The next person who refers to Newt Gingrich as an "intellectual" should get smacked in the mouth with a Susan Sontag book.
Newt Gingrich is an intellectual like Justin Bieber is a headliner at the Gathering of the Juggalos.
Has a person ever become so willfully stupid that their PhD was voided? I'm imagining a guy from Tulane showing up at Gingrich's office, removing the sheepskin from its frame, stamping a giant black VOID across it, and handing it back to him.
END OF RANT
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Monday, September 13, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Vampire Weekend 2031 Reunion Tour - Tix On Sale This Friday
So I noticed that tickets go on sale this Friday, February 26th, for a Vampire Weekend show on September 15th (don't worry, that's September 2010, not September 2011). And that the Flaming Lips Summerstage show, in late July, is already sold out. When did we get to the point of having to plan SEVEN M*****F****NG MONTHS ahead to see a band play a gig?!?
I was about to get all "in my day" up in here, but then I did a quick search and found out that when Paul McCartney played Shea Stadium last year, 2009, tickets went on sale a month before the show. One month.
I haven't fully thought out the practical economics of this, but it seems to me that selling tickets to a sure-to-be-popular show seven months ahead of time would be a good thing for the ticket resale market (known as "scalping" in the pre-StubHub era). Resellers can snap up a big chunk of the tickets before a lot of people even realize the show has gone on sale (or realize it but hold off on buying tickets), and then rake in the cash as demand increases toward the show date.
BTW, I might post a belated review of Contra soon. Because what the world needs now is love, sweet love, and another opinion on Contra.
UPDATE: I've become aware of a regrettable omission in the above post. I neglected to mention that American Express cardholders can buy tickets via a "presale" on Wednesday the 24th. ROCK'N'F***IN'ROLL!!!!!!!!
UPDATE #2: Apparently, ticket buyers will be required to show ID and the credit card used to buy the tickets to get into the show. Which, in theory, should eliminate scalping and any possibility of getting some money out of the tickets if some kind of schedule conflict comes up in your life between now and September.
I was about to get all "in my day" up in here, but then I did a quick search and found out that when Paul McCartney played Shea Stadium last year, 2009, tickets went on sale a month before the show. One month.
I haven't fully thought out the practical economics of this, but it seems to me that selling tickets to a sure-to-be-popular show seven months ahead of time would be a good thing for the ticket resale market (known as "scalping" in the pre-StubHub era). Resellers can snap up a big chunk of the tickets before a lot of people even realize the show has gone on sale (or realize it but hold off on buying tickets), and then rake in the cash as demand increases toward the show date.
BTW, I might post a belated review of Contra soon. Because what the world needs now is love, sweet love, and another opinion on Contra.
UPDATE: I've become aware of a regrettable omission in the above post. I neglected to mention that American Express cardholders can buy tickets via a "presale" on Wednesday the 24th. ROCK'N'F***IN'ROLL!!!!!!!!
UPDATE #2: Apparently, ticket buyers will be required to show ID and the credit card used to buy the tickets to get into the show. Which, in theory, should eliminate scalping and any possibility of getting some money out of the tickets if some kind of schedule conflict comes up in your life between now and September.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Wilco (The Rant About The Village Voice Review)
I enjoy reading criticism. When an author, a musician, or a letter to the editor writer lashes out at a critic, I tend to side with the critic. Not this time. The Village Voice has just published a review of the new Wilco album (which, I should say up front, I haven't heard yet) by Mike Powell that has stirred up all sorts of negative feelings in me. I'm not sure if I've fully grasped what it is that bothers me so much about this review, but I've got some ideas.
Wilco doesn't live up to Powell's idea of what rock'n'roll should be - they're too tasteful, they lack edge. His real problem, though, seems to be with the hype machine that's elevated Wilco, unjustly in his opinion, to the status of Major American Band. OK, fair enough, but it's not as if Wilco has ever declared an ambition, Stones- or U2-style, to be the "World's Greatest Rock'n'Roll Band".
The strange thing is that the parts of the review dealing with the new album are not all that negative. There's a strange passive-aggressive quality to the whole thing. When Powell throws some mild compliments the band's way, it rings false after the nasty and callous references to Tweedy's prescription drug problem and the recent death of former Wilco member Jay Bennett. I guess when it comes down to it, my problem is with the tone of the piece. The nastiness just seems way out of proportion to the aesthetic crimes Wilco is accused of.
Well, you might say, if he provoked that strong of a reaction, then Powell must be doing his job as a critic. At least it wasn't boring, right? Well, several Oscar Wilde aphorisms to the contrary, there are worse things than being boring (Powell's major problem with Wilco). The picture of Mike Powell that this piece paints is that of the worst stereotype of a critic - bitter, unpleasant, in love with the sound of his own critical voice, the kind of person Neil Young had in mind in "Ambulance Blues" when he sang "all you critics sit alone".
Maybe I'm overreacting. Maybe the use of "Midwesterner" as some kind of slur has got my back up. Read the piece and see what you think.
Update:
I just read the comments section below the online version of the review (I initially read it in print). Powell attempts to come to his own defense, stressing that it was supposed to be a positive review and that he really likes and recommends the album. He also makes this statement: "Wilco's general lukewarm-ness is what makes them really, really unique". OK. I guess now I just think that this is a weird, muddled, and ultimately unsuccessful piece of music writing.
I've been reading Stanley Crouch's most recent collection of criticism, and in it he says that "illumination is the true art of criticism". Crouch can be as confrontational and personal in his attacks as any living critic, but he knows what his point of view is about a subject and forcefully defends it with deep knowledge and formidable prose. Even if you think he's totally off base or out of line, you usually end up learning something about some aspect of the subject being discussed.
In his Wilco piece, Powell paints himself into a corner - his half-hearted attempts to peddle blandness as some kind of admirable virtue are D.O.A. after all the gleeful zingers he gets off at the band's (and especially Tweedy's) expense. Powell takes a couple steps toward staking out an intriguing position, but doesn't come close to adequately defending it or even convincing the reader that he's serious. There's no illumination to be found here.
Bonus Links
Powell's former blog at Stylus Magazine (not updated since '07). Maybe he has a current one, but I couldn't find it.
Another, harsher and more entertaining take on Powell's review.
Wilco doesn't live up to Powell's idea of what rock'n'roll should be - they're too tasteful, they lack edge. His real problem, though, seems to be with the hype machine that's elevated Wilco, unjustly in his opinion, to the status of Major American Band. OK, fair enough, but it's not as if Wilco has ever declared an ambition, Stones- or U2-style, to be the "World's Greatest Rock'n'Roll Band".
The strange thing is that the parts of the review dealing with the new album are not all that negative. There's a strange passive-aggressive quality to the whole thing. When Powell throws some mild compliments the band's way, it rings false after the nasty and callous references to Tweedy's prescription drug problem and the recent death of former Wilco member Jay Bennett. I guess when it comes down to it, my problem is with the tone of the piece. The nastiness just seems way out of proportion to the aesthetic crimes Wilco is accused of.
Well, you might say, if he provoked that strong of a reaction, then Powell must be doing his job as a critic. At least it wasn't boring, right? Well, several Oscar Wilde aphorisms to the contrary, there are worse things than being boring (Powell's major problem with Wilco). The picture of Mike Powell that this piece paints is that of the worst stereotype of a critic - bitter, unpleasant, in love with the sound of his own critical voice, the kind of person Neil Young had in mind in "Ambulance Blues" when he sang "all you critics sit alone".
Maybe I'm overreacting. Maybe the use of "Midwesterner" as some kind of slur has got my back up. Read the piece and see what you think.
Update:
I just read the comments section below the online version of the review (I initially read it in print). Powell attempts to come to his own defense, stressing that it was supposed to be a positive review and that he really likes and recommends the album. He also makes this statement: "Wilco's general lukewarm-ness is what makes them really, really unique". OK. I guess now I just think that this is a weird, muddled, and ultimately unsuccessful piece of music writing.
I've been reading Stanley Crouch's most recent collection of criticism, and in it he says that "illumination is the true art of criticism". Crouch can be as confrontational and personal in his attacks as any living critic, but he knows what his point of view is about a subject and forcefully defends it with deep knowledge and formidable prose. Even if you think he's totally off base or out of line, you usually end up learning something about some aspect of the subject being discussed.
In his Wilco piece, Powell paints himself into a corner - his half-hearted attempts to peddle blandness as some kind of admirable virtue are D.O.A. after all the gleeful zingers he gets off at the band's (and especially Tweedy's) expense. Powell takes a couple steps toward staking out an intriguing position, but doesn't come close to adequately defending it or even convincing the reader that he's serious. There's no illumination to be found here.
Bonus Links
Powell's former blog at Stylus Magazine (not updated since '07). Maybe he has a current one, but I couldn't find it.
Another, harsher and more entertaining take on Powell's review.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Pedantry on Parade
Wikipedia gives this definition for "pedant":
"a person who is overly concerned with formalism and precision, or who 'makes a show of learning'."
To see this tendency in full flower, take a look at the comments section here.
This is my favorite:
"This grammar error has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time, as it is committed by many grocers both in my home community and in the places to which I routinely travel. Most of the time it does no good to point it out, as few clerks grasp the distinction."
I understand now why I encounter so many surly grocery clerks. It's not the crappy wages and long hours, it's people complaining to them about the wording of the "10 items or less" sign. This is one reason I can respect the way Kenny Shopsin runs his restaurant. You know what would happen if one of these guardians of the English language came into his place and pointed out a grammar or syntax error on the menu? He would tell them to GET THE F*** OUT. Too bad the average grocery clerk doesn't have the power to tell somebody to take their pedantic a** down the road to Trader Joe's.
I'll admit that unnecessary apostrophes on signs bug me, but I can't imagine actually complaining to an employee or a business owner about the "incorrectness" of their sign. But obviously, that's just me.
"a person who is overly concerned with formalism and precision, or who 'makes a show of learning'."
To see this tendency in full flower, take a look at the comments section here.
This is my favorite:
"This grammar error has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time, as it is committed by many grocers both in my home community and in the places to which I routinely travel. Most of the time it does no good to point it out, as few clerks grasp the distinction."
I understand now why I encounter so many surly grocery clerks. It's not the crappy wages and long hours, it's people complaining to them about the wording of the "10 items or less" sign. This is one reason I can respect the way Kenny Shopsin runs his restaurant. You know what would happen if one of these guardians of the English language came into his place and pointed out a grammar or syntax error on the menu? He would tell them to GET THE F*** OUT. Too bad the average grocery clerk doesn't have the power to tell somebody to take their pedantic a** down the road to Trader Joe's.
I'll admit that unnecessary apostrophes on signs bug me, but I can't imagine actually complaining to an employee or a business owner about the "incorrectness" of their sign. But obviously, that's just me.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Musical Crime
The radio at work (which I do not control) just played "Golden Slumbers". Hearing it filled me with a wonderful feeling, until it ended and was followed immediately by a Ben Folds song.
Now, I have nothing against Ben Folds, but the transition was an utter, jarring, painful failure. The tempo didn't work. The tone was wrong. It made me angry. I wanted to walk over and smash the radio with a hammer, or a bat. I wanted to call the station and scream profanities.
If you're going to follow "Golden Slumbers" with anything other than "Carry That Weight" and "The End", it better be a f***ing great segue. If you picked the right song, it could conceivably be a pleasant, expectation-defying surprise. I'd like to hear that, but that's not what happened.
The medley is just over five minutes long. You couldn't just play the whole thing!?!?!?
!@&!$&*#%&*$#%*#&$@*&#!!!
Now, I have nothing against Ben Folds, but the transition was an utter, jarring, painful failure. The tempo didn't work. The tone was wrong. It made me angry. I wanted to walk over and smash the radio with a hammer, or a bat. I wanted to call the station and scream profanities.
If you're going to follow "Golden Slumbers" with anything other than "Carry That Weight" and "The End", it better be a f***ing great segue. If you picked the right song, it could conceivably be a pleasant, expectation-defying surprise. I'd like to hear that, but that's not what happened.
The medley is just over five minutes long. You couldn't just play the whole thing!?!?!?
!@&!$&*#%&*$#%*#&$@*&#!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
