ok, so here's my closer and I'm really going to be done after this because this is quite literally endless. I was all excited to come home and find links and quotes and blah blah blah, but this will never end either way. Everything I say will be argued and everything you say will be argued. Everyone keeps bringing up "proof" that I don't think solidifies anything. I never said there was no form of "evolution." There is growth, adaptation, mutations, etc etc. I just do not believe in the grand, long term theory of evolution, and none of this "proof" is going to change my mind. Not because of God, not because of the Bible, but simply because I don't accept it has a viable explanation, it's just that simple. I don't buy it, I don't accept it as a good enough answer. My doubt of evolution does not come from my belief in God, however my belief in God does further my doubt in evolution. Something you have to remember is that we're not even remotely in the same frame of mind.
Follow me here... I accept the various tests and theories and ideas and notions and assumptions as possible, but it doesn't disprove God, in any way. You can not disprove God, it is an impossibility, you can not disprove something that there is no evidence of. You can't disprove that there is not an invisible purple elephant sitting next to you either, it's impossible. So, being that God can not be disproven, which is something I have accepted as truth from my life and experiences and logic that I find to be sound, you must assume based on MY beliefs that there is a God. If there is a God (based on my ideas) then there is some truth to creation. If there is truth to creation, there is at least SOME falsities to evolution, even if it's on a small scale. I know that creation doesn't cancel the idea of evolution, nor does evolution cancel the idea of creation, but I believe in divine creation, not that we evolved from tiny organisms and developed into the complex, diverse, emotional begins we are now. I just don't buy it. So, being that in my little world there is a lack of evidence for evolution I am going to continue to lean towards the idea of creation. The fact that there are not even theories of where it all began, I mean the very very very beginning, pushes me towards the idea of an omnipotent being. It just does.
I didn't want to get into the actual God part really, but I will to back up why I can NOT accept there is no creator, and that is the nature of beings. Now, this for the most part applies to all creatures, but it can and will be disputed, so i'll limit it to humans for the sake of LESS argument. Human beings have an instilled moral compass, this is true through out history. From the earliest recorded history to modern tribes who are completely disconnected from civilization, we ALL share a similar moral value system of life and death and for the most part right and wrong. Now, are there tribes and civilizations that do not treat these values the same? Of course, there are cultures that accept murder and such as part of their lifestyle. But it's due to the different growth of societies and how they handle situations. For example, the Salem Witch Trials. EVERYONE knew that killing these women was wrong and were using it as a punishment. This is a practice we would certainly not commit today, simply because our knowledge of it has progressed and we understand it differently. But imagine this if you will, if you were convinced, ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED there was a person of magic power in your community that was abducting and harming children and putting curses on people and your own family was in danger, would you not react similar? Think of the emotional response that drives in you, both the idea of your loved ones in danger AND the idea of what you have to be capable of to deal with it. That emotional response is instilled in us as it is in all people. Now, assuming that there is such an instilled value system, this suggests the idea of right and wrong, which some might classify as good and, if I dare, "evil." Assuming for a moment that this does in fact warrant the notion of good and evil, and not just a chemical make up, then there must be a power behind it. The notion of free will suggests that there must be wrong/evil to be able to choose. If there is evil, there must be good. If there is good and evil, there must be a power behind it. Assuming for a moment there are beings behind the idea of good and evil, one must assume that there is a more powerful being in order for any form of balance to be kept, and that the more powerful being is good and created the evil being, for if the evil being was more powerful it would have never created the good. Now, many cultures have different names for this belief of good and evil, but that is a debate PURELY between religions and I won't even begin to go there.
Another instilled aspect of human nature is the need for something greater, the need for more, the need for answers. Human nature dictates that there is no desire with out necessity. There is no food with out hunger, there is no drink with out water. If you put stock in this, then you must believe that there IS something greater beyond our understanding. Being that we all strive for something greater, there MUST be something greater. Whether you believe that is science and the cosmos and the ability for something to appear out of nothing or you believe that there is an ultimate power that created our world, we all strive for answers of an ultimate truth. Now that is what splits EVERY human being down the middle. You either believe there is some sort of ultimate power (of any religion) or you believe in the idea of no creator and rely purely on science. Which brings us to the debate as a whole. But having established there is an ultimate truth, something I think we can all agree on, that brings me to my explanation above of instilled human nature.
Now, I have no doubt the idea of human nature can be attempted to be explained via chemical composition and genetic make up and all that, and that's totally fine. That all exists for certain. I know that fear and love and all that can be diminished through nothing more than science. I understand that love and fear and all emotion all have chemical and physical reactions. This is just about proven. However, it can not be easily attributed to just these things. Think of the way you feel about people... I know you've all been in love... do you really dumb that down to a pure chemical reaction? If you did, I see no point in seeing love out, because it wouldn't really matter, you would know that you could evolve through it. Your desire for love of another human being is a recognition of what they really are. You could also attribute this to the survival of our species and the need to mate. That however does not back up the notion of love, because many, MANY species survive and mate with out maintaining an solitary partner, or stick to their mate in anyway. Some do, many don't. So love must be emotional based. The desire to remain with someone for any period of time comes for a desire to connect with their inner being. Some might call this the soul, which if you don't believe in a god, then you wouldn't believe in a soul. But I for one certainly can not understand how you can think that we are just fleshly robots aimlessly roaming the earth like zombies with actions based of nothing more than chemical and scientific reactions. The idea that when we die our bodies just shut down like a broken computer just doesn't add up. If it were true, why would we miss loved ones so much? Chemical reaction, right? Not likely. And more over, why do ALL humans fear death? People can say they are not afraid to die, and perhaps even some truly are not, but come on now, MOST people are in fact afraid to die. Why? If there was nothing after we died, why are we born with an instilled fear of death? A true atheist should have absolutely NO fear of death, because there is no consequence to death. You could say that "you enjoy living" or you "don't want your love ones to feel pain when you die" or just that you want to ride the life cycle out in general. Especially if you're happy. But the very first time an atheist hits a rough patch, they should realistically just want to kill themselves and be forever done with our soulless husk and never feel pain again. Think about it... We do not want to die, we do not want our loved ones to die, we fear the unknown of what happens after. Whether you think you're going to heaven or you think you just rot, we all still fear the idea of losing our lives. This, to me, suggests there is in fact something more after death. As a Christian, I would subscribe to the idea of reincarnation (something I don't believe in at all) well before I swallowed the idea of no soul or no after life.
I know people have a scientific theory about everything, and that's great, it's the search for knowledge and truth, coincidently, most of the theories can not be proven, just backed.
It has been said, even in this post, that the need for God shows a lack of intelligence. To me, a lack of intelligence is displayed by not accepting possibility, especially of something that can not be disproven. You don't have to believe in God, but in my opinion, any man of science should be at least open to the idea of a ultimate being. I accept the possibility that I could be wrong, it's part of my search for the truth. People that close out the idea of a "god" are nothing more than stubborn, closed minded individuals who do not want to accept the idea of a being more powerful than them who they, in theory, may have to answer to at some point, or even just someone who "has control over them." I think that's madness personally. Insanity is doing something over and over again expecting a different result. To me, people trying to disprove a god is insanity at it's highest caliber, it CAN NOT BE DONE. You could say i'm insane for practicing my beliefs every day in hopes to reach a heaven. Well A: my beliefs have yet to be disproven, there will be only one result (whatever that result may be), and B: and I live each day a little differently in hopes to learn more about myself and truth itself. I consider myself a relatively intelligent person. Due to my various "chemical imbalances" I have seen numerous doctors and have been solidified as both sane and intelligent by all, including a very high IQ. I'm sure you're thinking "IQ tests don't mean anything right." Well, we're not talking about internet IQ tests, we're talking about full studies. Anyway...
I find it unfortunate that some people have never experienced what they feel could be God. I'm not saying I am better than anyone else in any form, but I most certainly have experienced MANY things that I believe to be that of a higher consciousness. That's fine if you don't share that belief, luckily what you believe in no way effects my beliefs.
This all started off with a simple quote that I found amusing by an absolute leader of evolution. Not to mention many other quotes that can be found by top people of their field admitting that there is no way to truly prove evolution. I get that science is not based off of something being proven beyond a doubt. I get that's it's learning and growing as you go in the hope to become more knowledgable of the idea of a truth. I even greatly accept the idea that grand, long term evolution is possibly 100% real and maybe even the big bang theory. I don't know, and it would be absolutely infantile of me to suggest I do. We weren't there, we don't know. All any of us can do is strive for knowledge and make the best guess possible with the information available to us. As I mentioned before, I am fine with the idea of being wrong, because if I am and there is no creator or no afterlife, then I will reap no consequences of living my life under this belief system. In no way do I mean this as a crazy uppity christian... but I truly, truly hope you all have the same level of confidence if you turn out to be wrong.
*(I love intelligent debate and I always welcome it. However, I feel that this will never reach a conclusion. You believe what you believe, and I believe what I believe. I respect your beliefs, I would ask you do the same in return. Despite the fact that this debate is generally healthy and intelligent, I do not wish to continue it, I have spent a lot of time with this and I have other things I need to focus on. If anyone would like to discuss this further I would be happy to do so over the telephone or in person. I however will not respond further. Thank you for your respect.)*
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Runaway - art or ego?
Well, Kanye West has got his head the furthest up his ass it's ever been.
I just finished watching Runaway, his "feature length film" (34 minutes and 33 seconds), and I am certainly filled with emotion. Largely in part boredom and contempt, but not completely void of intrigue and amusement. Out of almost 35 minutes there were about 10 that were enjoyable. The film is more or less a series of intertwined music videos. The "videos" at about 15 minutes in and the ending video, starting at about 28 minutes in were enjoyable, mostly due to the soundtrack of what I can only guess is material from his upcoming album. Like the film itself, the music had very few enjoyable moments. Scored by his unbelievable production abilities, you at many times are left with hope that you are about to hear what you've grown to love from Kanye's history. No such luck. Most of the music is gorgeous beats and instrumentals, rudely interrupted by the worst rapping out of West to date, both in flow, style and lyrics. The rap is especially disappointing because some of the music is quite possibly the best he's done so far. Makes you wish he wrote and produced this album for another MC. As mentioned before, the video's total failure is saved by the middle and the ending videos and music. At about 15 minutes in, the main video for the song "Runaway" begins. With blatantly over the top lyrics and an epic melody, Runaway hold it's place in Kanye's top tracks. Easily belonging on what you could've only hoped would be a continuation of West's album 808s and Heartbreaks, he has truly shown that his strengths rest outside of the pure hip-hop genre and are perhaps better placed in an almost crossbreed of modern hip-hop and rock reminiscent of Phil Collins. But, unfortunately, it appears Kanye has attempted to return to his roots, but perhaps dug a bit too deep.
The film ends with a completely ridiculous wrap up to his beyond pretentious story telling with a sample of another hopeful track. Unaware of the name, I am looking forward to hearing the rest as soon as possible. The track begins with a copy cat vocal style borrowed from Imogen Heap's "Hide and Seek." By the time you begin to get annoyed with him ripping off another artist, again, the beat kicks in and takes a completely different direction, and a pleasant one at that. Though I very much enjoyed those two tracks, and the music over all, Kanye's rap game has suffered so much that I am less than enthused for his upcoming album. All and all the film was entertaining, at least worth watching once. The gorgeous cinematography alone is worth viewing, even with the sound off. However the smug, over the top, artsy story telling is plagued even more by the down right horrific acting and foolish, and at times borderline insulting, imagery and in my opinion proves that Kanye's vast creativity is once again plagued by is even greater ego and need to out due everyone else. I have for the most part always been a fan of Kanye West, and to this day I think he is one of the greatest producers music has ever seen. He has a creative mind beyond most artists. The film attempts to be a pure triumph, but falls short and lands somewhere in the area of student art film.
Borrowing a rating system some of my friends and I have used at times, out of 10, Kanye West's film 'Runaway' is a 4 trying to be a 9.
I just finished watching Runaway, his "feature length film" (34 minutes and 33 seconds), and I am certainly filled with emotion. Largely in part boredom and contempt, but not completely void of intrigue and amusement. Out of almost 35 minutes there were about 10 that were enjoyable. The film is more or less a series of intertwined music videos. The "videos" at about 15 minutes in and the ending video, starting at about 28 minutes in were enjoyable, mostly due to the soundtrack of what I can only guess is material from his upcoming album. Like the film itself, the music had very few enjoyable moments. Scored by his unbelievable production abilities, you at many times are left with hope that you are about to hear what you've grown to love from Kanye's history. No such luck. Most of the music is gorgeous beats and instrumentals, rudely interrupted by the worst rapping out of West to date, both in flow, style and lyrics. The rap is especially disappointing because some of the music is quite possibly the best he's done so far. Makes you wish he wrote and produced this album for another MC. As mentioned before, the video's total failure is saved by the middle and the ending videos and music. At about 15 minutes in, the main video for the song "Runaway" begins. With blatantly over the top lyrics and an epic melody, Runaway hold it's place in Kanye's top tracks. Easily belonging on what you could've only hoped would be a continuation of West's album 808s and Heartbreaks, he has truly shown that his strengths rest outside of the pure hip-hop genre and are perhaps better placed in an almost crossbreed of modern hip-hop and rock reminiscent of Phil Collins. But, unfortunately, it appears Kanye has attempted to return to his roots, but perhaps dug a bit too deep.
The film ends with a completely ridiculous wrap up to his beyond pretentious story telling with a sample of another hopeful track. Unaware of the name, I am looking forward to hearing the rest as soon as possible. The track begins with a copy cat vocal style borrowed from Imogen Heap's "Hide and Seek." By the time you begin to get annoyed with him ripping off another artist, again, the beat kicks in and takes a completely different direction, and a pleasant one at that. Though I very much enjoyed those two tracks, and the music over all, Kanye's rap game has suffered so much that I am less than enthused for his upcoming album. All and all the film was entertaining, at least worth watching once. The gorgeous cinematography alone is worth viewing, even with the sound off. However the smug, over the top, artsy story telling is plagued even more by the down right horrific acting and foolish, and at times borderline insulting, imagery and in my opinion proves that Kanye's vast creativity is once again plagued by is even greater ego and need to out due everyone else. I have for the most part always been a fan of Kanye West, and to this day I think he is one of the greatest producers music has ever seen. He has a creative mind beyond most artists. The film attempts to be a pure triumph, but falls short and lands somewhere in the area of student art film.
Borrowing a rating system some of my friends and I have used at times, out of 10, Kanye West's film 'Runaway' is a 4 trying to be a 9.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
if you build it, they will come... and get you!
I'm not saying the right wing radicals aren't taking this whole Park51 thing too far, the degree of ignorance is bordering on impressive. But what I'm truly amazed at is what a big deal this is. We're once again at a stand still between two religions. It's really the same old song and dance it's been for centuries, only this time it's over a basketball court. I honestly don't agree with either side. The muslims should have the right to build, yes, however, is it really worth all of this commotion? The maniacs that are opposing this so heavily are in no way in the right, but what are you proving by beating this into the ground? Just go down the street or make it a building of multi-practicing faiths or anything. And you far right wingers, maybe that's not your first choice of where this thing could be built, but what do you ACTUALLY care? Once it goes up, what difference does it really make to you? I think both sides of this have got their heads so far up their asses that they're coming back out of their necks and smiling. Everyone needs to get over themselves, big time.
Here's a short list of things everyone could better put their energy into:
- world hunger
- alternative fuel
- human trafficking
- species extinction
- drastic climate changes
- water crisis
- economic collapse
- small/large scale pollution
- oil clean up in the Gulf
- the desensitizing of our youth through media
...feel free to jump in here anytime.
If people seriously used half the time they spend bitching about this kind of global high school drama, we could maybe save some lives and make this world a better place to live in. Yes, I know that religious rights are important to a lot of people, and when stuff like this escalates it turns into wars and fighting and etc, but that's just my point! Just chill out with having to be right around every corner. I'm surprised and not surprised at all at the same time that this conflict has lasted more than a day. I feel like our planet is in enough crisis right now that people shouldn't even have time to notice that this kind of thing is going on, and yet it floods our media outlets like shark week on crack. Do you think the people that live through daily hell in crisis Africa give two shits about whether or not this building goes up? I know everyone has their own level of priorities, I usually tend to take religious topics very serious. I just think there's a certain point where it becomes no different then two children fighting over a toy and once it's over both sides are going to say "well that was certainly a waste of time and energy."
Here's a short list of things everyone could better put their energy into:
- world hunger
- alternative fuel
- human trafficking
- species extinction
- drastic climate changes
- water crisis
- economic collapse
- small/large scale pollution
- oil clean up in the Gulf
- the desensitizing of our youth through media
...feel free to jump in here anytime.
If people seriously used half the time they spend bitching about this kind of global high school drama, we could maybe save some lives and make this world a better place to live in. Yes, I know that religious rights are important to a lot of people, and when stuff like this escalates it turns into wars and fighting and etc, but that's just my point! Just chill out with having to be right around every corner. I'm surprised and not surprised at all at the same time that this conflict has lasted more than a day. I feel like our planet is in enough crisis right now that people shouldn't even have time to notice that this kind of thing is going on, and yet it floods our media outlets like shark week on crack. Do you think the people that live through daily hell in crisis Africa give two shits about whether or not this building goes up? I know everyone has their own level of priorities, I usually tend to take religious topics very serious. I just think there's a certain point where it becomes no different then two children fighting over a toy and once it's over both sides are going to say "well that was certainly a waste of time and energy."
Friday, August 6, 2010
Here's How YOU Are Killing "The Scene"
Well, to be fair, the "scene" that I was raised in is already dead. But here's some reasons why YOU are killing whatever this version of the scene is.
To qualify that I have the right to talk on all these counts, I will give you a brief history of myself in this industry. As a "fan" I have been in the "scene" and going to shows of all shapes and sizes since 2000. There are certainly people that can trump me there, but 10 years is a long time, and I had dove in pretty hard when I did. As a musician, I have been playing out in bands since I was 14. More notably was Human Flight Committee, which whether or not you liked the band you can't really argue our local success and some of our touring success. And most recently To Speak of Wolves, which I left by choice, but had a major hand in helping to get them where they are now. As a promoter, I had booked a few of the biggest shows in the area (pre the rise of New England concerts anyway) and have brought in bands to NH that had never come closer than Boston. I also owned my own venue for a year, which was quite successful, the only reason I don't have it anymore is because the town it was in decided to pull the plug and I did not have the money to start in a new building. Again, I am honestly not trying to make myself sound cool, in fact I hate listing that stuff because I really don't care what you think about me on a personal level. I am just trying to qualify my right to speak on these matters for those who don't know.
That being obnoxiously said, let's begin...
*(I would also likely to quickly point out that this is not aimed at any individual or group of people, this is aimed at EVERYONE.)
BANDS: There is the obvious argument that the bastardized genres of things like breakdowns mixed with auto tune and things like that are having a large hand in killing the scene on it's own. But let's go beyond the fact that 90% of bands today just completely suck in every way imaginable. Let's address what a lot bands, good or bad, are doing to harm their own scene. If I had to sum it up in one word, I think it would be "priorities." Bands priorities are soooo out of whack these days it's nuts. The fact that fashion and look has become the single most important thing in the music industry is disgusting. You expect that sort of thing from the major label side of things, but this was NEVER the case 20 or even 10 years ago in the scene. I know that music can't be blamed entirely for the importance of looks because that is just a worldly thing in general, especially in this country. But bands can be blamed for how hard it's pushed. It's unfortunate that it's already come so far that you almost HAVE to have an incredible image to get anywhere in a band, because every time a new band with long flowing straightened hair, and v-necks showing chest pieces, and pretty boy images playing tough guy music comes out, the importance of look is furthered and furthered. I miss the days when a band's press shot consisted of each member wearing a different band's t-shirt. That is support. When I was in TSOW, we had a theory that if a few big bands started wearing band t-shirts on stage more often, it could very well change the touring band economy. We always used Underoath as an example, so I will now. If at least one or two dudes in Underoath were constantly seen in their favorite band's t-shirts, kids would go nuts and go to that band's shows and buy their merch. Then that band has more money and, in theory, get bigger themselves. Hopefully that band by now will be wearing their favorite band's t-shirts and encourage their fans to continue the trend. With in 6 months to a year, EVERYONE is wearing band t-shirts again (like they used to) and the touring band economy is in the best shape it's been in years. It may seem like i've strayed slightly from my original point, but I haven't it's the same thing in my mind. The importance of fashion is encouraging kids to refocus their priorities towards looking cool instead of supporting bands. I know that some bands do support other bands in this way, and other ways, and I know that plenty of kids do buy shirts, but nowhere near the way it used to be. I can remember less than 10 years ago when you would be at a show and 95% of anyone there was wearing a band shirt. Now it's all v-necks and striped shirts and tank tops and whatever else they bought at H&M or Urban Outfitters that day. And that's totally cool, I appreciate fashion as much as the next guy, perhaps a little too much, but the inner-band support system is crumbling.
Another thing bands need to do, and get ready for this... STOP TOURING!!! Confused? Let me explain. Bands tour TOO much, and here's where it fails on several levels. If every band in the country thinks that they just need to be out there touring non-stop, that puts like 865,000 bands on the road at the same time. That's horribly exaggerated of course, but their are just WAY too many bands out there these days. When there are so many tours happening at the same time, that makes it so there are an average of like 5 shows a week in every single city. Now if there are 5 shows a week anywhere from $10-$20 a show, or more, this is leaving kids no other option but to choose which show they go to. If an Underoath tour, a Bring Me The Horizon tour, an Attack Attack tour, and a Vanna tour all come through the same city in the same week, kids that very well may have gone to all 4 tours if they were spread out, are going to have to chose favorites, and in a lot of cases, the smaller bands are going to lose. Not to mention the even smaller DIY tours of bands that are desperately trying to be heard. Even if people choose the Vanna tour over other "bigger" tours, then that means the all local show or the upcoming band tour is going to suffer greatly. (By the way, I am not lumping any of those bands in together in anyway, they are just the first names I thought of. I would never intentionally group the dudes in Vanna in with a hack band like Attack Attack, don't hate me guys.) Anyway, so now you've got kids choosing which shows they want to go to, and at SOME point, your band IS going to lose to another tour, no matter how awesome you may be. Another reason you need to stop touring so much is competing against yourself. If you return to the same city in a month, you are not going to get all the same people back each show. Some people JUST saw you, and other people JUST saw some other tour. It's giving me a headache trying to reason this, but it should be simple to understand, YOU'RE ALL SPREADING THE SCENE TOO THIN. Space out your touring, make them the best, most profitable tours you can, and when not on the road, support your careers by doing some shows in your surrounding states, you make the most money there anyway. Oh, and this brings up a point to smaller bands, YOU DON'T DESERVE TO TOUR UNTIL YOU CAN DRAW KIDS IN YOUR HOMETOWN! Is this clear to everyone? If you can't even draw 100 kids in your hometown, you have NO business going out on the road taking up the other hard working bands tour dates. Struggling bands are killing the scene faster than signed bands are if you ask me. If all the small little shitty tours would stop, the number of shows would go down about 50% and this would solve this entire problem almost completely.
Does this blog not effect you yet? Don't worry, I'm getting there.
PROMOTERS: Oh man, as a former touring musician my hatred for most promoters is tangible. First thing is as a promoter, just read everything I said about booking too many shows, it applies to you too. Too many shows means spreading the attendance out which means some of the shows are going to suck which means both you and those bands are going to lose money. That whole theory not only applies to you, but can be blamed almost exclusively on you. Look, I know a lot of promoters try really, really hard and still get shit on by whiney bands, I've been on both ends, I've bitched at a LOT of promoters, but I also know how much it sucks to have everything on your head for shows, but it is still YOUR responsibility to make a show successful. If you can't handle it, then stop doing it. Is it the band's job to promote? Yes, of course it is, but it is YOUR job to make sure they do. Make a flyer and send it to all the bands, tell them how you want the show worded on their website/myspace, follow up and make sure they are also promoting. Their promotion is nothing but a tool of YOUR job. Making a band sell tickets is NOT part of being a promoter. Let me say this one more time... making a band sell tickets is NOT part of being a promoter. If a band is big enough to draw an audience, then it's insulting to even ASK them to sell tickets, luckily most bands like that are smart enough to refuse to do so. If a band is unknown to the point that the only reason them being on the show is worth it to you is to have them sell tickets, then they most likely don't belong on that show to begin with. But you want to "give smaller bands an opportunity to play with bigger bands" right? Nope. If you want to give a smaller band an opportunity because you think it will be good for them, then just do it. Just accept the fact that them being on the show is for them, not for you, and help the local community out. BUT WAIT, act now and I'll still throw in a selfish act for you to gain from! Check this math out promoters. If you put an unknown local band on a show with a big band that draws 500 kids, guess what? 500 kids just saw that local band and they are now on the fast track to being a band to make you more money! HOORAY, everyone wins!
Let's talk about guarantees for a second. I feel it's ridiculous that this is even an issue, but it sadly is. Promoters, incase you are unsure of the word guarantee, let me help you with it's actual definition. "Guarantee: an assurance for the fulfillment of a condition: as a : an agreement by which one person undertakes to secure another in the possession or enjoyment of something b : an assurance of the quality of or of the length of use to be expected from a product offered for sale often with a promise of reimbursement." If you are stupid enough to guarantee a band money, you fucking pay them no matter what the circumstances. I don't care if you have to sell your car to get the money, pay what you promised. I won't name names, but I remember one time we had to bring an e-mail up on a phone to prove to a promoter what he said and he still wouldn't pay which we then had to threaten a him that we were friends with all the bands on his upcoming shows and we would make sure they were canceled if he did not pay us what he promised us. He then proceeded to go across the street to an ATM and take out money from his own bank account to pay us, and we took every last penny he promised. To be honest, as a human being, that is a disgusting thing for me to have to share with people, I'm embarrassed that I had to do that, but I'm also disgusted that my hand was forced in that manner. I know of some bands that have strong armed promoters to an ATM and forced him to take money out, so you can imagine how much worse it gets. Anyway, you get the point. A band, especially a touring band, is a business and they rely on what you promised them. You owe them that money no matter what the cost, even if only 2 people showed up. I'm sorry that you may be losing money on the guarantee, but the lack of attendance is most likely due to YOUR shitty promoting, so you only cost yourself money. You should've either been smart enough to not book that show in the first place, or done a better job promoting it. This goes so much deeper than money though. Bands are your business, you are NOTHING with out them. I've got a hot newsflash for all promoters. BANDS DON'T NEED YOU. But you sure need them. Local bands can set up shows in basements or halls, and touring bands can just skip your area all together. I know so many bands that won't step foot in certain cities or sometimes even states because they hate everyone they've worked with, so they just skip it all together. There are ALWAYS ways for bands to by pass you as a promoter no matter how awesome you think you are. There is ALWAYS some kid out there that will book his favorite band at a college for 10 times what you would've paid them anyway. You are a luxury and you need to be in the business for the right reasons, because you love music and you love it's community, and you want to make a career out of flourishing it, NOT EXPOSING IT. If you do your job as a promoter the right way and do it to further the music community, it WILL turn around to make you more money. There is a dude in Mass, that will remain nameless, that would pay hundreds of dollars out of his pocket to bands before he let them go home empty handed, even if he didn't promise them anything. These bands and other bands via word of mouth would flock to him as a promoter anytime they needed a show. He grew in to one of the bigger booking companies in the state and has since moved on to buying in to huge venues themselves. THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE PEOPLE.
This is getting lengthy so lets move on to the "fans."
FANS: You are quite possibly the most to blame for the downfall of the scene. Your snotty close minded pompous trendy attitudes are doing nothing for nobody. For one, open your minds up to legitimate music please. Yeah, I know that you love them breakdowns and you love to punch other kids in the face when that 808 goes off. And I know that you girls can't help but love all that long straight hair and auto-tuned vocals. And you crazy kids love your zombie shirts and crazy cartoon designs of what would normally be considered gruesome imagery. But COME ON PEOPLE, try listening to some other stuff too. For every CD you buy that has auto-tuned singing mixed with breakdowns and two step parts mixed in, you should be forced, at gun point, to buy a jazz album. If you're listening to Brokencyde right now, please smash the computer you're on against a wall, go guy a Mumford & Sons CD and think about what you've done wrong. That being said, even in your own little closed world of music you are still killing the industry. Download music "illegally" if you wan't, I don't care, you're going to anyway. But if you do, for the love of God, go to that band's show and buy a shirt! If you are in possession of band's album and you have never given them any form of money, you are an asshole. There's no two ways about that. You suck, and you are destroying your scene, I hope you're happy. And stop whining about how much money it cost to get into the show. The bands, the promoters, the venue, the label, the managers, the merch guys, the security, etc, they ALL expect to be paid for their services, and that costs money, friends. I recently read an article by the singer of Trap Them that I think was worded perfectly. You'll pay $15 to go see a movie in IMAX and then drop $8 on popcorn and $6 on a drink, but you won't drop $20 to go see hard working bands play their hearts out, an experience that is different every single time you attend? And you call yourself a fan of music?
Also, back to the band shirts I talked about at the start of the blog. Bands should be supporting other bands by wearing their shirts, but more importantly, YOU should be wearing band shirts if you like them so much. You going out and buying a striped v-neck shirt from American Apparel just because you saw some lead singer wearing it is not helping anything. You're certainly not supporting that singer or his band, and 9 times out of 10 you look like a dickhead anyway. Buy your favorite bands shirt, and wear it to the next show you go to. (But not to that band's next show, you never wear the shirt of the band you're going to see, everyone knows that. Don't be THAT guy.) Now, granted, a lot of bands are way over paid in the grand scheme of life, but that's a whole other topic I won't get into because it's pointless. It's the same as actors, it's disgusting how much money they make while people across the world are starving, but it's never going to change, so let's not get into it.
Along all the same lines, but in my opinion the most important level, SUPPORT LOCAL MUSIC. Oh you idiots, please support local music. You've seen Every Time I Die 47 times, and yeah they're a good band and good dudes, but don't forget to head out to the local hall show every now and again. The scene is 100% dependent on local music, and here's why. Huge bands don't need local bands because the tour package usually is self reliant and draws all the kids themselves, but huge bands do need middle sized bands to open for them on the tours. Middle sized bands need big local bands to open for them to ensure a good crowd. Big local bands need little local bands to open for them to ensure a stable show and a growing community. So bands, promoters, fans, everyone, here's how it works: New bands need to open for big local bands so they can get a following and become big local bands. Big local bands need to open for medium size/touring bands so they can get their name out to a larger audience and the touring bands themselves so that they, the big local bands, too can become medium/touring size bands. Medium/touring size bands need to be put on opening slots for huge bands so they can get an even larger audience so that they can become huge bands. Then the new huge bands now let the new medium/touring bands open for them so those new medium/touring bands can let new big local bands open for them so they can let brand new bands open for them. SEE HOW THIS WORKS?! It is literally painful in it's simplicity. And yet, the concept is failing miserably by most.
The problems of the music industry and the "scene" go a lot deeper than this and it all stems from greed and the over all economy and the dumbing down of the entertainment industry and so on and so on. You could write an entire book on this stuff, and I'm sure people have. But this is the stuff that YOU can change. This is the stuff that YOU can be conscious of. It sounds stupid, but it starts on an individual basis. All it takes is for a couple bands, a couple promoters and a group of kids to start doing things FOR the music community and not for themselves and we can turn it all around. And as hippie as it sounds, if we can make the "scene" more positive, we can make the entire music industry more positive. And if we can change that, we can use that major outlet to better the world. It sounds cheesy even to me as I'm writing it out. But it's all about starting somewhere, and this is an easy problem to fix. Stop making music about you and your greed. The "scene" should be a large supportive community, a family. It starts on a local level and grows from there. Do your part.
Like I said, the scene I grew up in, as my generation knew it, is pretty much dead and buried. And this current generation scene is dying quick. I can't even imagine what the next scene will look like, it's borderline scary. Get involved now, keep the community alive before 5 more years pass and you're all writing stupid blogs like this one about how your scene is dead and the new generation needs to save theirs.
What I wouldn't give to go to a Coalesce/Get Up Kids show right now.
To qualify that I have the right to talk on all these counts, I will give you a brief history of myself in this industry. As a "fan" I have been in the "scene" and going to shows of all shapes and sizes since 2000. There are certainly people that can trump me there, but 10 years is a long time, and I had dove in pretty hard when I did. As a musician, I have been playing out in bands since I was 14. More notably was Human Flight Committee, which whether or not you liked the band you can't really argue our local success and some of our touring success. And most recently To Speak of Wolves, which I left by choice, but had a major hand in helping to get them where they are now. As a promoter, I had booked a few of the biggest shows in the area (pre the rise of New England concerts anyway) and have brought in bands to NH that had never come closer than Boston. I also owned my own venue for a year, which was quite successful, the only reason I don't have it anymore is because the town it was in decided to pull the plug and I did not have the money to start in a new building. Again, I am honestly not trying to make myself sound cool, in fact I hate listing that stuff because I really don't care what you think about me on a personal level. I am just trying to qualify my right to speak on these matters for those who don't know.
That being obnoxiously said, let's begin...
*(I would also likely to quickly point out that this is not aimed at any individual or group of people, this is aimed at EVERYONE.)
BANDS: There is the obvious argument that the bastardized genres of things like breakdowns mixed with auto tune and things like that are having a large hand in killing the scene on it's own. But let's go beyond the fact that 90% of bands today just completely suck in every way imaginable. Let's address what a lot bands, good or bad, are doing to harm their own scene. If I had to sum it up in one word, I think it would be "priorities." Bands priorities are soooo out of whack these days it's nuts. The fact that fashion and look has become the single most important thing in the music industry is disgusting. You expect that sort of thing from the major label side of things, but this was NEVER the case 20 or even 10 years ago in the scene. I know that music can't be blamed entirely for the importance of looks because that is just a worldly thing in general, especially in this country. But bands can be blamed for how hard it's pushed. It's unfortunate that it's already come so far that you almost HAVE to have an incredible image to get anywhere in a band, because every time a new band with long flowing straightened hair, and v-necks showing chest pieces, and pretty boy images playing tough guy music comes out, the importance of look is furthered and furthered. I miss the days when a band's press shot consisted of each member wearing a different band's t-shirt. That is support. When I was in TSOW, we had a theory that if a few big bands started wearing band t-shirts on stage more often, it could very well change the touring band economy. We always used Underoath as an example, so I will now. If at least one or two dudes in Underoath were constantly seen in their favorite band's t-shirts, kids would go nuts and go to that band's shows and buy their merch. Then that band has more money and, in theory, get bigger themselves. Hopefully that band by now will be wearing their favorite band's t-shirts and encourage their fans to continue the trend. With in 6 months to a year, EVERYONE is wearing band t-shirts again (like they used to) and the touring band economy is in the best shape it's been in years. It may seem like i've strayed slightly from my original point, but I haven't it's the same thing in my mind. The importance of fashion is encouraging kids to refocus their priorities towards looking cool instead of supporting bands. I know that some bands do support other bands in this way, and other ways, and I know that plenty of kids do buy shirts, but nowhere near the way it used to be. I can remember less than 10 years ago when you would be at a show and 95% of anyone there was wearing a band shirt. Now it's all v-necks and striped shirts and tank tops and whatever else they bought at H&M or Urban Outfitters that day. And that's totally cool, I appreciate fashion as much as the next guy, perhaps a little too much, but the inner-band support system is crumbling.
Another thing bands need to do, and get ready for this... STOP TOURING!!! Confused? Let me explain. Bands tour TOO much, and here's where it fails on several levels. If every band in the country thinks that they just need to be out there touring non-stop, that puts like 865,000 bands on the road at the same time. That's horribly exaggerated of course, but their are just WAY too many bands out there these days. When there are so many tours happening at the same time, that makes it so there are an average of like 5 shows a week in every single city. Now if there are 5 shows a week anywhere from $10-$20 a show, or more, this is leaving kids no other option but to choose which show they go to. If an Underoath tour, a Bring Me The Horizon tour, an Attack Attack tour, and a Vanna tour all come through the same city in the same week, kids that very well may have gone to all 4 tours if they were spread out, are going to have to chose favorites, and in a lot of cases, the smaller bands are going to lose. Not to mention the even smaller DIY tours of bands that are desperately trying to be heard. Even if people choose the Vanna tour over other "bigger" tours, then that means the all local show or the upcoming band tour is going to suffer greatly. (By the way, I am not lumping any of those bands in together in anyway, they are just the first names I thought of. I would never intentionally group the dudes in Vanna in with a hack band like Attack Attack, don't hate me guys.) Anyway, so now you've got kids choosing which shows they want to go to, and at SOME point, your band IS going to lose to another tour, no matter how awesome you may be. Another reason you need to stop touring so much is competing against yourself. If you return to the same city in a month, you are not going to get all the same people back each show. Some people JUST saw you, and other people JUST saw some other tour. It's giving me a headache trying to reason this, but it should be simple to understand, YOU'RE ALL SPREADING THE SCENE TOO THIN. Space out your touring, make them the best, most profitable tours you can, and when not on the road, support your careers by doing some shows in your surrounding states, you make the most money there anyway. Oh, and this brings up a point to smaller bands, YOU DON'T DESERVE TO TOUR UNTIL YOU CAN DRAW KIDS IN YOUR HOMETOWN! Is this clear to everyone? If you can't even draw 100 kids in your hometown, you have NO business going out on the road taking up the other hard working bands tour dates. Struggling bands are killing the scene faster than signed bands are if you ask me. If all the small little shitty tours would stop, the number of shows would go down about 50% and this would solve this entire problem almost completely.
Does this blog not effect you yet? Don't worry, I'm getting there.
PROMOTERS: Oh man, as a former touring musician my hatred for most promoters is tangible. First thing is as a promoter, just read everything I said about booking too many shows, it applies to you too. Too many shows means spreading the attendance out which means some of the shows are going to suck which means both you and those bands are going to lose money. That whole theory not only applies to you, but can be blamed almost exclusively on you. Look, I know a lot of promoters try really, really hard and still get shit on by whiney bands, I've been on both ends, I've bitched at a LOT of promoters, but I also know how much it sucks to have everything on your head for shows, but it is still YOUR responsibility to make a show successful. If you can't handle it, then stop doing it. Is it the band's job to promote? Yes, of course it is, but it is YOUR job to make sure they do. Make a flyer and send it to all the bands, tell them how you want the show worded on their website/myspace, follow up and make sure they are also promoting. Their promotion is nothing but a tool of YOUR job. Making a band sell tickets is NOT part of being a promoter. Let me say this one more time... making a band sell tickets is NOT part of being a promoter. If a band is big enough to draw an audience, then it's insulting to even ASK them to sell tickets, luckily most bands like that are smart enough to refuse to do so. If a band is unknown to the point that the only reason them being on the show is worth it to you is to have them sell tickets, then they most likely don't belong on that show to begin with. But you want to "give smaller bands an opportunity to play with bigger bands" right? Nope. If you want to give a smaller band an opportunity because you think it will be good for them, then just do it. Just accept the fact that them being on the show is for them, not for you, and help the local community out. BUT WAIT, act now and I'll still throw in a selfish act for you to gain from! Check this math out promoters. If you put an unknown local band on a show with a big band that draws 500 kids, guess what? 500 kids just saw that local band and they are now on the fast track to being a band to make you more money! HOORAY, everyone wins!
Let's talk about guarantees for a second. I feel it's ridiculous that this is even an issue, but it sadly is. Promoters, incase you are unsure of the word guarantee, let me help you with it's actual definition. "Guarantee: an assurance for the fulfillment of a condition: as a : an agreement by which one person undertakes to secure another in the possession or enjoyment of something b : an assurance of the quality of or of the length of use to be expected from a product offered for sale often with a promise of reimbursement." If you are stupid enough to guarantee a band money, you fucking pay them no matter what the circumstances. I don't care if you have to sell your car to get the money, pay what you promised. I won't name names, but I remember one time we had to bring an e-mail up on a phone to prove to a promoter what he said and he still wouldn't pay which we then had to threaten a him that we were friends with all the bands on his upcoming shows and we would make sure they were canceled if he did not pay us what he promised us. He then proceeded to go across the street to an ATM and take out money from his own bank account to pay us, and we took every last penny he promised. To be honest, as a human being, that is a disgusting thing for me to have to share with people, I'm embarrassed that I had to do that, but I'm also disgusted that my hand was forced in that manner. I know of some bands that have strong armed promoters to an ATM and forced him to take money out, so you can imagine how much worse it gets. Anyway, you get the point. A band, especially a touring band, is a business and they rely on what you promised them. You owe them that money no matter what the cost, even if only 2 people showed up. I'm sorry that you may be losing money on the guarantee, but the lack of attendance is most likely due to YOUR shitty promoting, so you only cost yourself money. You should've either been smart enough to not book that show in the first place, or done a better job promoting it. This goes so much deeper than money though. Bands are your business, you are NOTHING with out them. I've got a hot newsflash for all promoters. BANDS DON'T NEED YOU. But you sure need them. Local bands can set up shows in basements or halls, and touring bands can just skip your area all together. I know so many bands that won't step foot in certain cities or sometimes even states because they hate everyone they've worked with, so they just skip it all together. There are ALWAYS ways for bands to by pass you as a promoter no matter how awesome you think you are. There is ALWAYS some kid out there that will book his favorite band at a college for 10 times what you would've paid them anyway. You are a luxury and you need to be in the business for the right reasons, because you love music and you love it's community, and you want to make a career out of flourishing it, NOT EXPOSING IT. If you do your job as a promoter the right way and do it to further the music community, it WILL turn around to make you more money. There is a dude in Mass, that will remain nameless, that would pay hundreds of dollars out of his pocket to bands before he let them go home empty handed, even if he didn't promise them anything. These bands and other bands via word of mouth would flock to him as a promoter anytime they needed a show. He grew in to one of the bigger booking companies in the state and has since moved on to buying in to huge venues themselves. THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE PEOPLE.
This is getting lengthy so lets move on to the "fans."
FANS: You are quite possibly the most to blame for the downfall of the scene. Your snotty close minded pompous trendy attitudes are doing nothing for nobody. For one, open your minds up to legitimate music please. Yeah, I know that you love them breakdowns and you love to punch other kids in the face when that 808 goes off. And I know that you girls can't help but love all that long straight hair and auto-tuned vocals. And you crazy kids love your zombie shirts and crazy cartoon designs of what would normally be considered gruesome imagery. But COME ON PEOPLE, try listening to some other stuff too. For every CD you buy that has auto-tuned singing mixed with breakdowns and two step parts mixed in, you should be forced, at gun point, to buy a jazz album. If you're listening to Brokencyde right now, please smash the computer you're on against a wall, go guy a Mumford & Sons CD and think about what you've done wrong. That being said, even in your own little closed world of music you are still killing the industry. Download music "illegally" if you wan't, I don't care, you're going to anyway. But if you do, for the love of God, go to that band's show and buy a shirt! If you are in possession of band's album and you have never given them any form of money, you are an asshole. There's no two ways about that. You suck, and you are destroying your scene, I hope you're happy. And stop whining about how much money it cost to get into the show. The bands, the promoters, the venue, the label, the managers, the merch guys, the security, etc, they ALL expect to be paid for their services, and that costs money, friends. I recently read an article by the singer of Trap Them that I think was worded perfectly. You'll pay $15 to go see a movie in IMAX and then drop $8 on popcorn and $6 on a drink, but you won't drop $20 to go see hard working bands play their hearts out, an experience that is different every single time you attend? And you call yourself a fan of music?
Also, back to the band shirts I talked about at the start of the blog. Bands should be supporting other bands by wearing their shirts, but more importantly, YOU should be wearing band shirts if you like them so much. You going out and buying a striped v-neck shirt from American Apparel just because you saw some lead singer wearing it is not helping anything. You're certainly not supporting that singer or his band, and 9 times out of 10 you look like a dickhead anyway. Buy your favorite bands shirt, and wear it to the next show you go to. (But not to that band's next show, you never wear the shirt of the band you're going to see, everyone knows that. Don't be THAT guy.) Now, granted, a lot of bands are way over paid in the grand scheme of life, but that's a whole other topic I won't get into because it's pointless. It's the same as actors, it's disgusting how much money they make while people across the world are starving, but it's never going to change, so let's not get into it.
Along all the same lines, but in my opinion the most important level, SUPPORT LOCAL MUSIC. Oh you idiots, please support local music. You've seen Every Time I Die 47 times, and yeah they're a good band and good dudes, but don't forget to head out to the local hall show every now and again. The scene is 100% dependent on local music, and here's why. Huge bands don't need local bands because the tour package usually is self reliant and draws all the kids themselves, but huge bands do need middle sized bands to open for them on the tours. Middle sized bands need big local bands to open for them to ensure a good crowd. Big local bands need little local bands to open for them to ensure a stable show and a growing community. So bands, promoters, fans, everyone, here's how it works: New bands need to open for big local bands so they can get a following and become big local bands. Big local bands need to open for medium size/touring bands so they can get their name out to a larger audience and the touring bands themselves so that they, the big local bands, too can become medium/touring size bands. Medium/touring size bands need to be put on opening slots for huge bands so they can get an even larger audience so that they can become huge bands. Then the new huge bands now let the new medium/touring bands open for them so those new medium/touring bands can let new big local bands open for them so they can let brand new bands open for them. SEE HOW THIS WORKS?! It is literally painful in it's simplicity. And yet, the concept is failing miserably by most.
The problems of the music industry and the "scene" go a lot deeper than this and it all stems from greed and the over all economy and the dumbing down of the entertainment industry and so on and so on. You could write an entire book on this stuff, and I'm sure people have. But this is the stuff that YOU can change. This is the stuff that YOU can be conscious of. It sounds stupid, but it starts on an individual basis. All it takes is for a couple bands, a couple promoters and a group of kids to start doing things FOR the music community and not for themselves and we can turn it all around. And as hippie as it sounds, if we can make the "scene" more positive, we can make the entire music industry more positive. And if we can change that, we can use that major outlet to better the world. It sounds cheesy even to me as I'm writing it out. But it's all about starting somewhere, and this is an easy problem to fix. Stop making music about you and your greed. The "scene" should be a large supportive community, a family. It starts on a local level and grows from there. Do your part.
Like I said, the scene I grew up in, as my generation knew it, is pretty much dead and buried. And this current generation scene is dying quick. I can't even imagine what the next scene will look like, it's borderline scary. Get involved now, keep the community alive before 5 more years pass and you're all writing stupid blogs like this one about how your scene is dead and the new generation needs to save theirs.
What I wouldn't give to go to a Coalesce/Get Up Kids show right now.
Monday, July 19, 2010
I Backtraced It.
as anyone see this video of "Jessi Slaughter" aka Kerligirl13? the original has been taken down, but here is a copy of the original.
The video has gone viral in the last few days because clearly the father says some fairly ridiculous stuff. But this video is such a great example of the problems with the internet and this generation. I "backtraced" the story, and if it's real, it's really quite sad. Basically, this 11 year old girl "Jessi Slaugher" posted a video of her self mouthing off at "haters". Saying stupid shit like people only hate her cause she's perfect and all the haters should get AIDS and die and all this needless trash talk. Now, this is a problem to begin with. Why is an 11 year old girl on the internet talking like that? No matter how you slice it, THAT is the parents fault and problem, and it's sickening. Awesome way to raise your child. Let's move beyond that to the rest of the story. In response to that original video, and I would imagine a lot more shit talking from Jessi Slaughter, a bunch of people have been teasing and threatening Jessi. Apparently some people went as far to either expose or make up a rumor about how Jessi had been molested. The details are unclear and seem untrue, but I believe it was made to seem like her father molested her. Like I said, I'm not clear on the details, but either way, people were talking about how she was molested. Now whether that is true or not, that type of information can ruin someone's life, ESPECIALLY an 11 year old. Even just the teasing and threatening in general is absolutely horrible. And that is the real problem. Even if this little girl was running her mouth, which she shouldn't have, the internet and/or local community teasing her, and threatening her, and telling people she was molested is so incredibly disgusting it hurts. If she was molested, you go to the police and let them handle it. Needless to say, if it's made up, the person responsible should be brought up on criminal charges. Whether the father's reaction is funny or not (it KIND OF is) people are being completely fleeced past the fact that this little girl's life is ruined. Millions of people have now seen this video, even if she moves she will be around people that have seen it. There is no way for her to live this down, not in the near future. Other children have killed themselves over stuff like this.
Why are people just so incredibly evil? Why are these parents not keeping better watch of their 11 year old? Why are adults molesting helpless children? Even if she wasn't molested, why are people so mean that they would treat someone like this just to get back at her being a brat? And why do people find this so funny? It's a sick, sick world we live in and it makes me absolutely horrified to bring children of my own into it.
(If "Jessi Slaughter" is just a troll like some people claim she is, then she is an absolute genius)
The video has gone viral in the last few days because clearly the father says some fairly ridiculous stuff. But this video is such a great example of the problems with the internet and this generation. I "backtraced" the story, and if it's real, it's really quite sad. Basically, this 11 year old girl "Jessi Slaugher" posted a video of her self mouthing off at "haters". Saying stupid shit like people only hate her cause she's perfect and all the haters should get AIDS and die and all this needless trash talk. Now, this is a problem to begin with. Why is an 11 year old girl on the internet talking like that? No matter how you slice it, THAT is the parents fault and problem, and it's sickening. Awesome way to raise your child. Let's move beyond that to the rest of the story. In response to that original video, and I would imagine a lot more shit talking from Jessi Slaughter, a bunch of people have been teasing and threatening Jessi. Apparently some people went as far to either expose or make up a rumor about how Jessi had been molested. The details are unclear and seem untrue, but I believe it was made to seem like her father molested her. Like I said, I'm not clear on the details, but either way, people were talking about how she was molested. Now whether that is true or not, that type of information can ruin someone's life, ESPECIALLY an 11 year old. Even just the teasing and threatening in general is absolutely horrible. And that is the real problem. Even if this little girl was running her mouth, which she shouldn't have, the internet and/or local community teasing her, and threatening her, and telling people she was molested is so incredibly disgusting it hurts. If she was molested, you go to the police and let them handle it. Needless to say, if it's made up, the person responsible should be brought up on criminal charges. Whether the father's reaction is funny or not (it KIND OF is) people are being completely fleeced past the fact that this little girl's life is ruined. Millions of people have now seen this video, even if she moves she will be around people that have seen it. There is no way for her to live this down, not in the near future. Other children have killed themselves over stuff like this.
Why are people just so incredibly evil? Why are these parents not keeping better watch of their 11 year old? Why are adults molesting helpless children? Even if she wasn't molested, why are people so mean that they would treat someone like this just to get back at her being a brat? And why do people find this so funny? It's a sick, sick world we live in and it makes me absolutely horrified to bring children of my own into it.
(If "Jessi Slaughter" is just a troll like some people claim she is, then she is an absolute genius)
No Religion is the New Religion.
everyone realizes that believing in the Big Bang Theory and Evolution is a religion right?
re-li-gion: (noun) a cause, principal, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith.
yes, there are other definitions of the word that involve a more traditional thought and use words like "God" and such, but that is still a definition out of Webster's dictionary. And honestly even if it wasn't part of the official definition, my point remains the same.
I find it borderline hilarious that millions of people all believe in a similar notion and consider themselves with out religion. You believe that the entire universe sprang from a "singularity" (even though no one can truly explain a singularity) 13.7 billion years ago. A belief that, depending on your version, more or less pre-existing matter and energy collected itself together and exploded and created the universe and whatever. Now I could go several directions here. I could point out that there has never been a proven method of dating the age of the planet. Any method that has been developed to show the age of billions or millions of years has also been scientifically proven wrong. So the age is just a guess and hoping it's correct. I could also point out that the scientific evidence of the theory and process of the Big Bang is weak at best even in it's own science. It too is once again a theory based off I suppose the most evidence available that people chose to put stock into. And even if you come at me with a bunch of scientific "evidence" of how it's 100% accurate, which I will then just find evidence of how it's in fact NOT 100% accurate, I will just come at you with an age old fun Christian question called "well, where did that come from?" And I'll keep saying "well, where did that come from?" no matter how far back you try to explain until you run out of stories. Oooh it's fun being ignorant isn't it?
Let's also talk about how evolution itself proves it's own faults. Darwin himself said that for evolution to be accurate, it must be progressive and adapt. That's obviously not a direct quote, but it's real close and I'm real lazy. Does evolution exist on some level? Of course it does, if nothing else all species learn as they progress. Humans in the last two thousand years are 100% proof of evolution on at least some levels. But animals are doing an amazing job at proving evolution on a massive level wrong. The number of animals that have become extinct are in themselves a pretty hard hit against evolution. But you can argue that they just didn't evolve fast enough I suppose, even though I was pretty sure they've had millions of years to do so. Let's take a look at the prairie dog. When hunting for food or just out and about, the prairie dog has scouts that get a top the highest point they can to keep an eye out for predators, the "highest point" being small bushes and mounds of dirt. This is an extremely important, if not the most important, method of their survival. So why in the hell can't they climb trees?!?! They completely lack the ability to climb trees. Aside from the fact that climbing trees would give them another place of escape, it would allow them for a better vantage point for look out. So why, in millions of years of evolution, have they not developed the ability to climb trees? Squirrels, chipmunks and about a thousand similar other animals can climb trees, so why can't they? Personally I feel they've had the time to adapt... something must be wrong here. Also, why are bats still blind? Progressive adaptive evolution would suggest they would have sight by now. But I suppose that's a matter of opinion. Sonar is a pretty sweet ability, sometimes.
Ok, so, at this point most people reading this blog are probably itching with fun facts to throw at me trying prove that evolution is real, and I can't wait. I feel confident enough that there is evidence to make that evidence at least questionable. And for that matter, I am not even here to actually disprove evolution or the big bang or any of that. I am in no way even saying that you are wrong if that's what you believe. What I am saying is that there is no set in stone, 100% accurate, never been proven wrong evidence that this is how we came to be. "Science is not an exact science." Which means you are putting faith into this theory. Which means you are believing in "a cause, principal, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith." RELIGION ALERT!!!
Let me save you some trouble and point out I don't buy every word the bible says, especially not on a literal level. It is events and stories collected by many people over many years and placed into a single book with the intent of getting many people to share a similar belief. Sounds like a history book to me. Unless of course you were there when George Washington crossed the Delaware, in which case I apologize. You weren't? It's just a story that people have retold and we're all choosing to believe is 100% historically accurate? Wow, no shit. One of my favorite phrases ever is "pre-recorded history". Hahaha, are you serious? Pre-recorded history? It hurts my brain to even say. You're telling me we are now basing our "pre-recorded history" off not even the words of someone else but just some random nick-knacks we dig up and give a story? "Oh, here's a tomb with some shiny clothes and some gold in it, he must have been a great emperor!" Or, perhaps he was a flamboyant thief with a great real estate agent? Or maybe some smart ass opened up that tomb hundreds of years ago and thought it would be hilarious to dump extra shit inside just to fuck with the idiots in the years to come. HOW CAN YOU HAVE KNOWN HISTORY IF IT WAS NEVER RECORDED?! We weren't there. Did you know that no portraits of any kings before like the 1800s are real? (I wish I could remember which king was the first, but I can't find it online at the moment). Most portraits of older kings and other leaders were in fact just of fairly random people they had stand in as a subject so the king or whom ever did not have to. But we've done a pretty good job believing that those portraits are what they looked like, or at least most people have. I won't even go into how many times we've discovered new history to prove our pre-existing "known" history wrong. You can look that stuff up yourself, but it will fry your brainards. Realistically ALL history involves faith. For all we know, the entire world got together in let's say 1640 and said "let's screw with the future" and just up and re-wrote every piece of known recorded history. They might have, we don't know. If they did, they are awesome and I want to hang out with them.
"The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." Oh how this beautiful phrase can be used for or against us no matter what we believe. Here's my nut in it's shell. Evolution/Big Bang, you've got some decent theories, and you've got a fair amount of evidence that can back up some of your aspects, but your own scientists have also got lots of evidence to prove themselves and you wrong. Christianity, you've got some pretty interesting historical inaccuracies going on in that bible of yours that don't help your case, but you've also got a lot of versions that have been backed up by many, many other historians even from separate cultures. Both groups have got their facts and their theories. Neither one of them can prove themselves beyond a shadow of a doubt. And this leaves us with faith. Faith that what we believe in, with all it's evidence, or lack there of, is correct. And when you've got millions of people that all put faith into something, you've got yourself a stone cold RELIGION. My suggestion would be stop denying religion, and follow the few intelligent people that have had the good sense to recognize their various forms of "non-religion" being a religion and get yourself a tasty tax exempt status. (There is actually a group of atheists that have formed a tax exempt group and hold meetings to discuss their beliefs... I smell a religion!)
At the end of the day, I don't give a shit what you believe. I don't attack anyone's beliefs unless provoked. All i've ever asked for is this same respect. You don't have to believe in God, or Jesus, or whatever your definition of religion is, and that's fine, to each their own. All I ask is that you shut the fuck up about it. Stop posting your jokes and smart ass comments about God and Jesus and all that on Spacebook or MyFace or Tweetler or whatever. If you want to rant about how you believe that you don't believe in anything, why don't you start a blog? That way we don't all have to have it thrown in our faces on a daily basis but instead offer a forum for your constructed thoughts that people can chose to read or not. Ah, but alas... you won't. Because it's not that you care if people care what you believe, just as long as you're able to continue shitting all over what other people believe. Sigh, this world is so screwed.
***I'm positive that I am going to have some ANONYMOUS posts providing evidence of why I'm wrong and all kinds of other fun stuff. Look, I didn't check a ton of facts to present in this blog. This blog is more or less an emotionally charged rant that I use to get out my exploding brain frustrations. All I can tell you is, despite my lack of professional debating, I have checked my facts. I have studied the evidence against evolution and I have studied the evidence against the Christian Bible. I KNOW ALREADY. If you are going to be an internet tough guy and post anonymous comments, all I ask is that you keep it intelligent and save the insults for some bro at the bar this weekend. Or at a minimum, and here's a crazy idea, LEAVE YOUR NAME WHEN YOU COMMENT.***
re-li-gion: (noun) a cause, principal, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith.
yes, there are other definitions of the word that involve a more traditional thought and use words like "God" and such, but that is still a definition out of Webster's dictionary. And honestly even if it wasn't part of the official definition, my point remains the same.
I find it borderline hilarious that millions of people all believe in a similar notion and consider themselves with out religion. You believe that the entire universe sprang from a "singularity" (even though no one can truly explain a singularity) 13.7 billion years ago. A belief that, depending on your version, more or less pre-existing matter and energy collected itself together and exploded and created the universe and whatever. Now I could go several directions here. I could point out that there has never been a proven method of dating the age of the planet. Any method that has been developed to show the age of billions or millions of years has also been scientifically proven wrong. So the age is just a guess and hoping it's correct. I could also point out that the scientific evidence of the theory and process of the Big Bang is weak at best even in it's own science. It too is once again a theory based off I suppose the most evidence available that people chose to put stock into. And even if you come at me with a bunch of scientific "evidence" of how it's 100% accurate, which I will then just find evidence of how it's in fact NOT 100% accurate, I will just come at you with an age old fun Christian question called "well, where did that come from?" And I'll keep saying "well, where did that come from?" no matter how far back you try to explain until you run out of stories. Oooh it's fun being ignorant isn't it?
Let's also talk about how evolution itself proves it's own faults. Darwin himself said that for evolution to be accurate, it must be progressive and adapt. That's obviously not a direct quote, but it's real close and I'm real lazy. Does evolution exist on some level? Of course it does, if nothing else all species learn as they progress. Humans in the last two thousand years are 100% proof of evolution on at least some levels. But animals are doing an amazing job at proving evolution on a massive level wrong. The number of animals that have become extinct are in themselves a pretty hard hit against evolution. But you can argue that they just didn't evolve fast enough I suppose, even though I was pretty sure they've had millions of years to do so. Let's take a look at the prairie dog. When hunting for food or just out and about, the prairie dog has scouts that get a top the highest point they can to keep an eye out for predators, the "highest point" being small bushes and mounds of dirt. This is an extremely important, if not the most important, method of their survival. So why in the hell can't they climb trees?!?! They completely lack the ability to climb trees. Aside from the fact that climbing trees would give them another place of escape, it would allow them for a better vantage point for look out. So why, in millions of years of evolution, have they not developed the ability to climb trees? Squirrels, chipmunks and about a thousand similar other animals can climb trees, so why can't they? Personally I feel they've had the time to adapt... something must be wrong here. Also, why are bats still blind? Progressive adaptive evolution would suggest they would have sight by now. But I suppose that's a matter of opinion. Sonar is a pretty sweet ability, sometimes.
Ok, so, at this point most people reading this blog are probably itching with fun facts to throw at me trying prove that evolution is real, and I can't wait. I feel confident enough that there is evidence to make that evidence at least questionable. And for that matter, I am not even here to actually disprove evolution or the big bang or any of that. I am in no way even saying that you are wrong if that's what you believe. What I am saying is that there is no set in stone, 100% accurate, never been proven wrong evidence that this is how we came to be. "Science is not an exact science." Which means you are putting faith into this theory. Which means you are believing in "a cause, principal, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith." RELIGION ALERT!!!
Let me save you some trouble and point out I don't buy every word the bible says, especially not on a literal level. It is events and stories collected by many people over many years and placed into a single book with the intent of getting many people to share a similar belief. Sounds like a history book to me. Unless of course you were there when George Washington crossed the Delaware, in which case I apologize. You weren't? It's just a story that people have retold and we're all choosing to believe is 100% historically accurate? Wow, no shit. One of my favorite phrases ever is "pre-recorded history". Hahaha, are you serious? Pre-recorded history? It hurts my brain to even say. You're telling me we are now basing our "pre-recorded history" off not even the words of someone else but just some random nick-knacks we dig up and give a story? "Oh, here's a tomb with some shiny clothes and some gold in it, he must have been a great emperor!" Or, perhaps he was a flamboyant thief with a great real estate agent? Or maybe some smart ass opened up that tomb hundreds of years ago and thought it would be hilarious to dump extra shit inside just to fuck with the idiots in the years to come. HOW CAN YOU HAVE KNOWN HISTORY IF IT WAS NEVER RECORDED?! We weren't there. Did you know that no portraits of any kings before like the 1800s are real? (I wish I could remember which king was the first, but I can't find it online at the moment). Most portraits of older kings and other leaders were in fact just of fairly random people they had stand in as a subject so the king or whom ever did not have to. But we've done a pretty good job believing that those portraits are what they looked like, or at least most people have. I won't even go into how many times we've discovered new history to prove our pre-existing "known" history wrong. You can look that stuff up yourself, but it will fry your brainards. Realistically ALL history involves faith. For all we know, the entire world got together in let's say 1640 and said "let's screw with the future" and just up and re-wrote every piece of known recorded history. They might have, we don't know. If they did, they are awesome and I want to hang out with them.
"The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." Oh how this beautiful phrase can be used for or against us no matter what we believe. Here's my nut in it's shell. Evolution/Big Bang, you've got some decent theories, and you've got a fair amount of evidence that can back up some of your aspects, but your own scientists have also got lots of evidence to prove themselves and you wrong. Christianity, you've got some pretty interesting historical inaccuracies going on in that bible of yours that don't help your case, but you've also got a lot of versions that have been backed up by many, many other historians even from separate cultures. Both groups have got their facts and their theories. Neither one of them can prove themselves beyond a shadow of a doubt. And this leaves us with faith. Faith that what we believe in, with all it's evidence, or lack there of, is correct. And when you've got millions of people that all put faith into something, you've got yourself a stone cold RELIGION. My suggestion would be stop denying religion, and follow the few intelligent people that have had the good sense to recognize their various forms of "non-religion" being a religion and get yourself a tasty tax exempt status. (There is actually a group of atheists that have formed a tax exempt group and hold meetings to discuss their beliefs... I smell a religion!)
At the end of the day, I don't give a shit what you believe. I don't attack anyone's beliefs unless provoked. All i've ever asked for is this same respect. You don't have to believe in God, or Jesus, or whatever your definition of religion is, and that's fine, to each their own. All I ask is that you shut the fuck up about it. Stop posting your jokes and smart ass comments about God and Jesus and all that on Spacebook or MyFace or Tweetler or whatever. If you want to rant about how you believe that you don't believe in anything, why don't you start a blog? That way we don't all have to have it thrown in our faces on a daily basis but instead offer a forum for your constructed thoughts that people can chose to read or not. Ah, but alas... you won't. Because it's not that you care if people care what you believe, just as long as you're able to continue shitting all over what other people believe. Sigh, this world is so screwed.
***I'm positive that I am going to have some ANONYMOUS posts providing evidence of why I'm wrong and all kinds of other fun stuff. Look, I didn't check a ton of facts to present in this blog. This blog is more or less an emotionally charged rant that I use to get out my exploding brain frustrations. All I can tell you is, despite my lack of professional debating, I have checked my facts. I have studied the evidence against evolution and I have studied the evidence against the Christian Bible. I KNOW ALREADY. If you are going to be an internet tough guy and post anonymous comments, all I ask is that you keep it intelligent and save the insults for some bro at the bar this weekend. Or at a minimum, and here's a crazy idea, LEAVE YOUR NAME WHEN YOU COMMENT.***
Sunday, July 18, 2010
the dream is over.
SPOILER ALERT. do not read any further if you have not seen Inception, this will ruin everything.
ok, here is a stack of definite evidence that the end of Inception ends in the real world.
i'll go backwards from the least compelling to most definitive.
for the sake of this blog, we'll call the main layer of the movie, Layer Zero. Layer Four being the sub-conscious construct, or "limbo."
1 - the top losing it's spin in the last seconds is evidence enough. if you've ever spun a top, as soon as it starts to lose it's gravity axis like it did in the very last scene, that is the beginning of the end, it can not return to a perfect spin. and they specifically point out that the top spins PERFECTLY in the dream world, and they show it doing so in the dream layers.
2 - Mal suggests that one slice of proof to Cobb that he's still dreaming in "Layer Zero" is that corporations and the american government are after him. well, for starters, that is his mind telling him that no matter what you believe, because it's on Layer Four. On the time line of the story itself, she doesn't try to convince him of that until after she kills herself. So that evidence doesn't fly in any sense, but let's use it anyway. That's not how the "being chased by your sub-conscious" works. ALL the projections come after you. So, doesn't work either way you look at it.
3 - there is no way that Mal would exit Layer Zero and either not wake him up in her "real world" or at LEAST come back in after him and try to wake him up again and again until it worked. And, all the other characters in the movie are at a minimum real people somewhere in Cobb's life, and someone would wake him up. Or if nothing else, he would wake up eventually on his own. You can argue that even if she's been dead for awhile that in her "real world" it may only pan out to minutes and it just hasn't happened yet. But that brings me to a new point...
4 - they explain the time ratio in Layer Zero, and it starts compounding there. Mere seconds in Layer Zero translate into minutes in Layer One, hours in Layer Two, etc etc. And you can't argue that it could be even less time in the "real world" because it compounds. It's not each layer is just multiplied, it's each layer compounds with the last, so by that logic, the entire movie takes place in milliseconds in the "real world." And even if you believe that that is possible, it's just plain ridiculous, and pushing it too far. Nolan is better than that.
5 - also, in that aspect, as I mentioned before, he would at least wake up on his own... well even the strongest compound available only keeps people asleep for 4 hours, equalling 40 hours in a first level dream. Well this movie takes place over several days, so that math once again doesn't work out. He would have to be asleep in the "real world" for over like 5 or 6 hours, which, is not possible according to the movie's own rules. this is not all that compelling of evidence and could be argued against fairly easily in various ways, but I threw it in anyway to prove there's a bunch of reasons leaning towards the end being real.
6 - FINALLY, and the most compelling... in Layer Zero, he spins the top twice in the first half of the movie and it topples. which means, by Nolan's own rules of this story, that is the real world. so Layer Zero is the real world no matter what you think of my other evidence. you don't think about those top displays, because the last shot of the movie makes you focus on the debate of if it's real or not. I only remember he spun the top and watched it topple twice because I saw the movie a second time. You could argue that maybe in his first level dream he makes up those totem rules, but then that's just stupid and ruins Nolan's own story... and for that matter you could say that about anything... Jurassic Park was just a dream too. And, as mentioned before, the things that happen in the dreams HAVE to stem from somewhere in his real life, that alone is the entire point of the movie. So the totem rules came from somewhere in "real life." And if the totem rules are legit, then once again, this evidence holds strong.
In hind sight, the last scene with the top spinning isn't as horribly clever as it seems. It's still absolutely one of the best movies I've ever seen, and I think Nolan did it to kind of have fun with the audience and give people something to talk about. But, if you think back through out the movie, that last scene really shouldn't fool anyone. But, it definitely does what he wanted it to, because even I had to wonder about it for awhile and here I am typing out this blog.
In my opinion, the last scene was the movie saying: "is this real life? maybe... wait for it... wait for it... YUP, it's real. thanks for coming!"
ok, here is a stack of definite evidence that the end of Inception ends in the real world.
i'll go backwards from the least compelling to most definitive.
for the sake of this blog, we'll call the main layer of the movie, Layer Zero. Layer Four being the sub-conscious construct, or "limbo."
1 - the top losing it's spin in the last seconds is evidence enough. if you've ever spun a top, as soon as it starts to lose it's gravity axis like it did in the very last scene, that is the beginning of the end, it can not return to a perfect spin. and they specifically point out that the top spins PERFECTLY in the dream world, and they show it doing so in the dream layers.
2 - Mal suggests that one slice of proof to Cobb that he's still dreaming in "Layer Zero" is that corporations and the american government are after him. well, for starters, that is his mind telling him that no matter what you believe, because it's on Layer Four. On the time line of the story itself, she doesn't try to convince him of that until after she kills herself. So that evidence doesn't fly in any sense, but let's use it anyway. That's not how the "being chased by your sub-conscious" works. ALL the projections come after you. So, doesn't work either way you look at it.
3 - there is no way that Mal would exit Layer Zero and either not wake him up in her "real world" or at LEAST come back in after him and try to wake him up again and again until it worked. And, all the other characters in the movie are at a minimum real people somewhere in Cobb's life, and someone would wake him up. Or if nothing else, he would wake up eventually on his own. You can argue that even if she's been dead for awhile that in her "real world" it may only pan out to minutes and it just hasn't happened yet. But that brings me to a new point...
4 - they explain the time ratio in Layer Zero, and it starts compounding there. Mere seconds in Layer Zero translate into minutes in Layer One, hours in Layer Two, etc etc. And you can't argue that it could be even less time in the "real world" because it compounds. It's not each layer is just multiplied, it's each layer compounds with the last, so by that logic, the entire movie takes place in milliseconds in the "real world." And even if you believe that that is possible, it's just plain ridiculous, and pushing it too far. Nolan is better than that.
5 - also, in that aspect, as I mentioned before, he would at least wake up on his own... well even the strongest compound available only keeps people asleep for 4 hours, equalling 40 hours in a first level dream. Well this movie takes place over several days, so that math once again doesn't work out. He would have to be asleep in the "real world" for over like 5 or 6 hours, which, is not possible according to the movie's own rules. this is not all that compelling of evidence and could be argued against fairly easily in various ways, but I threw it in anyway to prove there's a bunch of reasons leaning towards the end being real.
6 - FINALLY, and the most compelling... in Layer Zero, he spins the top twice in the first half of the movie and it topples. which means, by Nolan's own rules of this story, that is the real world. so Layer Zero is the real world no matter what you think of my other evidence. you don't think about those top displays, because the last shot of the movie makes you focus on the debate of if it's real or not. I only remember he spun the top and watched it topple twice because I saw the movie a second time. You could argue that maybe in his first level dream he makes up those totem rules, but then that's just stupid and ruins Nolan's own story... and for that matter you could say that about anything... Jurassic Park was just a dream too. And, as mentioned before, the things that happen in the dreams HAVE to stem from somewhere in his real life, that alone is the entire point of the movie. So the totem rules came from somewhere in "real life." And if the totem rules are legit, then once again, this evidence holds strong.
In hind sight, the last scene with the top spinning isn't as horribly clever as it seems. It's still absolutely one of the best movies I've ever seen, and I think Nolan did it to kind of have fun with the audience and give people something to talk about. But, if you think back through out the movie, that last scene really shouldn't fool anyone. But, it definitely does what he wanted it to, because even I had to wonder about it for awhile and here I am typing out this blog.
In my opinion, the last scene was the movie saying: "is this real life? maybe... wait for it... wait for it... YUP, it's real. thanks for coming!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)