Too good to not repost

From the mind that brought us Clerks and Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back...

Ladies? Are you looking for Mr. Right?

Bwah ha ha ha ha ha ha...

Uh, I want to go.

 

Sell Out, Part One

So I was reading blogs the other day (as if you needed any more evidence of how big a geek I am), when I read this post. It struck a chord in me, since this is one of those questions with which I've grappled for a long time.

Not the hick thing. I'm from Ohio. I know hicks. And hicks are people, too.          :)

No, the thing that piqued my interest? Musicians selling out.

It's a classic scenario, right? Band records great album, sells 150 of them. Band then signs major label deal, makes vapid but radio-friendly album, allows Windex™ to use single in commercial, gets big and famous but has sold out, alienating 150 core fans. However, band is now adored by the Tiger Beat generation and the Baby Boomers and is making more money than it can piss away on beer, bourbon and hookers.

Perhaps this is a gross oversimplification, but you get the gist. I agree with batteryinyourleg's assertion that this is "selling out." But what's the difference between a rock group "selling out" and a rapper "gettin' paid?" Cultural vernacular? Marketing savvy? Simple intent?

You have two different musical aesthetics here. In rock, you get middle-class white kids rebelling against the establishment, doing it for the music (getting chicks has nothing to do with it, I'm sure), and keeping it real. In rap, you get poor black and Latino kids rebelling against the establishment, trying to get rich (while getting loads of ho's [sp?]), and keeping it real.

So does the whole selling out / gettin' paid debate boil down to a difference of socio-economic circumstance?

Not necessarily. You see, there's a common thread in the two descriptions: keeping it real. As batteryinyourleg pointed out (using Nirvana as an example), it's not selling out if you record something true to yourself and then the mainstream and advertisers come knocking on your door. Then, people are recognizing your musical genius (or, at least, your marketability).

Being embraced by the mainstream is one thing. Writing a song for a commercial? Well, that's the province of the schlocky jingle writers. Isn't it?

Case in point: Common's Gap ad (Sorry to link to the home page. The ad is in the lower right quadrant and has no direct link.). I wouldn't call Common a huge mainstream rapper, but he has a very devoted following. There's been some mixed reaction to his appearance, although the majority seems to think he sold out, big time.

I would have to agree. To me, this embodies the heart of selling out. While the music might not be any different, Common's now working with a company that has, in the past, advocated policies antithetical to his own. This really does seem to be a case of sleeping with the enemy, and if that's not selling out, I don't know what is. But I still dig the commercial, so the Gap got something right, right?

The true question here: will selling out actually increase Common's exposure / album sales? If you shill for a huge corporation but don't win the mainstream audience, I'd imagine you'd just want to kill yourself. While sitting on your big pile of money.

What if you start out with the express purpose of becoming rich and famous? Is there less musical commitment in rap or country, two genres in which becoming the biggest act on the planet is inarguably a good thing?

Has Jay-Z sold out by shilling for Budweiser? Even as he was name-dropping Cristal and Hennessy and all that shit? You have to forgive me if I don't hit all the cross-promotion right; I don't listen to Jay-Z, mainly because I easily tire of the crass over-commercialization.

But Jay-Z is the perfect case in point: he realizes that music is a powerful force for cross-promotion. And instead of just licensing his music to corporations, he's striking deals and gaining power. For a kid from Brooklyn's Marcy Projects, I imagine that he's living better than he could have dreamed growing up. And a million rappers want the same thing.

Is that selling out? Even if that was the goal in the first place?

I think it would be helpful to go back -- way back -- to when you first got into music, or more precisely, to when you wanted to be in a band. When you're a teenager, you join a band for five reasons:

1. To get girls
2. To play good music and express yourself
3. To become a rock star
4. To make a difference in the world, one fan at a time
5. To get girls

To me, this all just restates the obvious. We want to become rich and famous on our own terms.

Does the sellout debate then also apply to John Mellencamp? Either way, I'm going to buy a model of a Chevy truck so that I can throw it at the TV when I hear "Our Country" during the next football game I watch. But at first listen, the song sounds exactly like the rest of Señor Cougar's ouevre, and apparently, he did not write it just for Chevy.

This is an artist, whether you like his music or not, who has stuck to his guns his entire musical career. For God's sake, he basically told Reagan to go fuck himself. I have to assume that he subscribes to the theory of help-others-while-you-help-yourself (ignoring the fact that, while "Buy American" is a great sentiment, GM continues to fuck its workers [scroll down to hazelrah's comment]).

So yeah, he's probably sold out this time.

Hey, all. This one needs audience participation, so I'd like to see some comments, people. The next post on this topic: selling your old hits (The Stones, The Who, and the ever-greedy estate of the Beatles) and changing your musical style to fit the audience...

 

Home cooking

It's always a little weird having Korean food that's not prepared by my mother. Obviously, restaurant preparations are different from home cooking no matter the cuisine, but the difference is always more jarring to me with Korean food, probably because I've had fewer instances of different Korean food in my life.

A more-relatable explanation? As Americans, we're all familiar with hamburgers. We've had different hamburgers in different contexts with different preparations all our lives -- the bland, thin, flat McDonald's burger that tastes of overly-sweet bun and ketchup; the more flavorful In-N-Out burger that tastes of animal-style; the mystery-meat, school cafeteria burger; the Better Homes and Gardens® burger; the Midwestern housewife burger made with Lipton® onion soup mix; the overly-thick, burnt-on-the-outside, raw-on-the-inside, Memorial-Day-picnic burger; the nearly perfect Zuni Cafe burger -- and we're used to those differences. Let's call it a large sample size.

But imagine if you'd only had one kind of burger your whole life. Say, hypothetically, that I... I mean, you... grew up with only McDonald's hamburgers. Something different might excite you. Or scare you. Or puzzle you. But you'd probably always have a soft spot for that McDonald's hamburger. Or Quarter Pounder with Cheese, say.

I now feel the same way about Korean food. Don't get me wrong. I always enjoy kalbi and bulgogi. And kimchi in its many iterations. But I must profess to liking my Mom's recipes best.

And isn't that the way it's supposed to be?

P.S. - Meatloaf should be covered with gravy. There should not be any sort of tomato paste or ketchup anywhere near it.

OK, once again, I suck

It's been another week since I posted anything. As a blogger, I suck. Granted, I suck at a lot of other things, too, but I have been particularly remiss in the maintenance of the blog recently.

My excuses? As I mentioned last week, I was out of town with only dial-up access to the Intertubes. That sucked. I also had a raging cold. That sucked, too. I'm still a little sick. That sucks more. Turns out, I gave that cold to my mother. I suck. And my wife. I suck a lot.

So over Thanskgiving weekend, aside from working the 1 pm to 12:30 am shift on Thanksgiving, then going back from noon to 8 pm the next day, I've been taking care of the sick wife. She actually took the past two days off, too. As I type, she's passed out on the couch, full of as much ginger tea and Day-Quil as I could get her to take.

So I'll post more soon, and believe me, I have plenty on my mind.

But for now, I leave you with Santarchy!

 

Incommunicado (or, a turkey primer)

Well, it's been almost a week since last I posted something. It's not that I've been busy so much as I've been out of town. And I'm sick. Still. Nothing like catching a cold while you're on vacation.

Sorry about not updating; I'll make up for it, all at once, right now.

Brandy and I went to my parents' for an early Thanksgiving. I'll be pulling the all-day shift at work on actual Thanksgiving, so we figured we could just do the whole turkey thing a week early. Better air fares, less people travelling (and many, many fewer families with small children), and the opportunity to go to a friend's Michigan / OSU party. More on that later.

We got into Cleveland Thursday evening and had dinner at Korea House restaurant with my paternal grandmother. It was nice seeing her again, even if it was only for a couple of hours. She seems to be doing alright since my grandfather died, which makes me feel a little better, and she's still sharp as a tack. And I felt completely healthy.

Friday, I woke up with a cold. Unfortunately, I had also volunteered to cook Thanksgiving dinner this year. With some help from Brandy, everything turned out fine. We had to throw the bottom half of the turkey back in the oven for an hour (for future reference, if you use the America's Test Kitchen method, I'd say leave the turkey breast-side down for three-quarters of the time, then flip it over), but it tasted great. No stuffing in the bird, just a simple rough chop of mirepoix tossed in the cavity and scattered around the pan plus a butter / chardonnay baste. I'd say use very little (quarter cup) chardonnay if you're using the pan drippings for gravy later, but definitely throw in some chicken stock / broth to boost the liquid volume. And ALWAYS use roux to thicken your gravy. I make mine with butter and prefer a blonde or peanut-butter roux for turkey gravy. Yum.

The theme of this year's Thanksgiving (and pretty much any meal I make) was butter. Melted butter in the turkey baste. Two-thirds of a stick melted with equal parts ground cloves, cinnamon, and nutmeg (and ginger, if you've got it) drizzled over the sweet potatoes during baking. Butter for the roux. Two tablespoons in the mashed potatoes. Four in the stuffing. No butter in the Brussels sprouts (there was enough fat from the bacon).

It was, if I may say so, a damn good Thanksgiving meal.

As far as Thanksgiving wine pairings, I'd go with a Chateauneuf-du-Pape or medium-bodied pinot noir. In any case, you're looking for some depth of flavor without a lot of tannin, which is why I don't suggest the popular choice of zinfandel. A slightly older CdP will possess enough fruit to pair with T-day spices, enough earthiness to complement the autumn flavor palette, and enough acidity to cut the butter and fat, while not overwhelming everything with tannin. Thanksgiving is also one of the rare occasions where I think a big, rich chardonnay would be fine. Robert Young's leaps to mind immediately -- opulent and very ripe, lots of wood and baking spice, but just enough acidity to keep its definition amidst the Thanksgiving fat-tacular.

On Saturday, still nursing my cold and slowly emerging from the tryptophan stupor, Brandy and I drove back up to Cleveland to watch the Michigan / Ohio State game at our friend Steph's house. Bunch of people there, and thanks to all the UM alums, the rooting was fairly even. Despite the Michigan loss and the damn cold, it was a fun day. Michigan beat the spread and they're still ranked #2 (although that will likely only last one week).

I know that some of you were surprised that I didn't make a bigger deal over the Big Game beforehand, but I must admit that I was a bit apprehensive about the game. You see, Jim Tressel has Lloyd Carr's number. And Bo or no Bo (R.I.P.), I had an idea it might end in a Michigan loss. So now we're hoping for USC to beat Notre Dame, UCLA to beat USC, and Arkansas and Florida to play an ugly, mistake-filled game in the SEC championship. Because we all know there's no way Boise State will be allowed to play in the national championship game.

 

Diversionary Tactics

Since I've been in serious political mode for a little while, I decided to lighten up the blog by listing the mindless diversions that have been keeping me sane of late.

• Marvel Ultimate Alliance
  If you couldn't tell by looking at my MySpace profile, I'm a fan. Just got it the other day and took it for a little spin. That little spin took three hours. I must warn you, this is an alarm game -- the kind of game for which you'd better have an alarm set or you could find yourself greeting the sunrise after having missed your wife's birthday party. Not that that's ever happened to me.
• Making Dinner Reservations
  Nothing takes your mind off the impending turnover of Congress like a grumbly tummy, so Brandy and I have been planning to enjoy a nice dinner out. It just so happens that Wednesday, November 15 is Dine Around day in San Francisco. 25% of your bill will be donated to the AIDS Emergency Fund and the Breast Cancer Emergency Fund. So if you're eating out anyway, you might as well make some of those dollars count.
• Television
  Big surprise there. Yesterday, Brandy and I watched a special Iron Chef America in which two of the Food Network's more annoying stars, Giada De Laurentiis and Rachael Ray, teamed up with Bobby Flay and Mario Batali. Those of you who don't consider cooking shows to be food porn might not recognize any of these people. Your primer, then:
  • Giada De Laurentiis
    Host of Everyday Italian. Among the general populace, relatively good-looking; among culinarians, hot. Despite speaking like an overly-medicated high school orator and possessing a head three sizes too big for her petite-despite-specializing-in-pastry body, she's not too annoying.
  • Rachael Ray
    ...on the other hand, is particularly annoying. After years of proclaiming her the most annoying thing on the Food Network (a sentiment echoed by a surprisingly large number of people), I found myself slightly stunned to note that I found her not-so-irritating on Iron Chef America. And all it took was her silence. Ah, bliss.
  • Bobby Flay
    What can I say about Bobby Flay that hasn't already been said? I actually don't find him that irritating. He is one of those people, I think, who seems perpetually condescending, whether he's trying to be or not, and I just take those people with a grain of salt. In recent years, he has toned down his attitude to the point where he seems to be a genuinely interesting guy. Still arrogant, but interesting at least.
  • Mario Batali
    My favorite of the four, and one of my favorite food personalities period (the other two being Anthony Bourdain and Alton Brown). Who knew a man of such impressive girth could be so light on his (orange-clad) feet or so quick with his wit? And how can you not be impressed with a man who has so obviously parlayed his culinary talents into a rock and roll lifestyle? In the world of food, this guy's my hero.

Ooops, Aaron's comments

I just realized that the comments to which I referred in the last blog post (made by Aaron) were made on the MySpace blog.

Since they were so good, here they are, along with my reply:

Great article link, Tony! I really liked what you have to say as well.

I was with you until the third-party voter's paragraph. This sort of reasoning is exactly why we have to choose between people like John Kerry and George Bush. The two party system worked for many years. It's broken now. It simply could hold the weight of a large and diverse population. The problem we face now is that we have a nation that has no cohesive desire. This results in the splintering of ideals and resistance to accepting or aiming for common goals. How can anyone expect 51%+ of our nation to be happy and contented with any one candidate? I realize the presidential election is a ways off, but I think that Californians are in no danger of hiring a hard-liner Republican any time soon. Let's get local.

As for Arnie, I'm not sure how he's different than Davis or old Pete. The territory lines of the two parties are largely dissolved these days, and I think whether or not you vote Republican or Democrat, you're still going to get the same group of business giving them money.

Rather than support archaic and hegemonic structures, why not encourage people to move towards something more realistic and reasonable? The localization of government and the dissolution of current federal power structures is the only thing that will keep a teetering republic like ours afloat.

I voted Libertarian.

P.S. I <3[1] you for encouraging people to get out there. :)

[1] This is a heart.

Posted by aaron remembers caring is creepy on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 at 2:38 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

popcultist

Why, thank you, sir. Despite your Liberatarian voting, I applaud you (and actually, I tend to lean that way myself). You're right about the two-party system; it is broken. But I'm going to keep voting Democrat until we have a practicable solution in place. Or at least until Dubya's out of office -- ceding control of the country to right-wing nutjobs for six years is plenty enough for me. We don't need to make Dubya's last two years any more comfortable. You're also right about localization being the means to save the Republic. [You see, everyone. I can dispense the carrot as well as the stick.]

However, I disagree that the dissolution of the federal power structure is the way to go. OK, mindless conservatives, this is where you need to pay attention. When our Founding Fathers™ envisioned our system of rule, they saw the dangers of a highly-centralized rule(r) out of touch with the views (and dare I say, values) of the nation. That is why they called it a Union. United states, if you will. Where the Republican party -- and conservatives in general -- formerly advocated the ideas of states' rights and localized rule within a framework of national federation, they have now embraced a powerful, centralized federal government as a means of foisting their beliefs and morals upon everyone else. Just as National Socialism was a misnomer for fascists, so, too, is the Republican Party misnamed. They've attempted to legislate away the democratic mechanisms (filibuster anyone?) that maintain the balance of power in a republic.

Basically, what I'm saying here is that the country needs to return to intent of the Constitution. Slaveholders and misogynists though they might have been, the Founding Fathers were smart men and crafted quite the ingenious document. All they were looking for: guaranteed freedoms, open roads to prosperity, and the security of the Union. The means to those ends? Powers balanced between states and the federal government. Checks and balances. Separation of church and state. The Bill of Rights. How many of these has the current administration (and its associated Republican cronies in Congress and the Supreme Court) attemted to circumvent or abolish altogether?

So back to the point at hand. Not dissolution, but perhaps a revisitation of the way our democracy was intended to be. Hear, hear.

Thanks for the thinking man's comment, Aaron.

Posted by popcultist on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 at 3:46 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

Finding the dark cloud around the silver lining

As you're probably all aware by now, the Democrats have taken control of the House and most likely the Senate. Aside from Aaron's valid points that neither party represents a radical departure from the other and that the two-party system is inherently flawed, I'm much happier that the Dems have retaken at least one branch of the government. We can work on the executive branch in two years and the judiciary... well, that'll be a little harder, but Scalia looks like he might have a heart attack soon. Roberts and Alito, unfortunately, we might have to live with for a while. Thomas, aside from being a frighteningly obvious and uninspired sexual harrasser (Pubic hair? Really?), seems like he won't ever die. He's like the Kurgan, except black.          :)

Ah, the enduring legacy of George W. Bush -- an ass-backward, conservative cadre of "activist" justices. To rephrase something I read earlier today, if these guys leaned any farther right, they'd fall over.

Anyway, the dark cloud to which I referred? The Democrats (and liberals in general) have been set up to fail. They've inherited a partisan legislature in which the remaining conservatives, having had their collective ass handed to them, will entrench themselves in their "values" and block any attempts at progress. And by progress I mean getting any legislation at all passed.

Even if Congress manages to get a bill out its doors, the President will most likely veto it out of spite (except perhaps an immigration bill, since he leans more centrist on that topic than any other).

So you see, the Democrats have been thrust into an unenviable position -- they were chosen as the alternative. They were the lesser of two evils.

Now, if they don't cure all the ills of the country in a year and a half, the Heartland voters will hand the country back to the Republicans. Iraq, the economy, public perception of security... everything has to break exactly right, or we'll swing back into twelve more years of darkness.

And yes, I really do have that little faith in the American people (taken as a collective whole). Seriously, the fact that Tester/Burns in Montana and Webb/Allen in Virginia were even closely contested races confirms my darkest fears about American voters.

Once again, Lou Dobbs has the skinny. He's obviously much more optimistic than me, and definitely more a believer in the people, but he knows the score.

Let's hope the Democrats do, too.

 

It's Election Day. Do you know where your democracy is?

Hey kids,

I bet you were all ready for a no-holds-barred political diatribe today. Well, almost. I was in the midst of putting one together yesterday when I stumbled upon this gem by Bill Moyer. Yes, that Bill Moyer. It's super-long, but it's worth the time invested. Every politician should be forced to read this.

The speech was given to a school organization and is framed around education, but he brings up the socioeconomic ramifications of current and recent-past political policy. In other words, he beat me to the punch. But in a much nicer, more constructive way.

For a long time, I've grappled with one particular adage and how it applies to my relationship with society.

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. (And yes, I've heard it with bees, too, but I believe this is the original saying.)

I know this adage. I believe this adage. I know that I react better when people apply this adage to me. But damn it, sometimes you just want to call a moron a moron.

You see, Bill Moyers eloquently and constructively pointed out issues with the current state of politics, and more specifically, the (mis)allocation of government money. Meanwhile, the little rant on which I was working boiled down to a bunch of name-calling.

I know Mr. Moyer's approach is much more productive and infinitely more likely to persuade people. But I need to get this off my chest, so fasten your seat belts.

People Whose Motives I Can Comprehend

• Old-money Republicans
  You vote in the manner that best protects your financial interests. The candidate advocating tax cuts for you, tax breaks and weakened regulations for your company, and less money to the poor who might usurp you will get your vote.
• Asian Republicans
  You think with your wallet like Old-money Republicans, and you're also a little racist, so you vote with the socially regressive party. Yes, you may have come to this country with nothing and pulled yourself up by your bootstraps (see paragraphs 6 and 7), but that doesn't mean everybody can.
• Fundamentalist Christians (or any fundamentalist zealots)
  You are intolerant and most likely stupid, but it's easy to see where you come from. Your social intelligence has not evolved in two thousand (2,000) years, but your power lies in your numbers. The poor and disenfranchised make up the largest part of any populace and are generally less educated and more easily swayed by the promise of the Kingdom of Heaven™ or 72 virgins or whatever. You are led by a handful of men (and men only) who purportedly do good works but, in reality, are only furthering their own agenda. You are followers; there's a reason the Bible refers to people as a flock. Since you can't comprehend fire, you attribute its origins to an all-powerful deity. You are only one step removed from the polytheists from whence you sprang.
• Rich Democrats
  You try to prove that you have a heart. You may have been born into affluence, but you're not deluded enough to think that you would have ended up in the same place were you not afforded the benefits of wealth and status (see above, Old-money Republicans). Some seek to balance the scales by helping the poor, some seek to atone for the circumstances of their birth, some have a social conscience. Some just want to get pot legalized.

People Whose Motives I Cannot, for the Life of Me, Comprehend

• Poor Republicans
  You are financially challenged, yet you continually back the party that takes from the poor and gives to the rich, the party that underfunds education so that your children and children's children are stuck with your fate. You say that you vote with your values. Which values are those? Intolerance? Bigotry? Is your racism so virulent that you would condemn yourself to poverty and stupidity as long as you can continue to look down on the blacks and Latinos and gays?
• Black (or Latino or especially Gay) Republicans
  You affiliate yourself with the party of the Rich, White Male™. Why? Oh, because you yearn to be accepted into that club. And the country club. But you're no Tiger Woods. So you're either: A.) rich, and you bootstrapped yourself (see above, Asian Republicans), and no one is getting any of your money or B.) you vote with your "values," a combination of religious intolerance and bigotry, more than your brain (see above, Fundamentalist Christians and Poor Republicans).
• Third-Party Voters
  Yes, yes. You're voting your conscience. Bully for you. Most likely, you're socially and economically liberal (and how did "liberal" get turned into a bad word?), educated, and should know better. In a sea of red states, your only power is to dilute the blue voting pool so that the social regressives remain in control. This isn't Italy, thank «insert your choice of deity». There aren't twenty political parties in Congress, mucking up the process and not accomplishing anything. Two parties is quite enough to do that, thank you. So why the fuck are you voting for the Green Party?!? The Dems might not have your commitment to the environment, but they're a hell of a lot better than the drill-and-log (cabin) Republicans.
• Non-voters
  I understand that you don't think your vote makes a difference. But it does. Two good illustrations for you? This and this. So stop yer bitchin' and do something about it.

Now that I've offended everyone... What are you waiting for? Get out there and vote.

Quien es mas macho? (or, fun with links)

Peyton Manning or Tom Brady?

Find out at Kissing Suzy Kolber.

For those of you who are Spanish-impaired (and the funniest parts of that post are in Spanish), here's a helpful site.

If you don't recognize the people mentioned in the post, here's a primer:

• Peyton Manning
• Tom Brady
• Dave Kreig
• Nicole Kidman
• Peter King
• Phil Simms
• Eli Manning
• Archie Manning
• Brett Favre
• Anne Rice
• Trent Reznor
• Bridget Moynahan
• Ugly Betty
• James Brady
• Tara Reid
• Deion Branch
• Drew Henson
• Joe Theismann (don't watch if you're squeamish)
• Tina Fey

Manufactured Milestones

In this era of shortened attention spans and manufactured milestones (one-week anniversaries, "Established in 2001," etc.), I find it comforting to rediscover things that have stood the test of time.

Like the 20th Anniversary of Transformers: The Movie.

And not to shill for a company or anything, but if you order the movie on DirecTV PPV, they'll send you a free copy of the DVD. So you know what I'll be watching on November 7.

And on July 4, 2007? Probably this.

Speaking of meaningless milestones, I'll be purchasing this game soon. Probably this one, too. How is that a milestone, you ask? It's the 33rd anniversary of me being a big geek my entire life.

If you're only buying one of the games, here's a blow-by-blow comparison from a friend of mine.

And lastly but not leastly, I have reached the iconic milestone of 69 friends on MySpace. Thanks to Masaye for getting me over the hump.         :)