Random News Story for Saturday

I know that this is sort of a random post, especially after being so silent. But I needed to say to the world that I am horrified by this news story.

Abortion is not really one of my more passionately held political or religious viewpoints. To put it simply: politically, I believe in a woman's right to choose within some reasonable frame of time that I'm not educated enough to determine (and seems relatively arbitrary anyway, according to my slight knowledge).

Morally, the act horrifies me. And although I'm certainly not generalizing the above incident to all uses of abortion, this case should horrify you as well.

That is all.

-Sean Read more

Year Zero/In Rainbows

As a prelude, the Fresh Air of 13 March served to get this post (hovering since Year Zero was released last Spring) out of my head. It’s worth listening to.

If you don’t know that the music industry is changing, you’re hiding under a rock. Everyone ought to be aware by now that soon, the very meaning of music as a media and the business will be drastically different from how it is now, especially how it was two years ago. How we purchase music and, to me, more saliently, how we listen to it is undergoing a major revolution.

There are three major examples of this that have recently profoundly influenced my relationship with the industry—Girl Talk is one just by himself, but there has also been the release of Nine Inch Nails’ Year Zero and Radiohead’s In Rainbows.

I love Girl Talk, and an entry on him is coming soon, but for now, I want to address the latter 2. Both albums are similar in that they were released under conditions that were nothing short of revolutionary. For the full story of Year Zero’s release, go to the Wikipedia entry or for the full DETAILS, go to the NIN wiki and for In Rainbows, go to the Wikipedia entry or check out the backlog “In-Rainbows” blog-tags on Radiohead_At/Ease (many of my later links are cribbed from this, the best Radiohead resource on the net).

Basically, Nine Inch Nails leaked tracks on USB keys that were left in restrooms and such containing, along with a track or two, some kind of coded or hidden message that led you to a website that had further hidden or coded messages or some other kind of statement coinciding with the concept of the album. All of it worked together to tell a narrative that registered as if we are all unknowingly trapped in an oppressed society, drugged on some undetectable substance by an authoritarian government. They didn’t just decimate the fourth wall, they decimated all four of them at once—the album’s release blurred the lines between the artist and the audience, reality and a nightmarish dreamscape, perceptions of reality and certainty, and most importantly (in my opinion) self-expression and public consumption/social meaning.

Radiohead’s release held a much more limited meaning artistically, but in the sense of the business, their model is incredibly relevant. One initial report put album sales at a staggering at 1.2 million, although these numbers were later thrown into doubt. Still it seems, that the average listener paid somewhere around 8 dollars, but theoretically only 2/5 downloaders paid. Those numbers are in doubt, as Jonny Greenwood points out in a more recent interview. And this is on top of the stolen ones.

The first conclusion I’m drawing here is that the release of albums is getting much, MUCH more creative of late; there have been other marketing ploys of late—international bonus tracks, iTunes incentives, etc. But Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead achieved unprecedented levels of media buzz and fan exuberance. One reviewer (Pitchfork) of In Rainbows put it thusly—

Like many music lovers of a certain age, I have a lot of warm memories tied up with release days. I miss the simple ritual of making time to buy a record. I also miss listening to something special for the first time and imagining, against reason, the rest of the world holed up in their respective bedrooms, having the same experience. Before last Wednesday, I can't remember the last time I had that feeling. I also can't remember the last time I woke up voluntarily at 6 a.m. either, but like hundreds of thousands of other people around the world, there I was, sat at my computer, headphones on, groggy, but awake, and hitting play.

So these creative releases are certainly heightening the interest in the album and the interaction with the band, as Trent Reznor pointed out by saying in an interview on the Spiral (quoted from Wikipedia, for the Spiral—registration required): “'marketing’ is an inaccurate description of the alternate reality [marketing], and that it is ‘not some kind of gimmick to get you to buy a record - it IS the art form ...’”.

The second conclusion is a terrible one for the future of music, in my opinion. Despite this fan excitement, despite its ostensibly free release, In Rainbows was STILL stolen (DISCLOSURE: and I say this as a hypocrite, after trying to buy the album properly for $10, there was a huge internet snafu due to China issues—so I torrented it like so many other people).

The third conclusion here is that two of the most innovative albums of the last year or so were innovative NOT because of the artfulness of their musicality, but for the artfulness of the business surrounding their release. Indeed, musically, I was disappointed by both albums, although I think it had more to do with me being caught up in that aforementioned fan exuberance than it did with a lack of quality on the part of the albums themselves (I passionately love In Rainbows). But as Trent Reznor pointed out, the ideas concerning the release become some sort of meta-statement. The release became the album and the art itself.

Clearly, we as a society are rethinking what it means to purchase and appreciate music. And as Thom Yorke and David Byrne pointed out in their Wired interview, the very value of music is at stake. I’m curious to see where this will go in the next few years.

As an epilogue, and proof that Reznor and Nine Inch Nails are not letting up, Ghosts I-IV is getting RAVE reviews (VSL, RStone), and they're still getting innovative with fan interaction.

-Sean

Read more

When to Walk Away

I really wanted to blog about something more cheerful—like War & Peace or my passionate and newfound hatred of David Baldacci, or even about the glorious uncheerfulness that is Garfield Minus Garfield. HOWEVER, I am compelled…FORCED even to vent about what I’ve learned from Hillary Clinton.

This article was inspired by two things; the horrendously arrogant talk of offering the VP slot to Obama and a new column by Andrew Sullivan. First, lest anyone accuse me of having rose-colored glasses concerning Obama’s politics, I don’t think he’s been much better on tailoring himself for voters than Hillary has, and here’s my proof.

Should Hillary Clinton give up? (Unfortunately) no. You see, somehow, she keeps pulling some magical rabbit out of her hat and somehow, she stays in the game. But saying “somehow” is a big stretch. Afterall, it’s only through dirty campaign tactics, blatant lies, silly melodramatic accusations to the press, and hypocritical straw-man attacks on Obama that she has kept herself viable. And why do I say that? It comes down to the simple explanation that she has nothing that Obama doesn’t have. What experience does she have? Since when being first lady all of a sudden make you an expert on the Presidency? ESPECIALLY as national security matters are concerned! Moreover, as a Senator, Hillary has not particularly distinguished herself as an enlightened decision-maker. In fact, the best example of this is the Iraq War. She supports the war in 2003, and to this day STILL refuses to account for the switch in her viewpoint (IS there an appropriate explanation? Maybe there is! WHO KNOWS?). Furthermore, her ridiculously hypocritical attacks on Obama in what she callsNAFTAGatethe link is an excellent analysis of the whole affair, in my opinion) are just continuing proof of her gut-wrenchingly awful campaign tactics.

And now, havingdragged Obama into the mudwith her (to Obama’s detriment, and a decision by him that I’m not the least bit supportive of), she continues to tear this party apart simply because she’s capable of doing so and the cost of it isn’t too great in pursuit of her dream. As Andrew Sullivan says:

They have been thinking of this moment since they were in college and being a senator or an ex-president or having two terms in the White House are not sufficient to satiate their sense of entitlement. Even if they have to put their own party through a divisive, bitter, possibly fatal death match, they will never give up. Their country, their party . . . none of this matters compared with them.

And some people might think, “What about Obama? Why shouldn’t he walk away?” A) he’s leading in the delegate count, and B) he has motivated and pulled out voters the Clintons never could have, boding well for a Democratic victory in November. Clinton is losing (barely, I understand) in the delegate count, and is guaranteed to alienate a significantly large and probably decisive portion of the voters in November. To me, both of those reasons are enough.

Really, the policy differences between Obama and Clinton are relatively miniscule. I mean, sure there are significant ones like health care, or smaller ones like Cuba policy, but when it comes down to it, we’re not choosing a candidate for their policy, we’re choosing a candidate for their leadership ability. Maybe Obama won’t be as good as I’m hoping, but that’s part of what he’s inspired in me—the idea that he is; and I believe his experience, however allegedly limited it may be, is enough to demonstrate his viability. Clinton has not demonstrated anything more to me than a desperate machine hungry for power, even if I have her wrong and she means well, she hasn’t been able to convince me of that. And one way or another, she’s driving this race, her party, and, in my opinion, this whole country into the ground.

So this is what I’ve learned from Hillary Clinton. As grand or well-meaning as my goals might be, I’m resolving to always know or be aware of when it’s time to walk away.

-Sean

Read more