White Guys 43, Black Guys 1 - Black Guys declare Victory, Chicks Shut Out Yet Again

Okay, so we’re all happy for Barry Dunham... now what?

We will all remember where we were last night when John McCain made his dignified walk across the stage and it was no longer in question, Barack Obama was going to be the 44^th President of the United States.

It strikes me as important to get this down (or 'up in the cloud') for posterity.

I was at a rather small bar in the West End with my girlfriend, Jodie and our friend Mike. We shared a ridiculous number of surprisingly good hot wings, several pints of beer and endured the cheering of hockey fans on the other side of the bar watching the Canucks shut out the Predators. The CNN feed on our side of the bar had no volume, but I had picked up wireless from the coffee shop next door and was giving additional updates and context as the projections came in.

We sparred back and forth about the value of projections. Myself on the defensive... though I guess I'll even do the other two a favour and prepare a hot dish of crow for them – perhaps I can get the bar's recipe for tangy hotness. Yes, projections in 2000 were famously wrong at a late hour, but as I pointed out they are based on a long history of statistical analysis and that the laws of large numbers make them very reliable as a whole, if individually unstable... and of course the same law means that every now and then the whole collected projection can go to hell, but that's extremely unusual and the wise money can be put on the projections. Anyhow, I belabour a point which I had the grace to not rub in then – or was it that anytime I opened my mouth I was shouted down? Anyhow, in type... "Nyah nyah!"

When McCain took the stage to concede they switched the audio from the game to CNN.

I was disappointed on some level that McCain didn't make the core of his speech something to the effect of "YOU – my own party – threw me under the bus, you fuckers!" But I have to respect his reserve and dignity. It has to be tough to know that in the past 24 hours your life has peaked. Not many of us will ever face that moment except from a long nostalgic way off, and fewer will be able to say that that moment came when we were 72 years old.

By the time Obama was making his acceptance speech, the entire place was quiet... though it didn't take long before one drunk blow-hard was sharing his opinion with everyone. Once that fellow spoke up it wasn't long before the spell had been broken for others and they too quit their rapt listening and began chatting again.

By my count it took 32 minutes from McCain's concession until Obama was campaigning for 2012. You'll recall the sentence "We may not get there in one year or even in one term."

When Obama's speech was over and the hockey game was back on I took my moment to shout the defiant sentence that had been floating in my head, ready for this very moment, for days... "Take that 'Real America!'"

No one has any real reason to believe my own claims on this, but I called this (yeah it was a 50/50 chance) back at the DNC. In a conversation I declared that Obama had for all practical purposes asked Joe Biden to be the Vice President, not just the VP candidate. My intention at the time had been that I felt this election was the Dems to lose. Over the past seven weeks I have allowed myself to get shaken from time to time into caution by nay sayers and conspiracy believers. There were arguments that were hard to dismiss, but I didn't want to believe. 'The Bradley Effect.' 'Massive digital election fraud.' 'Military Coup by Cheney.' (Okay, I suppose that last one may still be an option.) But time after time I kept coming back to my guarded optimism. Every time Sarah Palin opened her mouth; add the economic disaster that landed largely in the Republican's hands; tepid debate performance after performance by McCain; in fighting; Republican endorsements of Obama by the likes of Colin Powell; McCain's apparent frustration and eventual veiled despondency – the list goes on.

In the past week I felt a growing sense of comfort. Less and less did my doubts rise. A few days ago I told myself that it was no longer worth worrying about and that the question was now whether Barack would merely win or win by a landslide.

Last night, shortly after I arrived at the bar they called Pennsylvania in Obama's favour and I truly felt like I knew it was over. A little while later Ohio was declared his and I breathed a shuddering sigh of relief. There were a few moments where I felt emotional over the remainder of the night as I was defending the value of projections, but I had largely already processed my feelings of relief over the past week.

Somewhere in the darkest part of my soul I find myself wishing that the first words out of Obama's mouth when he stood at the podium last night had been "Allah Ackbar!" Possibly followed by "Learn your Morning Prayer by 5am January 21st or lose your tongues, infidels!" And then with a puckish grin "Heh heh... just kidding."

Today it seems everyone's Facebook status is either a statement of relief (okay, there is one exception I've noticed – a friend who falls in the category of religious right... I shake my head at their dire warning of the end of days) or a humorous comment about the sudden lack of news.

I feel lighter today, or as though I've been holding my breath for eight years.

It's like the end of a TV series. The final episode has come and gone and everyone will be discussing it for days, how in the final scene Hillary woke up and said to Bill "I just had the weirdest dream." Or perhaps it's more like Star Wars... the Rebel Alliance prevails in the final reel and deposes the evil Empire.

In any case, the sequel is bound to be interesting. He's put on one hell of a show, but now he really has to perform. It's going to be virtually impossible for him to live up to expectations, but he has the acumen to redirect those expectations towards realities both as they actualize and as they are anticipated. Let's face it, if the woodland critters came from the forest and gathered at his feet with wide-eyed adorable expectancy, it still wouldn't be enough for his detractors.

Hey Premise Media! I Wilfully Watched a Pirate Version of Your Crappy Movie!

I've previously trumpeted my disdain for the politics behind Expelled. In short, it's a film starring noted (ahem) 'Smart Guy' Ben Stein wherein the producers explore the seeming enormous number of academics who have been ousted from their demagogic positions or denied tenure allegedly because they have aligned themselves with Intelligent Design. The film asks "Shouldn't both sides of this 'scientific controversy' be taught alongside one another? Isn't that what academic freedom and free speech are all about?"

I won't go deep into the answer, but briefly it is a resounding 'no.' That's not the film's position – far from it – that is my position. It's also the position of practically any genuine scientist or science education professional you can find. Intelligent Design (I.D.) is not science. It is not falsifiable. (Hence not science.) It is not even close to being accepted by scientific consensus (For the record, scientific consensus does not mean EVERY scientist on the planet agrees, it simply means that the vast majority do; that the notion has been properly peer reviewed; and it's hypotheses have either held up under scrutiny or been adjusted so that they do.) and thus does not constitute a scientific controversy. The 'scientists' who support it generally AREN'T accredited scientists or are scientists in disciplines that have nothing to do with evolution. The demagogues in the film who have allegedly been oppressed have demonstrably all been removed/denied tenure for entirely separate reasons (And if said reasons are 'trumped up' to give legitimacy to the purported 'real reason' (affiliation with I.D.) then where are the legal proceedings to untangle that misappropriation of justice?). Anyhow, there is much more that could be said on this, but I'm not going to retread more territory that has been well worn by more accomplished sceptics than I. If you feel the need to delve (and there's some good juice – just look into the entire P.Z. Meyers boondoggle) I recommend Expelled Exposed.

And now, in paragraph three, I finally get to my purpose.... Since I first heard of Expelled I've wanted to see it out of morbid curiosity. There is also the underlying need to be able to righteously answer "As a matter of fact, I have!" when defiantly challenged "Oh yeah? Have you even watched the movie?" But, as a result of all their underhanded shenanigans (demonstrably duplicitous interview requests; the aforementioned P.Z. Meyers affair; the unlicensed use of copy-written material; misleading misquoting of Darwin – it's all in the Expelled Exposed site) I am loathe to give those assholes a dime of my money. So, last week when an opportunity to watch a pirated version of the film floated my way, I jumped.

It would be too easy so simply dismiss the film by declaring that there is 106 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

It took me at least two hours to get through it. It is a remarkably uncompelling. Three times I had to rewind and watch as much and more than five minutes over again. Not because it was too complex to follow – no, it's pretty Mickey Mouse (to say nothing if it's transparent theistic agenda). Not because it was so fascinating I had to see it again – Christ, no. But because it is so dull that my mind would not just wander, but go on a full-on walk-about.

Many of it's most immediate critics (like Richard Dawkins) criticize it for its basic filmic technique, but why bother? Watching on a small screen, many of these purported failures were largely invisible if they existed in the first place. The real problem with the film is that it simply isn't in the least engaging.

If you, like me, have a need to buoy up your awareness of I.D.'s ridiculous creationist agenda, then go for it. Find a free copy, and sacrifice two hours of your life to an exercise in logical fallacy. But seriously, if you are even only marginally intrigued... save yourself.

A Pleasant Surprise from Vista

This is pretty much a pointless little celebration.

I just discovered that Vista will allow me to write a blog post in word and then it will automatically post it. I know I am only moderately 2.0 literate, but this one just boggles my mind. How perfect! No more of that crappy writing online and then losing the post in a browser refresh! Not that I've never lost anything on my computer – though the stability of Windows is far better than it once was. I can't recall the last time I lost a document to a failure to save on time. But on line... Grrrrr. I probably lost my initial will to blog to the too common loss of postings when writing on line. I did eventually learn to write in a word doc and then transfer it... I even have a file on my desktop titled 'Blog to Post' which is the file I save my latest post to on a rotating basis. But this discovery... wee haw!

I'll still have to learn how to add pictures and tags, but this strikes me as a personal revolution.

HEY LOOK! A PICTURE! A RANDOM ONE JODIE TOOK A FEW MONTHS AGO. Okay, now to figure out how to tag...

Ha ha! Screw YOU telemarketers! Screw YOU!

To the horror of more than one girlfriend - and the the amusement of several - I've never been particularly nice to telemarketers.

My Mother always used to simply tell them in a severe tone that they were wasting her time and, when she was particularly annoyed she'd use the same words Dad used while watching Hockey Night in Canada.

I'm sure that when I got my first place of my own with my own phone I probably resorted to the same tactics for some time - though I do not specifically recall. I soon bemoaned the lack of a national Do Not Call List. I had heard about how one existed in other countries - specifically the U.S. - and how you could get your number put on the list and then telemarketers were legally obligated to refrain from calling you. I can't imagine how this worked efficiently in the days before high-functioning computers, but that's not germane to my point.

Around the turn of the century I put two and two together and realised how important call-times are to telemarketers. I even spent some time working in an inbound (I.E. I was NOT a telemarketer.) call-centre and had the importance of call times repeated to me by upper management like a mantra. This was where I learned my most dastardly trick - the one that horrified some and delighted others...



Upon realizing that I had connected to a telemarketer I would express my exaggerated faux-interest in their product ("Why yes, I'd LOVE to get Guns & Ammo magazine for a bargain price.") and then 'discover' that I needed to attend to something ("Oh, just a moment I need to get a pen and paper." or "Oh crap, I'll be right back, the kids are playing in the oven."). At this point I'd set the phone down - off the hook - and go about my business. And now comes the hard part for the telemarketer... the clock is ticking. Their sales metrics are going to hell the longer they wait, but I have assured them that I REALLY want to give them a sale. The call is taking a longer and longer time every moment, but they have a seemingly guaranteed customer on the hook. The question becomes 'how long do they wait?'

The real art of it is finding the perfect moment to come back, just before they are about to give up and reassure them that you'll only be a moment longer and how you can hardly wait to get your hands on the great deal they are offering. If you can catch them at the perfect moment, this is really when you score big points - how can they give up now?

You may think this is unfair and evil. "It's not the telemarketer's fault." Well, not really. But they did take the job. And it sure as hell isn't my fault that they're calling me. I figure that in a country lacking a DNCL this is a pretty good tactic to put to use. Again, from working in a call centre I know that every number that is ever used goes into a file - with various other info (money spent, credit card numbers if applicable, possibly addresses) is a section for notes. And every time I screw around a telemarketer, the more likely it is that they are going to add that fact to their notes - eventually earning capital letters or bold face or even a radio-buttoned flag... warning that I'm not worth the effort. A defacto - 'Do Not Call'.



Since I first got call waiting I have quit answering dubious numbers. But with a cell phone I'm still on hand and disturbed by the interruption. For some time now it has also been necessary for individual companies to have their own internal 'DNC' lists... but who knows how well maintained these are and if there isn't a date at which the request runs out - I'd swear that some places I've told to quit calling have begun again after six months or so.



But today that all changes. The Canadian National Do Not Call List has begun. It took hours this morning to get my number registered - the flood of people must have been enormous.



I'm also amused by this article warning us about the exemptions (Why the fuck are newspapers allowed to keep calling selling subscriptions? Can someone explain that?) and portenting that by signing up for the DNCL we're just going to create a need for more direct mail and spam. Hmmm... well, I've got the required wording for effective 'No Junk Mail' filtering on the snail mail box, and my spam filter on my email has proven for two years or so to be extremely effective. So, what marketting firestorm exactly is it that I am bringing down upon my head?

I Never Thought I'd Tag an Entry with both 'Hitler' and 'Sitcom'

A sitcom about a happily married Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun in a typical 'Pleasantville'-esque American 50's suburbia... except apparently it's England. Though only Neville Chamberlain speaks with a British accent.

"Heil, Honey, I'm Home!"

(and the 2nd half, if you are truly so inclined)

No. Really.

Not a joke. I mean that in every way. It wasn't funny. I don't even mean that it was too taseless to be funny. It really isn't funny. It was cancelled after one episode. It was a real (attempt at a) sitcom, when it might have been funny as a one-time-only SNL sketch.

Apparently, (and this may be retrodicting) it was intended to be a parody of bad-sitcoms. The thing abour parodying something bad is that you can't afford to be bad yourself.

Whoever created this series should be forced to sit and watch it, Clockwork Orange-style until they promise to never do it again.

Where no Cake has Gone Before...

Geeks don't often come out looking good. Their absurd fidelity to the minutae of their fetishism regularly triggers the scorn of those of us with some sense of what really matter in the real world.

Case in point:

On the Food Network show 'Ace of Cakes' (geeky enough in it's own right, a show about decorating cakes) they recently did a show where they elaborately decorated a cake to look like the command deck of the original Star Trek series Enterprise. (Add geek level number two.)

It is cartoonily impressive.

But it gets better. Meanwhile over at trekmovie.com, they got into a good debate about it. (Level three.)
Comment number 6, Sean, goes WAY over the top - which is noted above as being parody of how Trek fans geek-out and nit-pick. This may be true, or it may be retrodicting. Either way, the need to defend it is telling in it's own right. Yet it goes on. And on. And on. The statement sparks a small online fracas that extends well beyond the borders of cakes and Trek (as if that wasn't bad enough). It gets a bit boring to be honest, but a quick skim to see how retarded it gets is worth a peek on a slow day. That is if you can handle a flame-war over the dismissive use of the word 'First' (I kid you not.) and who has the right to use ALL CAPS when and where.

A Stern Phone-call from the Boss

I know that this is a week late, but I had a busy week last week with reshoots on 'Beast...' so I'm just getting around to watching the DNC & RNC today... heck, I'm not even going to finish watching DNC highlights today, let alone catch up on analysis of the various passes, yields and of course Hillary's dramatic movement to suspend proceedure.
THAT was great theatre.
But then, Melissa Etheridge gets up on stage for a victory medley of songs.
I'm not really a fan, but I did buy her first CD back in... '88 was it that it came out? For that matter, when was it that she came out?
Anyhow... I'm off topic by a mile in just two sentences.
M.E. was at her throaty best on-stage in Denver last week... except for one lousy little galling thing.

I imagine that she took a phone call later that night.

M.E.: Hello?
B.S.: Hi. Is that Melissa?
M.E.: Yes. Who is this?
B.S.: Bruce.
M.E.: Bruce? I don't know any... oh. wait. THAT Bruce.
B.S.: Yeah. That Bruce.
M.E.: Bruce, from New Jersey, Bruce.
B.S.: Exactly.
M.E.: Look, Bruce I think I can guess what this is all about...
B.S.: You do, do you?
M.E.: Yes...
B.S.: Then why the fuck do I have to make this phone call!?
M.E.: I thought...
B.S.: First Reagan, now this.
M.E.: Well yeah, but he was a Republican.
B.S.: What kind of difference does that make?
M.E.: You let Kerry use 'No Surrender' - heck you even came out and played...
B.S.: What does that song mean?
M.E.: You mean 'No Surrender?'
B.S.: Yes. What does it mean?
M.E.: It means... uh...
B.S.: Don't think to hard now. It's right there in the lyrics...
M.E.: "No retreat... no surrender..."
B.S.: Riiiight. It was a good motto for that campaign...Christ, that fucking campaign...
M.E.: So...
B.S.: That's what it means. Simple as that. Now... what does 'Born in the U.S.A.' mean?
M.E.: "I was Bor-"
B.S.: NO!!!
M.E.: You say it like fifty times -
B.S.: It's ironic!
M.E.: But you sing it so anthemically.
B.S.: That's anger Melissa! Anger! Do you understand irate anger!?!
M.E.: Is that intended to be ironic?
B.S.: I swear to god, next R&R.H.o.F dinner, I'm gonna smack you right in the face. That song is about a country gone wrong. It's not about pride. When Republicans mis-use it, it's one thing. They look like idiots. But when it's used as a victory song for a history-making moment in Democratic Party nominations... FUCK! Melissa, Democrats should know better. The DNC should know better. Obama should know better. YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW BETTER!
M.E.: I'm sorry, Bruce. I'm a bad lefty. I screwed up. I'll never do it again. You are right, and by 'right' I mean 'correct' not...
B.S.: Yeah yeah, I know what you mean, I'm not nuance challenged like the rest of you.

Bob Odenkirk at his best...

Why Bob Odenkirk isn't as famous as his old Mr. Show partner, David Cross, I'll never know.

This is totally awesome:

MANSON

Where is West?

No secret, but the ongoing conflict between East and West has found new life. Yeah, not much of a news flash there, it’s been blatantly obvious since one fall Tuesday seven years ago - has it been that long already? And doubtless it was actually pretty obvious before that for anyone who was paying attention - but that seems to have been part of the issue… no one was.
Like some geo-political Valdez, with a drunk Captain at the helm, Western civilization ran aground on the shores of Islam.
It’s been obvious that the definition of ‘East’ in East versus west has changed over not only the course of my lifetime, but for a lot longer than that. It’s face has several times been worn by Communist China and it’s ideological Asian allies. It has been the Soviet Union. And, of course now it is the fundamentalist vein of Islam. Lot’s of virtual ink has been used yakking over how different this paradigm is. How it’s not political, but religious. How the geography of the opposition is both unconstrained and interspersed with less radical mindsets and to a lesser degree even interspersed with our own. I couldn’t comment upon an idea that is new to me on this front, let alone one that is new to anyone else who is at all in touch with the state of the world we live in.
I fully expect that this particular stand off will out live me. Though I do hope that it’s eventual outcome crystallizes in my lifetime. It’s such a big question - one of the biggest of our time, up there with peak oil and global warming - and one that would be particularly unfulfilling to leave unanswered in my day… even if the ‘answer’ is nothing more than a projection. Perhaps I should re-phrase this. It is a certainty that this divide will remain long after I am gone. But perhaps the core issue might lean towards resolution before I am done.
What I have been thinking about that may seem more original - it certainly does to me - is the notion of how we - The West - have changed.
I’ve taken to using the term ‘Neo-West’ of late as I feel it more accurately identifies who ‘we’ are.
Once upon a time, the West was Western Europe. Then the New World began to exert it’s might in the world - as the ‘we’ of the America’s found our ideological voices and the ingenuity to muster our resources into some relevance. This primarily came into focus through the two global conflicts of the 20th century. And with the rise of the Pax-Americana, shifted drastically through the cold-war to roughly where it is now.
But even that designation is misleading. The ‘West’ of my high-school days is significantly different from the ‘Neo-West’ of today. Certainly in a political sense. The geography of who is counted among the West has shifted, though in many ways the demographic of the people within those areas remains in many ways the same.
Obviously I am speaking foremost of the former Soviet Union. While significant parts of that vast land-mass are strife ridden and much of that strife is a Muslim/Non-Muslim divide, most of that it small scale. The land that was once behind the Iron Curtain and made up the greater part of the perceived ‘East’ of the Kennedy/Kruschev through Reagan/Gorbachev eras is now inarguably Neo-West.
The Land of the Rising Sun - once an enemy so reviled that the moral compass dropped quickly to the bottom, like say an atom-bomb, thus allowing the inhumane notion of visiting the horror of that same weapon upon them was seen as collateral damage - are now a thriving Neo-western nation. Indeed, one of the most thriving. If the definition of Neo-West is ‘industrial capitalist democracy’ (which isn’t necessarily the definition, but certainly works as starting criteria) then it’s arguable that Japan is the epitome of Neo-Western civilization. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it! The unavoidable inclusion of Japan alone clearly severs the implicit understanding of my grandparent’s generation that ‘West’ meant white (or even pre-dominantly white) nations.
There are also countries that were the afterthoughts of Western Civilization. Places that were culturally and politically ‘West’ and had be so affiliated for generations, but by an accident of geography were typically ignored as being part of the family. Australia and New Zealand are the obvious examples here. Both colonies of Britain, both settled under similar circumstances to one another and to a lesser degree Canada. Both participated in the World Wars, are essentially English speaking, and have long been consumers of Western culture. It’s hard to say that they haven’t been part of the club. But they were always wallflowers at the member functions.
There is an obvious geo-centric argument to go against my claim that Canada has been a part of the West as long as the U.S. has been. We participated in both World Wars more immediately than the US - and going with my earlier thoughts that seems to have been one of the keys to membership previous to the past twenty years. And as the US became the dominant force in Western culture, Canada was both literally and figuratively right alongside. Yes, we as Canadians come similarly close to being the red-headed step-children along with our brethren from Down Under, but I feel that we’ve been sitting at the big kids table for most of a century.
Undoubtedly many more countries and or regions can lay claim to being part of the Neo-West. Western Europe is a given. Large portions of South and to a lesser degree Meso-America are ‘in the club.’ Parts of Africa, for sure seeing as the ‘white’ requirement has been dropped.
Israel? Why not. Israel certainly qualifies by any measure previously mentioned, and if being ‘pre-dominantly white’ is no longer relevant then why should religion? Excepting that the ‘East’ of this equation is primarily defined as Muslim. That alone firmly puts any Judaic society on the ‘camp of opposition’ to the existing ‘East’ simply by definition. There’s nothing that says this is a ‘Christian-nation’ thing. That’s an idea whose fleeting relevance gets more and more quaint in the face of rising US religiosity.

My point - for the moment - seems to be that ‘East’ and ‘West’ while still relevant terms, don’t in fact mean ‘East’ and ‘West’ cartographically anymore. It’s obvious that Western culture is no longer ‘Leave it to Beaver.’ Not even close. Though I think in many ways, by those of us who have been part of the ‘West’ since before our grandparents were born, it’s easy to forget. We may be a global society, but superficially at least, a patina of our former centricism remains while the fruit underneath the skin comes in so many different flavours - often a melange of the greater selection.
What does it all mean any more? How do these increasingly arbitrary divisions have such long legs?

Oh, why can't we all just get along? ;-)

Dark Knight

I went to Batman yesterday.

It was fantastic.

A number of months ago Dafne asked me who my top five directors were. Chris Nolan was on the bubble at that time, but there is no longer any doubt in my mind. He is an outrageously talented visionary.

There are a few quibbles I have with it, but just minor things really.

The real question though is Heath Ledger. How good is he?

He is wonderful. He seems to have put it in the back of his mind that the Joker is one of the greatest arch villains of all time. The Joker has to earn that, just like anyone else - and he does. It must be a scary proposition to know that you are going to be measured against Jack Nicholson (and no less than one of Jack’s most iconic performances) and Heath is equal to the job. It is very impressive.



It’s also very creepy that at the end, the door is clearly left open for the Joker to return, when we know that he (or at least Heath) can not. It would not have been hard to re-shoot & restructure in such a way that the Joker was clearly gone for good.



But someone needs to say this…

It is NOT an Oscar worthy performance. That is being said for the sole reason that Heath has died after such a promising performance. He probably would have been a perennial had he not overdosed, but that in itself does not make this an Oscar contender. He is great as the Joker. Let me say that again. He is great as the Joker. But most of the depth is in the script (and considering how little is known about the Joker, that doesn’t in fact allow for a lot). He is scary and gross and terrifying. But Oscar noms are worth more than this. This is hype. Well supported hype for a film that hardly needs it.

There we go. Someone said it. Let the tomatoes fly.

Some Women Give All Women a Bad Rep

This one just has to be put into posterity.

I’ve been trying some internet dating. So far it has resulted in one three month relationship that was nice, but had nothing at it’s core. Beyond that it’s been fun, but unsuccessful.
I had an excellent date with a delightful lady who agreed that we’d had an excellent time. Later she sent me an email telling me that she knew she’d be trying to change me and that she didn’t want that in her life. Okay. Fair enough. Not sure it’s a fully matured argument, but it’s not unreasonable.

There was the woman who found me later on Face book (who didn’t have my name to the best of my knowledge) and would NOT LEAVE ME ALONE.

There was the oddball who sent me a photo of her, her rifle and the deer she’d just killed with it. Props for bold presentation. Wrong audience, lady.

An awkward connection with an attractive friend of a friend who didn’t want to accept that I identified a deal-breaker in our first exchange. A nice seeming woman in all other respects, but she just didn’t understand that I would either have to constantly censor myself or she’d have to live in the shower of my contempt for something dear to her. Doesn’t sound like a good relationship to me, but some people apparently like abuse.

There have been a few totally pleasant meetings with women who seemed surprised when I made it clear at the end of the face to face that that would be all we’d be doing.

This story is about one of the latter-most situations. Two of them actually.

I don’t know when I first connected with Tracy (not her real name). A few weeks ago in any case. She had her defences up high, but I didn’t care. She was on an online dating service, she WAS looking for a connection. The messages progressed well. She was amusing and I amused her.

We decided that we should meet face to face, but we were collectively booked for the better part of a week. We set it all aside, agreeing that we’d reconnect after the upcoming weekend.

Then, one evening as I was on the site answering emails, or perusing photos I got an instant message from another user. I’ve only used the IM service on the site once before. It’s a lousy UI, and I’m not big on IM in the best of cases. I’ve never initiated an IM conversation, but I do accept them - ‘cause ya never know!

It was a decent conversation. But it was late. We agreed to message each other the next day and make plans. She ended up suggesting we get together at a place near both of us (she claimed to live on the Drive) that night after work. I had nothing up, so what the hell.

We met. It was a decent conversation. She was definitely interesting, but I knew very quickly that I wasn’t interested. The more I meet women, the more I think I don’t want to get together with another artist. I used to think it was just actors I was done with, but I suspect my moratorium may extend further. Jury is officially still out on that one - it’s not a simple equation.

As we wound up, she - let’s call her Carrie - gave me the somewhat ambiguous invitation “Want to come with me?” The answer was a polite ‘no thanks.’ She seemed surprised.

Allow me a moment to rant about women. How many times have we - guys - been given the message that ‘all I want is someone who is a good listener?’ “Innumerable times” is the answer. So the astute guys develop that habit. It gets practived to the point of instinct. But there is an issue that develops from that. Our ability to actually listen gets interpreted as interest above and beyond the moment. When all we are doing is being polite! I’m sure later I’ll discover that my ability to listen when I’m not interested has become a liability as women don’t know when I’m listening sincerely. Argh! Fuck!

So I’m thinking that the fact that I actually paid attention to her gave her the message that I was actually interested in her. That wasn’t the case. To be blunt - even a bit rude - if I was still on the longest dry-spell of my adult life I don’t know that I would have followed up on the vague invite. She may have just been saying “Hey I’m going to a ________. Want to come along?” Though that itself may have been a trial that eventually led to her bed. But not necessarily.

In any case, it’s moot. I wasn’t interested. She seemed a bit surprised. Perhaps even put out. (Oooh! Pun.) Maybe even…(and this is reading things in after the fact, and with more circumstantial information) …it seemed that I might be screwing up some wild plan.

So, that’s that. Farewell to Carrie. Pleasant enough, and I wouldn’t be adverse to running in her in the ‘hood and asking how her projects were going, but that was that.

I get through the weekend and it comes time to reconnect with Tracy and make plans. She chose Tuesday after work… which was a strange choice as neither of us, as it turned out, worked that day.

We met, had dinner. She was fun. Very lively and fun. I laughed a lot. Physically she was not really what I’d immediately think ‘holy shit, she’s hot’ about, but her genuinely winning personality could potentially tip the balance. There were some other factors which would prove an issue, but not insurmountable if things remained otherwise promising. No deal breakers.

After dinner we went for a walk. I don’t recall how we got onto it, but she started talking about her crazy roommate. This apparent nutbar who wouldn’t clean up after her dogs. Who would wake up at 7am and start hammering. HAMMERING!

I could totally relate. Those of you who know the epic of Erin living upstairs know the essence of my commiseration. I was totally on board with Tracy’s complaints. She told me how the roomie’d driven her so bananas that last week she snapped and had it out with her on Thursday afternoon. The roommate exhibited an utter dereliction of responsibility and capped it all off with this gem of a quote (which also recalled Erin for me) “you think I’m loud now, wait ‘til I bring a man home!”

Oh, the non-sequitur argument. Such a slam dunk of ‘WTF?’ stupidity. I was totally with Tracy in her frustration.

Then she dropped the bomb.

“She is on the site.” (Meaning the dating site.) “Her user name is ‘Hawk moon’ (not her real username).”

Carrie’s username had been “Hawk moon 71.” I stopped dead in my tracks. I don’t think I’ve ever done that before.

“Oh, have you talked with her online?”

“That is really familiar. There’s a chance.”

“Her real name is ‘Carrie.’”

Holy shit.

I played dumb from there out.

Have you done the math? I’ll lay it out for you, just to be certain.

What are the chances that a Carrie going under the name Hawk moon 71 is NOT the same Carrie whose roommate identifies her as Hawk moon? That’s the easy part. Thursday morning, Carrie and tracy have an argument about noise that culminates in the gem “wait ‘til I bring a man home!”

Later that night, I - who am already having an online chat with Tracy - get IM’ed by Carrie/Hawk moon 71 who fast tracks her way into a date with me the next night where she seems to try to get me to go home to bed with her.

Granted there are a few assumptions being made in this equation (that Tracy is missing the ’71’ from her roommate’s username; and that Carrie who I met was in fact trying to get me to go to bed with her.) but it certainly appears as though I almost became a pawn in an apparently really ugly roommate battle. In fact, I’m almost certain of it. The real question is: did Carrie hack Tracy’s account - or other wise pick me out as her mark in said war - or was that really just a huge co-incidence?

There is really only one piece of evidence that contradicts any of this and it’s quite easy to reconcile. Carrie claimed to live near me on the Drive. Tracy lives over near Main. The Drive and Main are not far apart, but I don’t think someone who live on Main would claim they lived on The Drive… unless they were manufacturing a reality for some reason.

I could be manufacturing my own reality on this matter myself, but I think Occam’s Razor dictates that this was a close call of weirdness for me.

Assuming all of that, Carrie did achieve part of her plan. I’m not getting involved with Tracy any further - though exploring it just a little farther would be illuminating - when I otherwise would have.

Palm Slapping Between Dix & Mr. Homosexual following a good leg-pounding in a wonderful matching swimsuit

Yeah, that was a long title... but it got your attention, right?

And it wasn't just a gimmick. It's totally relevant to this post.

I just came across this hysterical blog post about an unintentionally funny find/replace error.

I suspect I'm going to be giggling about this one all day - you deserve the same chance.

Abortion Hits the Big Time

A nice contentious post for Canada Day.

Henry Morgethaler has been named to the Order of Canada.

I think that that is awesome, and far too long in the coming.

I never really had a strong position on abortion one way or the other. I knew that I didn't think it was a positive thing personally, but I knew that that was a personal issue. Further, I knew that no matter what else I thought, it was important that any and every one else have to freedom to make their own choice on the matter.
On this my opinion hasn't changed terribly much. I do beleive that there are gray areas. Very gray. But I am loathe to put limitations on circumstances under which abortion is identified as a bad thing.

I've twice been in circumstances where abortion has been a direct factor in my life.

In both cases it was a situation where we slipped through the cracks in terms of statistics contraceptively.

Without getting into specifics...

In the first case we had been dumb, yet we still lost the contraception lottery.
I was shocked and upset at the prospect of parenthood, yet I was willing to bite the proverbial bullet and make the necessary changes in my life to own up to my contraceptive stupidity. Further, I don't think we would have been collectively bad parents. She already was a parent. Myself... well there's no owner's manual, right?

It was a significant time for me. I had never seriously considered the possibility of being a parent. But there it was. I warmed up to the idea quite quickly. I was ready - or as ready as I'll ever be. (This still holds true.) It wasn't ideal, but we'd do fine. It was then that I opened my mind to the real prospect of being a parent. Obviously it never happened. She decided to have an abortion. I suspect that it had something to do with my inital uncertainty. Or at least that became her excuse. We only ever seriously discussed it once. I arrived home to the news. We lay in bed for a few hours talking about options. I was non-committal. I had never thought about being a parent seriously. I had some mental housekeeping to do. And I did it. I prepped myself for being a father. Then, one day not much later, she told me she'd had an abortion. Not once had I been directly consulted. While I recognize that it is her body and that that alone ought to dictate whose choice it is, I do think it is the right of the father to know in advance - so at the very least they can wrap their head around the notion if they aren't actually prepared for it. In a best case scenario they would have a chance to put forth a considered argument against it. But it's not their choice. They should be kept in the loop. I wasn't.
I was mad. It was the end of our relationship - though it took a year for that to fully blossom. Though I have to admit that my life is probably better for it.

In the second case we REALLY slipped through the cracks statistically. We were using contraception 100% properly (though 100% properly is not 100% effective) and in doing the math backwards we are pretty certain it happened the very first time we had sex together. We were later engaged - we were serious about each other. But when we were hit with the prospect of being co-parents so early, it was utterly wrong. It was too soon, and I think sub-consciously I already knew she was an alcoholic. No good for parenting, let alone gestation. I was not happy about the idea, but I was totally ready for her to have an abortion. It was her second too.
I am very happy we didn't carry that one to term. It would have had fetal alcohol syndrome. What a terrible thing to be responsible for - not the child specifically, but to know that you allowed it to happen to the child. Not to mention that if I never speak to the would have been mother ever again, it will be too soon.

But upon that second - most accidental - abortion, I was determined that I never wanted to be in that position again. Having said that, if I were faced with having a baby with someone who would bring the worst of circumstances upon the child (such as FAS) I would seriously consider the option, and probably go with it in the end. That doesn't change the essential emotion. I don't want to ever have an abortion in a relationship ever again.

But I WANT THE CHOICE.

Previously when I was approximately opposed to the idea personally, it was always with the caveat (ask around, it will be confirmed if you drill deep enough) that I had never been in the position of having knocked someone up.

In my first circumstance, I was willing to follow through. I would have done my best. But it's probably best that it didn't happen - though there was no medical reason to back out. In the second, it may be mostly hindsight, but I am very thankful it didn't happen, medically and socially. Would I have got to that point if not for the first? I can't say. But I'm glad I did.

In any case I am extremely grateful for Henry Morgenthaler for breaking the ground. He is totally deserving of the Order of Canada. In a forward thinking society we should all be able to make personal decisions about how our lives are lived. It is responsible to have children under responsible conditions. I can't thoroughly claim that I would have been doing it in either circumstance. We owe it to the children.

A few last random thoughts:

Only stupid people are breeding. I don't know who first put forth that notion - it wasn't Harvey Danger. But it's very true. I don't know how we can ever beat that one.

Where do we draw the line? If someone uses abortion as contraception, that strikes me as beyond the pale. How to determine that? I do not know. But perhaps if a pattern develops? A three strikes rule? That might work. If you can't learn your lesson in three times, you've got to start facing the music. If there is no clear mitigating circumstance (rape, severe invitro medical condition (a slippery slope, that one)) on the occasion of your fourth abortion - perhaps even the third... Tough luck you are expected to see this one through. There would be occasional issues, but there is little doubt in my mind that they would be significantly reduced.

In any case...

I am proud to live in a society that recognises the social value of abortion.

Wicked Puzzle Solving Game... featuring Time Travel

My head is exploding.

I can't stop playing this game.

It's a really great brain twister that REALLY forces you to think ahead... well ahead.

Commercial Drive Photo

I meant to post this weeks ago.

A photo of mine of Commercial Drive has been used for the Schmap Canada website.

Naps - gooood.

This info graphic on napping was just too good not to try to share as far and wide as I can.

Six Word Memoirs - My Heart Breaking New Literary Addiction

I've found myself a new web-page. It is addicting beyond my imagination.

It came from a simple notion. Hemingway was once given a challenge. Write a story with six words. Just six - beginning, middle and end. His response was profound and tragic. "For Sale: Baby shoes. Never worn."

Smith Magazine challenged other famous authors. Including: Colbert, Eggers, Sedaris, and Chopra. They also solicited their many readers. Then they made it a book. "Not Quite What I Was Planning." They also gave it a sub-title. "Six word Memoirs by Famous Authors." It also includes their obscure contributions.

They are still taking new memoirs. New ones go on the web-site. Maybe eventually in a new book.

They are various in their impact. Curious, complete, sad, inspiring and funny.

I had to submit my own. "No time to wait for coda." I'll try again with more reflection.

It'll definitely make a good present.

A 'Meh' Moment in NHL History

The Wings won the Cup last night. It makes me happy. Pittsburgh is a really promising team with a heap of young talent that whether together or in other cities WILL win their share of Stanley Cups, but Detroit is just too damned good.
The current team has plenty of experience, yet isn't terribly old - Chelios and Hasek excepted.

In the final round, as good a fight as Pittsburgh put up - it often looked really evenly matched (the first seven periods of the series excepted) - there was barely a single stat that Pittsburgh led in for any relevant length of time. Sure, there were two games where the Penguins led on the scoreboard at the end of a game. In game three that was mostly because Detroit looked a little old for the second period and then couldn't catch up. They turned around and never looked weary again - even late in overtime in game five. In game five it was Fleury, whose outstanding goaltending outdueled Osgood for a game - most importantly in the last three periods of the game. Osgood looked like the goat in that game, but he was in fact solid straight through the series from start to finish. But when you shut-out the competition for nearly seven straight periods at the start of a series there is only one direction to go... I predict that that single direction was the reason he didn't win the Conn Smythe.

Zetterberg won the Conn Smythe. I've got no argument with that. If you saw game four you know that Detroit weathered nearly a full two minutes of 5 on three. If it had been 5 on Zetterberg it would have made no difference. He seemed to single-handedly killed that pair of penalties and nearly got a short-hander out of it to boot. It was totally fucking amazing. He also tied that Pittsburgh kid for points in the playoffs at 27.

Last time the Wings won the Cup - six years ago - the Conn Smythe was won, for the first time by a European. Niklas Lidstrom. Last night he did something else no European has ever done before - he was the first to hoist the Cup. The honour of recieveing the Cup goes to the team Captain. No European has ever Captained a Stanley Cup winner until now.

Historically I don't really see it as that momentous. But it is worth considering why it hasn't happened until now. Europeans have been playing the the NHL for longer than I've been alive. Granted, there wasn't a particularly big influx of them until the Russians started playing in the NHL - significantly Fetisov and Larionov, in 1989. Which wasn't so long ago really. Larionov played for Detroit for all three of it's previous Stanley Cups in the past 12 years - most recently 2002. Fetisov for the first two. It was a decade ago that the league made the two year All-Star game experiment of dividing the league between North American players and European Players, rather than East and West conferences. They couldn`t have done that if there wasn`t significant balance in the league. So, if in theory there were as many marquee players of European decent as North American a decade ago and more, then why did it take this long for one to Captain a team to victoryÉ Certainly, there was some reticence to making them Captains. But TEN YEARSÉ I haven`t looked at the stats. I`m sure some mining there would be illuminating.

What seemed far more interesting to me was who he handed it to. I always thought that there was something special being said in who the Cup was handed to first after the Captain. Some kind of acknowledgement, that `hey you are special to this team - this victory.` The two most significant being Steve Yzerman handing the cup to a wheelchair bound Vladimir Konstantinov in 1998 - which caused me to burst into tears ina bout a quarter of a second; and Joe Sakic wasting an entire two seconds between recieving the Cup from Gary Bettman and handing it over to Ray Bourque in 2001. Failing such obvious emotional choices there are other options, including any single one of; a stand-out player who DIDN`T win the Conn Smythe (which Borque was), a veteran workhorse who has likely played his last game (which Bourque was), a veteran who had finally won the Cup (Bourque for the trifecta), a goaltender who worked his ass off - which strikes me as the default choice. Last night Lidstrom passed the Cup to Dallas Drake. Drake is my age - which is to say that failing a Chelios-like stamina (which it`s safe to say he doesn`t have) he is going to retire any moment now. This was his first Cup.

Hockey Nirvana

Two posts in one day. I've been slack lately, so this is a change of pace - literally.

With two hours and counting 'til game one of the Stanley Cup Final I just couldn't let the moment go un-commented upon.

I am SO excited. I think most hockey fans are. When was the last time there was a match-up so promising in the final? The closest we've come most recently is Colorado v/ New Jersey in 2001. The drama of Mission 16W. That was a pretty great series. Seven games. The last one, if I recall was pretty one sided - more so than the 3-1 decision implies. But this series is still all promise. It could still be the greatest hockey series ever played. It really could. It is absolutley in the realm of possibility.

I've been looking forward to today since about half way through the second round, when it started looking realistic that the Wings and the Penguins could be facing off against each other for the cup.

I think they genuinely are the two best teams in the league - sorry Montreal fans. Wait a second, why am I sorry? I hate the Canadiens.

Detroit has been my second favourite team for about as long as I've been a hockey fan. It's been a good decade and a half to be Detroit fan. I expect them to win, but I don't expect it to be easy. I also expect that this will be the end of the glory years in Detroit - times are too hard there in the auto industry and that can only hurt the club. They may go back to being the Dead Wings of 25 years ago and further - the pre-Yzerman era. But for now... four cups in 12 years, they've made it to the conference finals or further as many additional times since '95, they've been 1st in thier division every season but three since '94 (and they won the Cup in two of those three years.), Since it's inception in 1986 only one team has won the President's Trophy more than twice - Detriot - SIX times. They are the closest thing to a dynasty left in hockey in the new millenium.

But the boys in Pittsburgh aren't going to be a pushover. Crosby and Malkin are undisputed superstars in waiting. I think we can expect that this Cup will be to Pittsburgh what the 82-83 thumping the Islanders gave the Oilers. They handed them their ass, but showed them what it took to be a great team, passing the torch in the process. I don't expect the Pens to get swept, but I doubt they can out perform the combination of winning experience and skill that has been steeping in Hockeytown for over a decade.

Okay... now there are only 90 minutes left.

Defending the Music XXII: Also Rans & the Bullpen

I thought I was done, but there's been some lingering thoughts that I felt needed addressing. There are a number of groups which have never made the cut for various reasons. Some, though coming very close, just haven't quite had the personal appeal for me; others haven't been consistent enough to earn my faith to the degree that I am willing to accept their lesser works as wholeheartedly as their best works; and still others have fallen short by right of never developing a large enough body of work. Additionally, it occurred to me that there are a few artists that are hovering on the edge of me embracing them as completely as I do Pearl Jam or the Hip or any of the other acts on my list of true believers. As that's the most victorious category, I'll save it for last.



It's a pretty substantial list, so I won't spend much time commenting on individual acts, but rest assured they all came very close to being on my list of the real cream of the crop.



First up, the inconsistent artists. These are the folks who at some point in their career blew my mind with at least one full album, but throughout the rest of their career - which may or may not be on going - have been too hit or miss for me to get behind them universally.



The Alarm - I was (happily) tricked into seeing The Alarm on their practice gig at the long since defunct 86 Street Music Hall for their last full tour. Two of their last three albums are amazing, and they had some great stuff that presaged those moments in their earlier career. The real spectacular thing they did was break up on stage in 1991 - what I wouldn't have done to see that!
Alice in Chains - Dirt. Damn what a great disc. Jar of Flies was no slouch either... but they just didn't have the jam to keep up the pace.
Barenaked Ladies - Gordon, Stunt and the infamous Yellow Tape. Beyond that I've always found them to be pretty hit and miss. They did do a wicked concert though.
Beck - I totally expected Beck to be a one hit wonder. Mellow Gold was a remarkable and unique album in it's day. Odelay and Guero are also wicked albums that pretty much work top to bottom. I also don't think he's done a disc that hasn't had a great track or two on it... but they also all have a solid sampling of boring twaddle. Too bad.
BoDeans - I saw the BoDeans open for U2 in 1987. They were great! So were their first two albums. But beyond that they rarely made much music of value... arguably the theme to Party of Five: Closer to Free, is an exception.
Cracker - Kerosene Hat is one of the most awesome albums ever. Period. Nothing else the former Camper Van Beethoven frontman, David Lowery fronted project has done since - and arguably before - has done much for me at all.
Collective Soul - I'm actually surpised that these guys are still making music together. I thought they faded away after their fourth album - by which point I had quit finding them interesting... actually I pretty much only found them exceptionally interesting for their second (self-titled) album.
Counting Crows - A band that lost steam fast. August and Everything After was amazing. Everything after, wasn't.
Crash Test Dummies - The law of diminishing returns returns... Such a brilliant start. Some decent sophmore stuff and with a few bright moments to follow it was pretty much over. I actually met Brad Roberts at a party just as they went meteoric. I think he hadn't realized he was on the verge of stardom.
The Cult - Love and Sonic Temple were amazing albums. Electric was fun if flawed. In concert they were crap. Stumblingly drunk. Embarassing.
Frank Black - He's already on the list of honour for The Pixies, so falling short for the solo career is hardly a (pardon) black mark. I'm lumping all post Pixies Frank Black together. His first solo effort is awesome, as is Frank Black and the Catholics' Pistolero... but he's managed to put most of the rest of his career together with filler. So disappointing.
Great Big Sea - Though nowhere near the artistic attrition of the Crash Test Dummies, Great Big Sea's studio albums are each a little less than the one before. Too bad. Up and Play were both pretty wicked.
INXS - Kick and X - with a few scattered bright lights from their earliest days through to the death of Michael Hutchence. INXS V. 2.0 with J.D. fortune... god help us.
Nine Inch Nails - A brilliant and industry changing first album. I listened to Pretty Hate Machine in full for the first time in years last weekend. It was amazing. Broken is also a pretty great disc... but it all starts to sound the same after that. Almost ironic seeing as Trent Reznor was so original in the first place.
Pogues - If I should Fall From Grace With God is a spectacular work of celtic punk fusion. Fairytale of New York would probably get my vote for the best duet ever... which perhaps explains some of my worst relationships. Peace and Love isn't far behind, but outside of that the Pogues are pretty hit and miss.
Sinead O'Connor - I Do Not Want... was at one time one of the most listened to albums of my life. She has her moments before and after, but she's also pretty tiresome at times too.
Smashing Pumpkins - Billy Corgan. Brilliant and bat shit crazy. The brilliance didn't have enough legs on it to consistently lift their music to the level that made Siamese Dream the breakout that it was. Not even the solid, but flawed Mellon Collie...
Stone Temple Pilots - I always loved how STP experimented with their sound and knew no bounds with where they could go sonically... but it didn't always equal brilliance.
White Stripes - I'm breaking the rules here. There are several dozen White Stripes songs that together would make two or three amazing albums... unfortunately there isn't one single album full of them.



Next up, there are a number of artists, who are seen by many as being among the all-time greats - or on their way - who I do really like, but I don't embrace at the level that their own true believers do, despite recognizing and respecting their genius. I should mention, dividing artists accurately between this category and the first, was not always easy or clear.



Alanis Morissette - I was as surprised as anyone by her reappearance on the scene, and Jagged Little Pill was a spectacular album. She's had some other great moments too, but not enough for me. Oh, and... note to self - do NOT date this woman - have you heard how she savages her exes on her albums?
Beastie Boys - There are those for whom the art-rap of the Beastie Boys is the pinnacle of the white man's accomplishment in urban music. Actually, now that I've written that, I believe that that is the case for me too... I just don't think that that is enough to act as though the sun rises and sets on Mike D, MCA, Ad-Rock & Mix Master Mike.
Billy Bragg - At his best Billy Bragg is amazing. I've just never found that his best is totally in step with what I want to hear. Close... so very close.
Bright Eyes - Connor Oberst is pretty damned interesting, and I can see why he is looked upon as the vanguard of lo-fi. No doubt one day he will be a legend... just not in my mind.
The Cure - There is no single album by the Cure that blew me away... except for their singles album Standing on the Beach. But Robert Smith managed to pack every album with a handful of wicked ditties... and too much tiresome woe to really win me over in full.
David Bowie - If I take it on the chin for any one artist, I expect it to be this one. I do in fact really love a LOT of David Bowie. No artist on this list comes closer to making my true believers list than David Bowie. One of my favourite concerts of all time was the Sound and Vision tour. But when I consider putting him in the autoplaylist I keep getting stopped up by thoughts like 'ugh - that would mean having to listen to Glass Spider.'
Metallica - Another of those 'most influential bands of all time' that didn't specifically inspire me until well after their impact was long since apparent. I'm still not so hot on anything before And Justice for All....
Nick Cave - How can you not love Murder Ballads? I'm also a big Grinderman fan. And there aren't many musicians I'd rather sit down and chat over a pint with... but I've never completely bought into the music. Sorry Chief.
Public Enemy - I should almost put the mighty P.E. in the next category. They were truly tremendous, and perhaps only a white man could fail to recognize their complete genius. And I DO think Chuck D is a genius - to this day. But Flavor Flav gets more egregious with each subsequent reality show. Apocalypse `91 is one of my favourite albums of all time. Fight the Power is obviously one of the most influential individual songs ever recorded. There's more P.E. of value - but for me it's scattered, and the further you get from the ...Black Planet the scarcer it becomes.
Spirit of the West - I don't think there is a band that was loved by more people I went to university with than Spirit of the West. I was even mistaken as John Mann once, even though I look nothing like him (long story for another time). And the best of Spirit of the West has become among my favourite music, just out of osmosis from those days... but I just don't LOVE them the way my peers did.
Radiohead - A secret confession: Radiohead shouldn't really be on this list. I just don't like them that much. But at least they are current, they are seen by many as geniuses and I do own some of their music and like it. For this they earn a place - unlike Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Stones and the Beatles; all of whom I expect to be the artists that are most conspicuous by their absence. All of whom I am at least a little actively contemptuous of.
Rage Against the Machine - I was rather late to RATM. I was familiar with bits and bites of their music until their last album, Renegades, came out. Renegades didn't have a single song written by RATM on it. All covers. Brilliant noise. Going back through their catalogue I found a lot to like, but they never managed to totally enthrall me, top to bottom. ...top to RATM.
Red Hot Chili Peppers - Mother's Milk was responsible for me putting a LOT of faith in the Chili Peppers. I went back in their catalogue looking for the same brilliance and never found it. I bought their next three albums looking for the same and only ever found it in bits and pieces. Shame.
They Might be Giants - I've got so much respect for the Johns. They have done so well for themselves by simply doing their own thing and not caring what the world thinks. But that same quirk means there`s an awful lot of weak spots in their catalogue for those of us who aren't totally devoted to them.


Then there are the artists whose career was simply too short - which in many cases is undoubtedly the proof of the scope fo their talent. But in each of these cases there was one to three albums that kicked ass. In many cases some of my favourite albums of all time. But it would be totally cheap to declare that I love everything they ever did, when they only ever relased an album or three.

Andrew Cash - One kick ass rootsy album. Especially the first half of it. Never saw him again.
Cutting Crew - I think I lost my virginity to The Broadcast. Their second album, The Scattering wasn't quite as good, but I think their ambient pop was ahead of it's time.
Faith No More - I don't count the pre-Mike Patton albums. But when he was their front man, they were the best funk metal band on the planet. Again - ahead of their time.
Guns & Roses - Technically G&R have more than three albums, but only three really count. Appetite for Destruction - one of the greatest albums ever. Lies - which was packaged with their earlier Live Like a Suicide disc (which I don't count.) Use Your Illusion - which while sold as two albums... came out the same day with the same artwork (in different colours) - it's the SAME album. Spaghetti Incident was all covers thus doesn't count. And if Chinese Democracy ever gets released... well I'll cross that bridge then, if one can even consider it a G&R disc.
Hothouse Flowers - Three really gorgeous albums. Rich and lustrous. I had tickets to see them - but they cancelled the concert the day before... and they never toured or recorded together again.
Jane's Addiction - Nothing's Shocking and Ritual de lo Habitual are collectively responsible for expanding my mind with regards to what music could be more than any other band's discs ever. Their reunion... not so much - though it was good to get a chance to see them play.
Mollies Revenge - You've never heard of them. The best album by a Vancouver band ever. Also a great show.
The Monks - Bad Habits was more responsible for my interest in punk music - yes, even more so than The Clash. I've never managed to get my hands on a copy of Suspended Animation, their second album. VERY hard to find.
Power Station - The sound of this album was so thick. Their second album turned into a Rod Stewart album - it was all downhill from there. Andy Taylor almost makes the list with his only solo album - equally fat sounding.
Robbie Robertson - A stretch. I know. Obviously The Band provided Robbie Robertson with a career before his career. His first self-titled solo album is a clinic in epic sounding rock. One of the best albums ever produced. His second, Storyville, is also pretty awesome. After that - his two Native American releases (the newest of which is a decade old) - are really albums with other people, though not quite bands in themselves... and not quite as good.
Rock & Hyde - I would have liked to be able to justify the Payolas on this list somewhere, but I can't. This is as close as it gets. One album - ten better tracks than any Payolas album anyhow.
The Silencers - Another stretch. The only Silencers' album I've ever been able to get my hands on, Blues for Buddha, is twenty years old. They released their tenth album this year. I suppose I could try harder to get those other nine albums - there has been some real effort, but in a way I don't want to ruin the magic of that one disc of divine aural pleasure.
Stone Roses - Their first album was the best music for smoking dope to of the 1990s. And then it all went to hell due to legal entreching of corporate music interests. Second Coming - their late arriving sophmore was a pale shadow, but had it's moments. It was probably best that they broke up thereafter.

Last and far far far from least are a number of acts who I see the potential of that could concieveably make my list of True Believers some day.

Gavin DeGraw - They had better play "I Don't Want to Be" at my funeral.

Gomez - Gomez have been growing on me for years. The scope of thier sound is vast. Their latest, How We Operate, pretty much seals the deal. If their sixth album is as good as their previous ones, I'm going to have no choice but to add them to the list. Just thinking about them now menas that Girlshapedlovedrug will be stuck pleasantly in my head all day.

Kings of Leon - Just keep your eyes on these guys. They're awesome. My only fear is that after four albums they might start sounding like more and more of the same.

Les Dales Hawerchuk - Perhaps a wee bit pre-mature, but I really love these guys. I only barely grok French, which is a bit of a challenge, but this is the hungriest rock around. Love 'em.

Modest Mouse - I actually just saw Modest Mouse in concert (opening for R.E.M.) last night. I gotta say they're far more interesting when constrained by the studio. And I'm not sure that Isaac Brock's voice can continue to be interesting after another album - but they only release a full album every three years. And the addition of Johnny Marr... inspired.

Okay. That's it. This series is over. I'm going to find some thing else to yak about for a while. If/when I come back to music I'll tackle it from another angle.