so that their social life with YHWH isn't disturbed.
The Douchbags have every right to refuse their own medical treatment, but if they have no such right to impose such gobbledy-gook on children too young to have a say. It's nonsense. The sooner the government can re-set and save those babies from their parent's dogma the better. And hopefully it will set a clear precedent for the future so that next time some a-wipe zealot squirts out a prodigious litter in need of ICU attention, they'll get it without any sort of interference from a collectively insane religious sect.
Apparently before someone can refuse medical treatment they need to satisfy three conditions: they must be deemed competent, adequately informed and be free of coercion. (I'm not sure exactly how this - particularly the second item - is applied in DNR cases or in the case of people who have declared that they are not to be left on life support if their quality of life has been compromised, but that's a different issue.) So let's break that down quickly...
Competent: I'm thinking that if 5 week old babies were considered competent that we'd give them the right to vote.
Adequately informed: "Hello 5-week-old-baby. I'm your paediatrician. If you don't get new, potentially sin-filled, blood into your vascular system ASAP, you are going to die and possibly be saved from a life ruined by a tidal wave of sectarian gibberish and lies imposed upon you by Ma & Pa Douchbag and their zealot chums. Stare blankly or cry if you understand."
Coercion: I think it's pretty safe to say that any choice, positive or negative (however one defines those based upon their political and religious beliefs) is being forced upon the child, so I figure that we have to go with the default - which by definition of these conditions is to adhere to a treatment regimen. But even if we look past the kids to the parents... I'm going to turn to an excerpt here to make my point: (Full Text.)
"Congregations are deliberately kept to no more than about 100 people so everyone can get to know each other, said Mr. Ruge. They spend hours together doing door-to-door canvassing and attend a number of meetings each week, he said. Other parents of multiple-birth children say such aid is crucial in dealing with the monumental child care challenge.
However, the infants still have months of medical care in hospital ahead of them, with their survival not at all assured, physicians say.
Extremely premature babies experience a drop in levels of hemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that transports oxygen from the lungs to the rest of the body, to the point where anemia often develops, said Ian Mitchell, a Calgary pediatrician who has dealt with Jehovah's Witness patients.
It is very common for such infants to require transfusions as a result, he said. Jehovah's Witnesses, citing various parts of the Bible, believe that blood is sacred to God and that Christianity forbids its consumption, storage or transfusion.
In a paper published with Dr. Mitchell last month in the journal Pediatrics and Child Health, Ms. Guichon argued that patients and their families sometimes feel pressure from the organization to oppose a transfusion even when they might feel differently themselves.
The fear, both explicit and implied, is that anyone who agrees to accept a transfusion will be banished from the organization, and lose the social network on which they depend, said Ms. Guichon. That prospect may be even more frightening for the B.C. couple, given how much they will need the help of their fellow Witnesses, she said.
But Mr. Ruge said Jehovah's Witnesses do not reject transfusions because they feel coerced. In addition to their religious beliefs, most are convinced that they are better off physicially without the blood, and there are many alternatives now to transfusions, he said.
"I wouldn't have a blood transfusion for a million bucks."
However, he did not deny the consequences of willingly undergoing a transfusion. Anyone who does so "wouldn't be a Jehovah's Witness [any more], of his own accord," said Mr. Ruge. "Jehovah's Witnesses follow the teachings of Christ and by your own actions you wouldn't be one."
They're a nice young religious couple who believe that letting your children die when action could feasibly save them is a righteous way to live their lives.
They believe that blood transfusions can also infuse a body with sin. Yes, that's right, their definition of 'bad blood' means that you can become a bad person by accepting the blood of a bad person into your body. I think it must have something to do with the Red Cross not screening for Dark Side Midichlorians.
They also believe in the sanctity of every precious life. Or so they say. In fact, what it means is that they believe that their own souls are precious. They don't want to go to hell. They are scared that if someone else forces them to allow their children to have a life-saving proceedure which happens to be against the tenets of their specious religion, that they - the parents - will fall from grace with god. Therefore it is better for them (and supposedly the children) to allow their children to die. Perhaps the children have been spared. Not from hell, but from being raised by parents who have fallen into the Watchtower Society's trap of spiritual slavery.
It borders on hypocrisy that the Douchbags would allow themselves into a pregnancy which could only be achieved by modern medical miracle, yet not accept the added benefit of saving their children's lives via those same modern miracles.
Or perhaps the Douchebags just got in over their heads? One (or two, or five) children too many? And luckily for them their religious beliefs supported a choice that would ease their load?
Personally, I think that the Douchbags have forfeitted their right to a say in the treatment of their babies. There is a Hypocratic Oath for doctors. If you ask me there should be one for parenting.
What are the surviving kids going to think when they grow up? It's not like this is going to be something that can be hidden from them. It's simply too public. They will put it together. They'll Google (v. 11.51) it and find a backlogged history that their church cannot keep covered. They could even read this very post. (Sorry for calling your parent's 'douchbags', kids - but they are, and I hope you are recognizing that by now, because your disdain is the true hell which they deserve for reasons I shall discuss henceforth. If your real family name was not being kept secret, I wouldn't have to make up a symbolic one.) They can read that their own Mother and Father were willing to let them suffer and die so that THEY THEMSELVES might avoid going to hell... or at least avoid being ostracized by their JW elbow-buddies. Two (so far) of thier former wombmates have already died. It could have been any of them. That's how much your parents care. They are willing to let you die so that their social life with YHWH isn't disturbed.
The Douchbags have every right to refuse their own medical treatment, but if they have no such right to impose such gobbledy-gook on children too young to have a say. It's nonsense. The sooner the government can re-set and save those babies from their parent's dogma the better. And hopefully it will set a clear precedent for the future so that next time some a-wipe zealot squirts out a prodigious litter in need of ICU attention, they'll get it without any sort of interference from a collectively insane religious sect.
Apparently before someone can refuse medical treatment they need to satisfy three conditions: they must be deemed competent, adequately informed and be free of coercion. (I'm not sure exactly how this - particularly the second item - is applied in DNR cases or in the case of people who have declared that they are not to be left on life support if their quality of life has been compromised, but that's a different issue.) So let's break that down quickly...
Competent: I'm thinking that if 5 week old babies were considered competent that we'd give them the right to vote.
Adequately informed: "Hello 5-week-old-baby. I'm your paediatrician. If you don't get new, potentially sin-filled, blood into your vascular system ASAP, you are going to die and possibly be saved from a life ruined by a tidal wave of sectarian gibberish and lies imposed upon you by Ma & Pa Douchbag and their zealot chums. Stare blankly or cry if you understand."
Coercion: I think it's pretty safe to say that any choice, positive or negative (however one defines those based upon their political and religious beliefs) is being forced upon the child, so I figure that we have to go with the default - which by definition of these conditions is to adhere to a treatment regimen. But even if we look past the kids to the parents... I'm going to turn to an excerpt here to make my point: (Full Text.)
"Congregations are deliberately kept to no more than about 100 people so everyone can get to know each other, said Mr. Ruge. They spend hours together doing door-to-door canvassing and attend a number of meetings each week, he said. Other parents of multiple-birth children say such aid is crucial in dealing with the monumental child care challenge.
However, the infants still have months of medical care in hospital ahead of them, with their survival not at all assured, physicians say.
Extremely premature babies experience a drop in levels of hemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that transports oxygen from the lungs to the rest of the body, to the point where anemia often develops, said Ian Mitchell, a Calgary pediatrician who has dealt with Jehovah's Witness patients.
It is very common for such infants to require transfusions as a result, he said. Jehovah's Witnesses, citing various parts of the Bible, believe that blood is sacred to God and that Christianity forbids its consumption, storage or transfusion.
In a paper published with Dr. Mitchell last month in the journal Pediatrics and Child Health, Ms. Guichon argued that patients and their families sometimes feel pressure from the organization to oppose a transfusion even when they might feel differently themselves.
The fear, both explicit and implied, is that anyone who agrees to accept a transfusion will be banished from the organization, and lose the social network on which they depend, said Ms. Guichon. That prospect may be even more frightening for the B.C. couple, given how much they will need the help of their fellow Witnesses, she said.
But Mr. Ruge said Jehovah's Witnesses do not reject transfusions because they feel coerced. In addition to their religious beliefs, most are convinced that they are better off physicially without the blood, and there are many alternatives now to transfusions, he said.
"I wouldn't have a blood transfusion for a million bucks."
However, he did not deny the consequences of willingly undergoing a transfusion. Anyone who does so "wouldn't be a Jehovah's Witness [any more], of his own accord," said Mr. Ruge. "Jehovah's Witnesses follow the teachings of Christ and by your own actions you wouldn't be one."
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Little Mosque, Better Fare
Okay, so I'm glad to be eating most of my words.
Episodes two and three of Little Mosque on the Prairie have now aired and gosh if they weren't pretty funny.
The pro-am acting has largely been dialled back and a few of the actors really shine - Sitara Hewitt springs to mind, who is not only funny and real as an actor, but gorgeous as well.
Additionally the bad word play has practically disappeared. (Allah, be praised!)
The characters are developing nicely. Still a bit surface in some cases, but hey, it's only been three episodes! The range of characters is quite pleasing. Varying levels of devotion to Islam - even within single families - and plenty of universal virtues and foibles.
Yeah, I still with it were a bit edgier, but I think I'm going to have to relent on that matter. Edgier would appeal to a narrower audience - quite possibly even the Muslim audience that likely make up the shows core viewers - and would probably be the kiss of death to a show which is already pushing the boundaries of viewer expectations.
I can hardly wait for the curling episode!
Episodes two and three of Little Mosque on the Prairie have now aired and gosh if they weren't pretty funny.
The pro-am acting has largely been dialled back and a few of the actors really shine - Sitara Hewitt springs to mind, who is not only funny and real as an actor, but gorgeous as well.
Additionally the bad word play has practically disappeared. (Allah, be praised!)
The characters are developing nicely. Still a bit surface in some cases, but hey, it's only been three episodes! The range of characters is quite pleasing. Varying levels of devotion to Islam - even within single families - and plenty of universal virtues and foibles.
Yeah, I still with it were a bit edgier, but I think I'm going to have to relent on that matter. Edgier would appeal to a narrower audience - quite possibly even the Muslim audience that likely make up the shows core viewers - and would probably be the kiss of death to a show which is already pushing the boundaries of viewer expectations.
I can hardly wait for the curling episode!
Friday, February 02, 2007
Mooninites Attack!
In the whiplash splash of opinion that is the internet, I am over a day behind on this one... but last night I was telling two friends (and they'll tell two friends...) about the 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force Bomb Hoax.' They had not yet heard the news, so I suppose there's still some value in weighing in... even if it's just so I have something to reflect back upon in my dotage.
So... who is the mental midget who called in the lite-brite? And once the police are on the case, they have to follow through.
But here's the thing, THEY WERE UP FOR A WEEK! Do the math... of the four flights involved in 9/11 the longest any one flight went from scheduled departure to crashing was just over two hours (United 93 which crashed in Shanksville) - let's call it an even two - that's 84 terrorist hi-jacked flights that Al-Queida could have sandwiched into a week if it had taken people the same length of time to notice that there was a big column of smoke billowing out of New York.
I really don't know which is worse. The retarded paranoia that leads to thinking bird-flipping low-res cartoon characters hate America, or the sharp as a brick instincts that keep said paranoia in check longer than all the days strung together that Jack Bauer has been awake for public consumption. (And how long is it going to take before there is a YouTube video about CTU fighting Mooninites.)
I'm particularly bothered by the incessant use of the word 'hoax.' It implies that the folks at Adult Swim, or the Cartoon Network, or Turner Broadcasting had every intention that someone would take their publicity campaign as a bomb threat.
Having said all that, the media conglomerate who will benefit outrageously from this campaign should be expected to pay the public expense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)