Baby Carriage Full of Beercans

Latest CD Purchases

2004-08-18T14:08:00.000-04:00

Buckethead
Electric Tears
Population Override
Monsters & Robots (pretty much sucks)
Bucketheadland
Colma
Giant Robot

Shin Terai - Unison

Thanatopsis
S/T
Axiology

Bill Laswell
Invisible Design
Ambient Compendium
Radioaxiom w/ Jah Wobble
Sacred System - Book of Entrance, Dub Chamber 1

Miles Davis reworked by Bill Laswell
Panthalassa

Ekstasis
Wake Up And Dream

Praxis
Transmutations
Metatron (sucked, returned it)

Material
Hallucination Engine

Funkadelic
Let's Take It To The Stage

Bootsy Collins
Player of The Year

Great stuff. A few more I will get in the near future: Cobrastrike - "13th Scroll" and "Cobrastrike II", Buckethead - "Somewhere Over The Slaughterhouse" and "Bermuda Triangle", Nicky Scopelitis - "Ekstasis, King Tubby - "In Fine Style", Bahia Black - "Ritual Beating System", and a Psychonavigation disc or two.

Lately

2004-08-06T02:10:00.000-04:00

Listening to loads of Bill Laswell-related music: Praxis - Transmutations, Shin Terai - Unison, Material - Hallucination Engine, Thanatopsis and loads of Buckethead. At this point, I'm about ready trade all of my old rock music in for more of this genre-busting stuff. So many elements of so many types of music I didn't really like somehow meshed together to make stuff I absolutely love: ambient-dub-jazz-fusion-groove-IDM plus a few others I am afraid to mention for it will surely give the wrong impression. Part of the'"downtown" / "NYC Underground" scene is how I see it described everywhere. From Bootsy Collins to Miles Davis to a man with a fucking KFC bucket on his head.

Also on a non-musical note... (get it?)

Found this cool link for weirdness sake : http://deoxy.org/inc1.htm
I really enjoyed the story behind the conspiracy.

That's all for now. Weeha.

Sources cited for Farenheit 9/11

2004-07-20T16:58:00.000-04:00

http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/

This makes it a bit harder to pretend Moore "slanted" everything to his liking. Like I've said before, Moore's so-called "slants" are obvious to the audience. The facts are the facts.

Have another glance at the Saudi relationship.

Farenheit 9/11

2004-07-03T15:34:00.001-04:00

Go see the movie. There's so much already said about this, I'm not going to even bother to try to convince you. You just have to see it.

I will, however, use the words of Fox News.

Someone who works for FOX NEWS actually gave F-9/11 a GLOWING REVIEW! Seeing how Fox helped Bush steal the election with Bush's first cousin pulling the strings, I wonder if this poor reviewer is about to be fired:
Check out the review: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html

Quote from the review that says it all:
More than even "The Passion of the Christ," "F9/11" is going to be a "see it for yourself" movie when it hits theaters on June 25. It simply cannot be missed, and I predict it will be a huge moneymaker.

Quote from the review for people who didn't like Bowling for Columbine:
As much as some might try to marginalize this film as a screed against President George Bush, "F9/11" — as we saw last night — is a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty* —* and at the same time a indictment of stupidity and avarice.

Readers of this column may recall that I had a lot of problems with Moore's "Bowling for Columbine," particularly where I thought he took gratuitous shots at helpless targets such as Charlton Heston. "Columbine" too easily succeeded by shooting fish in a barrel, as they used to say.

Not so with "F9/11," which instead relies on lots of film footage and actual interviews to make its case against the war in Iraq and tell the story of the intertwining histories of the Bush and bin Laden families.

The Phish show last night...

2004-06-18T20:50:00.000-04:00

Saw Phish's first show of their last tour ever last night. Fortunately for me, I didn't have to pay $35 or more to go stand in the rain in Keyspan park in Brooklyn; they had the show simulcast in Regal Cinema movie theatres nationwide. In NYC, not only did the show sell out, but the first theatre sold out so they added another. I was quite thankful for this since I haven't seen them since I was 18 or something back when they were a rather small-scale act playing at a local university. I was also thankful for several other reasons, which I will get into one by one.

CUSHY CHAIRS - Phish may be a great band to listen to, but they're not the most exciting band to watch from a standing room only situation, even with the over-the-top elaborate stagelights and sheer monstrosity of a huge plot of land filled to capacity. Since they basically just stand like plants, there's nothing really to see from 50 feet away except on the monitors. And then it's mostly just facial expressions and fingers moving. This brings me to my next reason I'm thankful...

AMAZING CAMERAWORK - This had better be released as a DVD (the FULL concert, not just the "best parts" of it). The 3 hours of concert footage I was privaledged to view last night were top-rate and obviously a very expensive production. The band said all of 10 words to the audience and just blew through 3 sets, during which time the cameras caught their hands and fingers playing some of the most impressive music I have actually ever been able to witness in detail. Hearing them play is one thing, but actually being able to SEE what their fingers are doing in order to produce such sounds is something else entirely. By the end of the show, I WAS EXHAUSTED, literally, just from watching them play from the comfort of my cushy theatre chair! I dragged my ass out of the theatre as if I had just danced all night on ecstacy or something and fell asleep on the trainride home.

THE ATTITUDE CAPTURED ON FILM - Besides the smirking attitude of the band, as they laughed about fun little things they'd just done musically, I saw this same attitude reflected in the fans. It was really just about the music and being happy-- not stupid hippy polyanna "everything is groovy, it's all happenning" kind of happy.... just pleasure in small things.

It started out with us (the audience in the theatre) sitting there watching the audience in Keyspan park just waiting for the show to begin. As I looked around the theatre, I saw a perfect mirror of the fans' general attitude. There weren't a lot of filthy hippies. There were just thousands of mature short-haired casual people more or less hanging out as comfortably as if they were in a family barbeque somewhere, hanging out with friends on a beach or something. So much different from your average rock show where people are either trying to "outcool" one another or are obnoxiously "psyched" to be rocking out in a concert venue.

When the band took the stage, a roar filled the audience, as one would expect, but after 15 or 20 minutes into the show, the audience was STILL standing (or sitting) in a civilized manner, just soaking up the music. Nobody in Keyspan seemed to be dancing all over everyone else's shoes or otherwise going "apeshit," which almost shocked me because I had also spotted in the crowd several teenage jocky looking guys. These kids had the typical sullen expressions of rebel kids who enjoy their drugs, but seemed to be willing participants in a peaceful good time. I can't tell you how surprised I was when the group of little hoodlums next to me who had been smoking pot the entire time, took it in stride when I accidentally kicked over their jumbo $6 movie theatre drink! I said, "Oh shit, was that a drink?! I'm sorry..." and was fully expecting them to act as any NY teenage prick would, but to my surprise, one just said casually, "That's alright." They didn't even try to be "magnanimously cool" or anything.

All these 12 year old kids were running to and from the bathroom yelling, "What'd I miss?" and "Did they start the 2nd set yet?" They didn't look drunk or high or even old enough to really be that excited about music. I was thinking, "Shouldn't you be listening to Eminem or something?" When I was 12, I think I would've been bored off my ass by Phish.

However, in contrast, if this was a Regal Cinema simulcast of KISS or Eminem or something, you can bet the general feel of the crowd would be somewhat hostile (remember the fires at Lollapalooza?). During the second set, the crowd peacefully went down the escalators calmly and smoked cigarettes. As I smoked, I was approached by all sorts of people who just wanted to talk to me. It was a gentle give-and-take sort of conversation I had with EVERYONE, talking about nothing in particular. So different from a standard rock show where there's this weird tension in the air and people are afraid to talk to other people... so different from NYC in general, where conversation is all about how witty or interesting you can be in the first 90 seconds in order to grab someone's attention. This left me with the realization that you just can't listen to Phish and not end up being mellow and genuine; they're not a band that's interested in "rocking your balls off" or getting you to join the KISS Army or some shit, so it's just really: "You like this music? That's cool, I do too." Sit back and enjoy it.

A GOOD SHOW, THREE TIGHT SETS - There really wasn' much fucking around with this show. The band just played to their highest standards and walked off the stage. Nothing more fitting for a DVD release than that. Let the music speak for itself. Let the sheer enormity of it all (gigantic stage, monitors, lights, audience, etc.) be a testament to the fact that this music is at the heart of it all. It has been fun for me to watch the reversal of opinion from critics and detractors over the years. Rolling Stone hated Phish in the beginning, but eventually called them "the most important band of the 90's." After all these years, when Phish has REALLY decided to pack it in and call it a day, critics are now complaining that the band is just "paranoid" or 'too idealistic"... suddenly, NOW the critics don't want the band to stop playing. If this show is released on DVD, it will be a great realization for the rest of the stragglers out there who still think Phish suck. They'll be middle-aged men and women somewhere and someone will put in this Phish concert and they'll stop and say, "holy shit, what did I miss? I was actually ALIVE back then and I actually chose to ignore this band..."

And they might feel like I do now. I ignored Phish for most of their glory years.

I bought the new album on the way home from the show and, believe it or not, listening to it this afternoon at work, my eyes started to tear up. The new album, "Undermind," is the most fitting end to Phish I could imagine. There are lots of little references sprinkled throughout the album that this is the end of Phish... maybe they weren't really intentional at the time they wrote them (but maybe they were)... in any case, subconcious thoughts say quite a lot....

THE FINAL REASON I'M THANKFUL - Like I said, when I left this show, I was EXHAUSTED (from doing NOTHING, mind you!) and as I walked away I thought to myself, "I can't believe that they've played shows like that for the past 21 years. I would never choose to work that hard in a band..." and then I remembered that Trey and Page especially have been visibily "drained" for the past 6 years or so, according to all their family and friends, who frequently urged them to stop. Trey threw out his entire CD collection and burned his TV last year (not the actions of a healthy man, regardless of whatever his reasoning may have been at the time). And, as I thought about this, it was not surprising in the least that they didn't say 10 words to the audience all night. They could have gone on and on about their decision to quit the band and become really emotional (like Courtney Love or something), but instead they were visibly enjoying themselves, most likely knowing and feeling what Trey recently said in an interview:

"It will be great to revisit all that old material one last time this summer, but I need something knew. I can't just keep travelling around the world playing 'You Enjoy Myself.' I need something new!"

I would have quit the band probably after the 2nd or 3rd major label release. If James Brown is the "hardest working man in showbiz," Phish is at least that times four.

I suggest everyone buy the new album, "Undermind" ... it's just good. The lyrics... well, they make me cry. Not for myself, but for them. What a struggle, what a life... and for what? Just for our enjoyment... 'You Enjoy Myself' indeed. They managed to release 400 songs and 30-something "official" albums, not to mention the downloads of dozens of shows, they provided free DAT soundboard taping for the fans and they donate the profits from their LIVE PHISH series to charity... what more can be said in favor of ANY band? Oh that's right, they didn't cure cancer.

Sure are going out with a bang though...!

2004-05-27T01:17:00.000-04:00

First I've ever heard of a nation-wide movie theatre simulcast of a live concert. Since the Brooklyn shows are sold out, I may just have to pay $12.50 and go to Union Square's theatre to watch the show.

I also just might pay the $149.50 to see that very last show in August.

And, in about 15 minutes, I'm going to watch Trey on Charlie Rose on PBS...

Just some swiped links for storage

2004-05-27T00:13:00.000-04:00

*****************************************
>> Everything below is copied + pasted.
I wrote none of it.
It is just an archive of links as described be other people.
Lots of free online books if you're interested, though...<<
*****************************************

I AMs extensive list of Grimoires and other Magickal
Texts as well as some fiction...

http://www.geocities.com/neverclan/OF/links.html

http://www.schuelers.com/enochian/

http://www.alchemy.dial.pipex.com/index.html

www.spellsandmagic.com
Not really so useful, but an good intro for newbs and a spells resource for pros alike.

Here is a link to an underrated book in my oppinion. This is only part 4 which is the most curious in this book.
http://www.esotericarchives.com/solomon/sibly4.htm

Golden Dawn:
The Golden Dawn Sanctuary - http://home.earthlink.net/~lyam/index.htm
The Sanctuary of Ma'at Order of the Golden Dawn® - http://www.ritual-magic.com/welcome/
ISIS THOTH - http://isisthoth93.bravehost.com/
Journal of the Western Mystery Tradition - http://www.jwmt.org

Discordian
FNORD - http://www.fnord.org/

Misc
The Internet Sacred Text Archive - http://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm
Norton's Imperium - http://www.hermetic.com/browe-archive/index.htm
The Mystic - http://www.themystic.org
LOGDOS - http://www.lawbright.com/logdos/

I AMs extensive list of Grimoires and other Magickal
Texts as well as some fiction...
http://www.geocities.com/neverclan/OF/links.html

This site is certainly worth a look, althogh it encompasses more
than just CM:
http://www.antiqillum.com/glor/gloridx.htm

And some more to keep us going:
http://ar.atwola.com/html/93167784/953482353/aoladp?SNM=HIDF&width=180&height=150&target=_blank&TZ=-60&CT=I

(esoteric archives)
http://www.lava.net/~pagios/basic.html

(Bardon comentary by Mistele)
http://www.abrahadabra.com/

(Im sure you remember this)
http://www.templex.org/reference_library.htm

(Chaos and Thelema)
http://fusionanomaly.net/

(A site Logos posted, interesting)
http://www.ordoaa.org/index.htm
(one of the A A sites)

meditation -
http://www.smokindiscounts.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=75

astral projection -
http://www.smokindiscounts.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=74
dreams -
http://www.smokindiscounts.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=76
magick -
http://www.smokindiscounts.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=73

Necronomicon links for historical reference:
The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
This site has ODD spellings of common names but is the largest link I've found of actual table references complete with transliteration.

Gateways to Babylon
NOTE: This site seems to be a little free with their translations...going so far as to even blatantly make stuff up! But even their fiction is a pretty good read...and I figure if the necro works for you...these might as well

Argos

This is a series of links for middle eastern studies...there is a lot of info linked here, but ya gotta sort through a BUNCH of other stuff.

Sumerian Lexicon
Translate the words in the Necro yourself! (NOTE: most of the words in the necro are actually Akkadian )

Sumerian Mythology FAQ (Version 2.0html)
Fair to accurate information...and it cross-references itself for ease of use.

GUIDE TO THE SUMERIAN TEXTS
I just found this site...it "looks" good...but could be a bunch of crap...read at your own risk!

The Necro in HTML
I've not compared this with my book! (it has audio of Evil Dead *shudders*)

THE SEVEN EVIL SPIRITS
R.C. Thompson, translator [The Devils and Evil Spirits of Babylonia, London
1903].
You can actually BUY this book from Amazon or your local B&N!

WWW-VL HISTORY
GREAT site! One problem...most of the content is too current & not related
to anything even remotely magickal
Digitized Titles for Etana>
Electronic Tools and Anceint Near-Eastern Archives. A MUST! Some of these books actually have spells in them!!!

Online books:
http://www.blackmask.com/page.php
(seems to have bandwidth issues )
There are two or three books on Sumer in here...one of them is pretty good!

http://www.livingwithmagick.com/LBRP.html

http://www.livingwithmagick.com/SIRP.html

http://www.kats-robes.com/robes.htm

http://www.tylwythteg.com/guide.html

http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientastronauts.html

http://sobek.colorado.edu/LAB/GODS/index.html

http://home-2.worldonline.nl/~gibbon/enki_enlil.htm#5

http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ema/

http://www.coldsteel.com/
[QUALITY knives!]
http://www.satanism101.com/

http://www.mysteriousworld.com/Journal/2003/Summer/Osiria/

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_7.htm

http://deafening-silence.deviantart.com/

http://www.dslreports.com/stest?loc=97

http://www.guardians.net/egypt/giza1.htm

http://www.sacred-texts.com/ufo/ourpast.htm

http://www.harmonikireland.com/index.php?topic=LivingWater

http://www.prairieghosts.com/

http://www.vortexmaps.com/htmla/megalith.php

Bummer, Phish is gone for good

2004-05-26T14:04:00.001-04:00

As the message from Trey below shows, the band is done for good. It also seems to indicate that the new album must really suck! That really blows cuz I only saw them twice back in, like, 92-93 on college campuses. Never once saw the huge arena tours. I had gotten so much back into them in the past 2 years that I fully expected to see them at the Garden next time they came around...
Looks like I won't get to.

Really sucks, too, because their side projects are not great. They're barely good.

Ah well, I can still buy up all the old LIVEPHISH cd's ... that should satisfy me for a lifetime. A catalog of over 400 different songs (not including variations) and enough available music to listen to for probably a month or two before you'd have to repeat the cycle... who listens to music 24 hours a day, anyway?

AN ANNOUNCEMENT FROM TREY 05.25.04

Last Friday night, I got together with Mike, Page and Fish to talk openly about the strong feelings I've been having that Phish has run its course and that we should end it now while it's still on a high note. Once we started talking, it quickly became apparent that the other guys' feelings, while not all the same as mine, were similar in many ways -- most importantly, that we all love and respect Phish and the Phish audience far too much to stand by and allow it to drag on beyond the point of vibrancy and health. We don't want to become caricatures of ourselves, or worse yet, a nostalgia act. By the end of the meeting, we realized that after almost twenty-one years together we were faced with the opportunity to graciously step away in unison, as a group, united in our friendship and our feelings of gratitude.

So Coventry will be the final Phish show. We are proud and thrilled that it will be in our home state of Vermont. We're also excited for the June and August shows, our last tour together. For the sake of clarity, I should say that this is not like the hiatus, which was our last attempt to revitalize ourselves. We're done. It's been an amazing and incredible journey. We thank you all for the love and support that you've shown us.

-- Trey Anastasio

Mind Machines You Can Build!

2004-05-21T01:38:00.000-04:00

They changed blogger and I haven't been here in three weeks. Know why? Of course not. Because I've been doing experiments. I got a funny little book by a NASA scientist that wanted to disprove PSI (mental super awesomeness) and so created some experiments to confirm the nonexistence of simple bullshit telekenutcake powers.

So he did.

He made like 40 machines or something to test simple "supposed" powers. But, the weird thing is he proved that these ridiculous "mind machines" actually worked, despite the fact it made no fucking sense!

He then made a book called Wonderful And Amazing Mind Machines You Can Build! and gave details on how to construct these super-simple mind machines and experiment for yourself!

I bought this fuckin' book and immediately got to work on one of the "MIND MACHINES". All I needed was a needle, a piece of paper and some scissors. Yes, that's all it takes to build your first "MIND MACHINE"!!!! But, it is actually WAAAAYYY interesting, despite that it sounds like crafts class. You can, like I did, verify this shit for yourself!

SO FUCKING WEIRD, BUT HERE ARE THE INSTRUCTIONS:
(Give it a shot!)

1. Take a regular 8.5 x 11" size piece of letterhead paper. It is rectangular. Make it a square. Use your powers of logic to take those SCISSORS and make that rectangular piece of paper a SQUARE! I'm not going to tell you how. You should know. Just cut off enough of the paper to make it a SQUARE. You got that? Do it.

2. Fold the paper from corner to corner to make an "X" in the square paper. TIP: You start with a square, but you create a triangle two times.

3. Now you have a little pyramid. Why? Because if you take a square piece of paper and fold it from corner-to-corner twice, you end up with a little "X" in the square paper and that makes a little "tent" or "teepee" effect that resembles what a douchebag might call: THE PAPER PYRAMID.

4. Take a fucking pin or a needle or something. Take that damned wirey object with a sharp point and stick it somehow so that the sharp point faces skyward. Just make sure the little lightningrod is pointing upward and stabilized. (Try not to think of sex).

5. PAPER PYRAMID! Remember that thing? You folded a square piece of paper? Well, take that square piece of paper and set it on the point of the needle you just "stabilized." It looks like a little umbrella, doesn't it?

6. Now put your hands over the PAPER PYRAMID / NEEDLE UMBRELLA and imagine the paper spinning in a clockwise motion. Just imagine that you have forces in your hands which will spin the paper in a clockwise direction. MAKE SURE THE WINDOWS ARE NOT OPEN AND THERE ARE NO DRAFTS. MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE NOT BREATHING ON THE PAPER UMBRELLA. There is no draft of air and no breath of air moving the umbrella. But, still... if you imagine that you are moving the umbrella clockwise with nothing but the powers of your hands... does the PAPER UMBRELLA move clockwise? If there is no wind currents, why should it move?

This NASA scientist came to the strange conclusion that all these things (provable for yourself) are actually true. Try it out for yourself.

I'm drunk and high.

:-)

If you could do it all over again...

2004-05-06T23:35:00.000-04:00

I was talking to my friend Adam last weekend about life-type stuff and he came out with my favorite line: "... if I could do it all over again, I wouldn't change a thing..." which is a refreshing thing to hear every now and again. Especially from people you've spent a lot of time with. I feel the same way most of the time. In fact, this seems like a really common thing to say. People who are content with who they are always say this. These are the only people anyone really wants to hang out with, anway. I'm really, like, PROUD of the jerk I've become. You know what I mean, so I won't analyze this statement to death. I think it's a healthy attitude. Certainly beats hating yourself. Or as someone once said, "It's better to regret things you HAVE done, than to regret things you haven't..."

But, man, Adam brought back some crazy memories. That guy has a mind like a vice (which is really appreciated by a guy like me, who has a mind like a sieve!). I've told the crazy acid story a million times about jumping in front of a train, but it's barely what you would call a memory. There is a galactic-sized fog around my late high school/early college years that Adam helped fill in last weekend. And, man, when I went home after our visit, I really realized how glad I was to hang out with him again and found myself really kind of missing "the old days"... and wishing I could remember them better, too. It's kind of like I set everyone up as a character in my head for convenience sake and lost all the humanity each of these characters really had. I guess that's what people are good at: pigeonholing other people. But, hanging out with Adam again started old memories trickling back. It was sort of like Romper Room (you remember that show?): "I see Jeff and Ally, Terry and Val, Martin and Jerry, crazy naked frisbee man and Tracy, Drunk George and Ira, Kristen and Trish, Spliff and Tim... man, there's a lot of faces I see in my head right now, but I can't remember the names. So many people who were just as fucked up as I was, in retrospect. But, to me, everyone ELSE seemed "normal" and I was on the verge of loosing my noodle. There was a lot of fuckin' people in Potsdam, NY that I "knew" ... but good god, what kind of a lunatic must I have seemed? ("Oh, hello everyone, I'm too high to converse with you at the moment, so I will go outside and smoke to get away from you... or, I will talk about music because that's about as intelligent a conversation you're going to get out of me...")

Anyway, I started thinking about Adam's statement and rolling it over in my twitching melon. If I could do it all over again, I believe I WOULD change things... A LOT of things! I don't particularly CARE if "life experience creates the people we become." I think I could have taken an easier route to the person I am. No? Hmm. Shit. Maybe not. I really am happy with my perception. I'm actually at a point where I feel neither young nor old, but juuuust right. I want to stay here, stop time and live forever, yet somehow learn more every day.

It's so great that we get the chance to realize we're confused and want to understand our situation better. From that point on, it's up to us. You'll never get out of this maze. All you can do is keep trying, keep realizing "shit, that didn't work" and try something else. I guess the best way to do that is to say, "fuck it," and risk making huge mistakes that you'll regret. Hopefully, you learn something and don't "die trying."

But, ya know, I still have regrets:

1. I regret I never had the balls to ask out the "really hot girls" all the time when I was younger.
2. I regret I never had the balls to interview for a dream job.
3. I regret I never had the balls to perform in more bands.
4. I regret I never had the balls to quit my cushy job when the economy was great and risk it all on something far more interesting.
5. I regret I never had the balls to CHEAT ON A GIRLFRIEND. I don't know if it's "balls" or "morals," but I fucking WISH I had cheated on every single one of my ex-girlfriends. What the fuck?

Amazon Wishlists

2004-05-06T16:25:00.000-04:00

Ever just decide to get real creepy and start perusing other people's Amazon wishlists? I never really have, but I always knew it was a possibility and so have tended to keep my wishlist chock-full of fucked up shit (as well as a useful storage bin for things I might actually like one day). At one time, I had about 10 books on "how to get laid" at the same time when I had another 10 more books or so on "childfree living" (my favorite book I found was called "I'm Okay, You're A Brat").

Anyhoo, I have waited/wanted forever to see if anyone would mention my wishlist to me (or send me something GIFT-WRAPPED! EVEN BETTER!)... nope... Ah well. It is less fucked up than it has been in the past because I weeded it down to things I might actually buy one day, but just now I got the idea to really look for people I haven't seen forever on Amazon Wishlist.

I'm pretty sure this wishlist is not from the Leslie Sutter I know... nor is this one!... Although, I guess I could be wrong...

And here's the wishlist of a gal I dated for 2 weeks in high school, who supposedly ran off and joined a Satanic cult in California, bathed in blood and put a curse on me! It would figure that her wishlist is so negative!

Looks like Moe from Atomic Number 76 has some interesting taste...

You'd have to know the guy, but there's no way in hell this wishlist is by the same Terry Wooten that I know!

All in all, nobody's beat mine for oddness. And, sadly, most people I thought up did not have wishlists for me to peruse. I encourage anyone who is bored and weird to finally start stalking people by their Amazon Wishlists. It was about as entertaining as Friendster was.

MY BLOG was Reviewed! (mentioned briefly)

2004-05-06T13:05:00.001-04:00

I feel special. In the short time I've been blogging, I actually rose to the attention of Virtual Insanities, who featured me out of a handful of blogs that are "all about the rant". Pretty awesome! Click the link and scroll down til you see Communities - The Rant (his April 7th entry) in big type. There you will find Doctor Strange listed among four other blogs: The Ranting Rationalist, johnny's ranting on gaming, The Ranting Pseudo-Grad Student, and Slowpoke Blog. Not bad company. I likeee.

Aleister Crowley Movie In The Works! Yeah!

2004-05-04T15:14:00.000-04:00

This is going to be one hell of a cool movie! Crowley's life was fascinating, even if you DON'T think he was busy raising demons and shit.

Web Links for Adam and Lily

2004-05-03T13:45:00.000-04:00

I feel silly posting this because it's pretty old news, but Homestar Runner / Strongbad is still probably the funniest thing on the internet, even if it is kind of old. I was talking with my friends Adam and Lily this weekend about Subservient Chicken and Liquid Generation and when I mentioned Strongbad, nobody knew who I was talking about. "Time to check da email..." was the funniest damn catch phrase to me for quite a while.

At this point, there's a lot of catching up to do, but Homestar Runner / Strongbad still rules. I can't figure out why it hasn't been converted to a Comedy Central cartoon or something:

Homestar Runner main (choose from cartoons, games, etc).
Strongbad's Email (my favorite)

HELLO CTHULHU!

2004-04-30T16:17:00.000-04:00

Seacrest Out

2004-04-27T17:20:00.000-04:00

Canceled Friendster! Yay, they finally added a cancel feature (or at least I finally found it). Finished 2 freelance jobs. Quit smoking again, reaffirmed my resolve to drop out of society.

Does "Cosmic Intelligence" imply you are a "Creationist?"

2004-04-22T17:22:00.000-04:00

In many cases, Creationists and Evolutionists are polar opposites set on disproving the other: "what the thinker thinks, the prover proves." Were it not for each other, neither would have a specific viewpoint to assert. But what if there was another viewpoint? Of course, there are many viewpoints. This is what's good about life and why life is what it is. Arguments often dissolve with both sides convinced they have disproven the other, each existing somewhere within the overall order of things. But, in such cases, the overall order of things is not truly understood, and this is something even fundamentally understood to those posing their arguments.

While often taken to be a "Creationist,"I actually wouldn't consider myself to be a "Creationist" at all. I simply see evidence for an as yet "officially" unrecognized force (or perhaps "unofficially" recognized would be a better term?) which permeates the universe. Belief in "Cosmic Intelligence" (or an intelligent force underlying everything) is different from "Creationist" for many reasons, which at first might be hard to distinguish for someone who simply sees order as the natural result of chaos.

For the sake of brevity, you could dismissively state, "order comes from chaos." But, if I asked you, "why does order come from chaos?", you'll be stuck with one of a few answers: "because it just does" or you could show me a Mandelbrot set or launch a Cellular Automata program (which wouldn't explain why; these would describe how), OR you could just say, "that's what we're trying to figure out, dumbass!" Finally, you could be totally dismissive and say, "The question "why" is illogical as it is attempting to find purpose in the universe, which necessitates a Godhead."

But, I'll try to explain why I'm not a "Creationist," anyway... for starters, I don't believe in any Gods I've read about here on planet Earth, nor do I believe in any Godhead which has created all of "creation." I merely see that a "thing" only exists in relation to some other "thing" and that both "things" are actually the same "thing" underneath this illusion of separateness. We now realize that the universe is not made up of "separate things" at all, but a "whole thing" of "stuff," which only appears to be "separate things" when looked at through the spotlight of narrow focus... until the point of extremely narrow focus when this illusion finally breaks down and we realize we don't know what the hell this "stuff" really is at all, only that it is a "whole thing." All respected men who have examined this stuff have said as much, with a tone of total awe and consistent surprise.

Consciousness is a hard thing to pinpoint, so we tend to ignore it, for the most part, when we are examining "reality." The minutae of reality we examine scientifically in order to understand and apply this knowledge on a grander scale is exactly what we think it is: smaller "parts" of a whole. We grasp the universal reality in small bits, deciding "this thing" goes with "this thing" which goes with "this thing" which goes with "this thing"...

But we do not ignore consciousness completely. In scientific experiments, we are often careful to realize that our own consciousness, subconsciousness or unconsciousness might interfere with a "true" outcome, so we take every precaution to eliminate all possibilities in which we could inadvertantly taint the results of the experiment. We attempt to "control" it. This is a logical, intelligent decision on our part.

Yet, while logic itself is the result of labelling and ordering our world, logic "goes with" consciousness and consciousness "goes with" brain, which "goes with" neurons which "goes with" electro-chemical reactions which "goes with" the total organism, which is the result of this implicate order. Whatever consciousness actually is, all organisms have some degree of order within the environment of which they are part. Questioning "why" there is order is just as necessary to understanding the universe as it is to understanding anything else because this order is the very same thing that allows us to examine anything else in the first place. If there was no order, there would be chaos; if there was chaos, there would be no order and no logic. Therefore, the question "why is there order?" is not illogical and it does not necessitate a Godhead. It is simply asking, "why the implicate order of all this 'stuff'?"

And you could still respond with, "That's what we're trying to figure out, dumbass!" But, trying to extrapolate your consciousness from an unconscious system seems just as insane as claiming that the universe is not really an ordered or logical system at all, but rather a temporary result of a pre-existing chaos which will eventually return to the chaos from whence it came. But, you know what? That is Vedantic belief, which predated the Big Bang theory by thousands years. So, if you believe this, you are officially pronounced a "Scientific Creationist" by your own logic. However, unlike the Vedanta, which recognizes logic, order and consciousness for what they are, you would deny that this same force within you operates throughout the universe. You claim the force is not there, despite maintaining your being within its current. This makes you an insane creature in an insane world, with or without chaos, for you are part of a world which doesn't exist. There is no force of logic or reason to give rise to your so-called "logic" and "reason" (this can be taken two ways: either your logic and reason came from lack of either... or there is no logic or reason underlying what you currently consider your "logic" and "reason," thereby making you illogical.) Your opinion makes man separate from the universe, when he is clearly a part of it. So, you are looking in such a way that will never make sense.

If you are pointing to something "out there" which you explain with logic and reason, you say, "Look! Of course this is logical! It's right there in front of you! How can you deny it?" That makes the thing you are pointing to, necessarily, LOGICAL. Your consciousness is not created in a vaccuum, but a certain way of looking at the world makes it seem so, despite all the other consciousnesses you argue with or play with each day.

I would recommend Dean Radin's "Conscious Universe" book simply for entertaining different possibilities, if nothing else. I was ready to put it back on the shelf after that Preface, which struck me as supremely lame, but the rest of the book I found very interesting.

In addition, Alan Watt's "The Book" might better explain what little I said above.

B3ta rules! I'm dying of laughter!

2004-04-16T14:21:00.000-04:00

This B3ta artist has some of the most hilarious goofs I've seen in a while. I especially enjoyed the joust and the dolphin.

Also funny:
funny
funny
seems funny

What I do when i kid myself

2004-04-16T01:32:00.000-04:00

I am the student, teacher and adjunct lecturer of my very own clown college. We are all glad I am kidding myself. Won't you pull my finger?

"Brutally shall I teach the gospel of soul-suicide..."
--Austin Spare

"We gonna have Soul Shakedown Party."
--Bob Marley

Also, check out We Want Your Soul, Inc., a promising business model if ever there was one!

poop for peace

2004-04-15T17:15:00.000-04:00

http://www.poopreport.com/Intellectual/Content/Poopforpeace/peace.html

NEW SEX

2004-04-15T02:32:00.000-04:00

People have been experimenting with sex for a long time now, but I finally came up with something which I feel is completely different. Therefore, it is sexy as hell.

I want to stick my butthole up someone else's ass. I want to bypass the "average" and go straight to the "fetish": I want to stick my butthole up a horse's underage child's foot's ass.

GOOGLE ME BABY! BLOG PUSSY COCK GOBBLER HOWLER MONKEY

2004-04-15T01:21:00.000-04:00

Hello. I think I managed to tweak the Blogger settings so that this thing is GOOGLE-ABLE.

However, I just did this today, April 15th, so it will take a while before you see the results.

I put in a free WEBSTATS thing and discovered that a whole hell of a lot of people were finding my website through GOOGLE ... and probably LEAVING instantly, thanks to the Marshmallow Fluff picture, cumshots, etc. People searching really cool philosophical, science-shit and magical whatnots were greeted with fluffernutter and cumshots. Awesome.

So, anyway, now I guess my site is Google-able. Wait a few days, weeks or months for results. I look forward now to many more insulting comments/comics.

Extreme Makeover is my new favorite show for tonight

2004-04-14T22:10:00.000-04:00

Fuckin' sad story, man. Wow, that poor guy made me want to cry. Who would think that a show that at first seems so shallow is actually quite doing some good in the world.

Interesting but confusing waste of time

2004-04-14T19:57:00.000-04:00

From Elkins and Long Story Short Pier, a funly interactive thing.

Here's the instructions:
1. Grab the nearest book.
2. Open the book to page 23.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal along with these instructions.

So, here's what I got:

"Are they what they appear to be, genuine phenomena that transcend the usual boundaries of space and time, or are they better understood as conventional psychological and physical effects?"
--Dead Radin, "The Conscious Universe"

Feel free to post your results...

The Queers Are Alright

2004-04-12T21:14:00.000-04:00

Just refamiliarizin' myself with The Queers. I must say, this is one pop-punk band that hasn't really outworn its welcome for me. Though, you could probably put all the NEED-TO-OWN songs on one 70-minute CD, each album is worth the effort. Some of my favorites:

See You Later, Fuckface
Get A Life And Live It (Loser)
I Only Drink Bud
Born To Do Dishes

The Conscious Universe (not a book to be scoffed at)

2004-04-08T23:18:00.000-04:00

THE FIRST US PATENT FOR A PSI EFFECT WAS GRANTED to Princeton University researchers on November 3, 1998. Patent "US 5830064"(click for link) is entitled: "Apparatus and method for distinguishing events which collectively exceed chance expectations and thereby controlling an output." This patent specifically covers distant mental control of electronic random number generator outputs. (How interesting! See Carl Sagan quote 3 paragraphs below...)

"After 100 years of separating 'mind' from 'matter,' Science has lost its mind...."

The book I'm about to suggest is really nothing like it will seem by its description. Reading the few excerpts from Amazon below, it will be very easy for a hardcore skeptic to dismiss this book as "bullshit" with such a cursory overview (and not a moment's thought, natch). However, actually reading just the introduction of this book in your local bookstore and skimming through the enormous amount of research which comprises the rest of it, will be enough to convince fans of Brian Green (respected Superstring Authority), hardcore skeptics, wannabe occultists (and completely disinterested parties, too) that this book is something more than your average pseudo-scientific, trumped-up-research tripe thrown at New Age morons to make a quick buck.

Anyone who's read Brian Green's "Elegant Universe" and is familiar with Nonlocality and Bohm's "holographic universe" theory knows there is something very interesting going on in respectable modern thought, scientifically speaking, of course. What people are generally unaware of, however, is the serious research that has been done for the last 20 years in the field of "psi" and that this research has been convincing enough to change the opinions of even the most skeptical scientifically-minded people, like...

Carl Sagan, for instance, who (probably begrudgingly) wrote (although, he didn't have to "admit" anything):
"At the time of writing there are three claims in the ESP field which, in my opinion, deserve serious study: (1) that by thought alone humans can (barely) affect random number generators in computers; (2) that people under mild sensory deprivation can receive thoughts or images "projected" at them; and (3) that young children sometimes report the details of a previous life, which upon checking turn out to be accurate and which they could not have known about in any other way than reincarnation. "

Before I even get into WHY I'm suggesting you pick up this $25 book, I'm simply going to provide a link to Amazon.com where you can purchase it: The Conscious Universe, The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena by Dean Radin, Ph.D (I realize a PhD doesn't mean much), director of the Consciousness Research Laboratory at the University of Nevada.

"Attempting to dequackify the study of psychic phenomena, parapsychologist Radin (whose research has been sponsored by the U.S. government, AT&T, and Stanford University, among others) analyzed all the serious studies on telepathy, psychokinesis, clairvoyance, and precognition for his intriguing, exhaustive tome. "

"Uniting the latest in high-tech experiments, including irrefutable data from his own groundbreaking research, with teachings of mystics and theories of quantum physics, Radin explores myriad phenomena: from ESP to ghosts to psychokinesis. Radin reveals the remarkable extent to which psi is already tacitly acknowledged -- and exploited -- by Fortune 500 corporations and the U.S. government, then analyzes how the inevitable mass acceptance of the mind-matter link will affect social, economic, academic, health and spirtual issues. At once visionary and pragmatic, The Conscious Universe recalls the classics Godel, Escher, Bach and The Holographic Universe, yet transcends mere experiments to offer a bold new vision of the future. "

And now, my own words (much less intersting, I'm sure.)
It's always hard when you're an open-minded kind of skeptic discussing the slimmest likelihood of psychic phenomena with a very closed-minded kind of skeptic. On the one hand, the open-minded skeptic doubts everything, really, but doubting everything opens him up to the possibility of almost anything. This is where he loses the closed-minded skeptic. A closed-minded skeptic can simply not understand how you could possibly DOUBT science! He will ask rhetorically, "Do you think the earth is FLAT, too?" When you point out that he is stating a theory as if it were a fact, he will joke, "Well, gravity is just a 'THEORY,' too! Surely, you believe in gravity, don't you?!"

The closed-minded skeptic believes only what is "observable" and "provable," even if the "observation" is nothing more than a closed circuit: a seemingly logical, though purely theoretical, mathematical equation he may not even understand and which is by no means provable. He is the type of person who will accept modern theories as if they were fact, citing the pseudo-"scientific" argument that a popularly accepted "theory" only differs from a "fact" in that its methods are "less rigid" and therefore the results are "less turgid." This is the same general semantic principle a politician will use to sway a peaceful crowd into fighting for what he believes in, despite the fact there is clearly a possibility that what he believes in is entirely wrong.

Realize: the word "possibility" is not the same as "a slim chance." Now... a possibility is a possibility; a slim chance is a slim chance! The two are not synonymous! In the case of comprehending the nature of the universe, scientific theory is actually closer to a "slim chance" than it is a "possibilty," for the simple fact that some firm beliefs which were once considered "scientific fact" have actually been disproven over time... by science! Furthermore, ideas which were once considered scientifically "impossible" or "implausible" have, over the years, turned out to be entirely possible and, in fact, these "impossible" ideas have become downright commonplace! A real simple example-- probably too simple for you real "smart" types-- is FLIGHT! Human air travel! It wasn't science that invented airplanes, it was two dipshits who owned a bicycle shop!

So, okay, I'll admit that I have recommended books in the past. Books with wacky names. You've probably researched them on the internet and decided I was out of my fucking gourd. How could any SANE person suggest the sort of books I suggest OVER AND OVER AGAIN?! Of course, the answer has to be confusing if I am to pretend I am a sensible individual. Maybe my answer will be "confusing," but I'm just going to explain honestly: ALL of these books I have recommended (and I am very judgemental) provide very enlightening insights into the nature of belief -- they explain the difference between WHAT IS POSSIBLE vs. WHAT WE THINK IS POSSIBLE, but they are far from "New Age." In fact, the books I recommend, you have to search to find. They are, in fact, very unpopular! Believe me, I've read that New Age shit-- it's fucked! A few books I mention frequently are "SSOTBME" and "Thundersqueak." (Try to find THOSE at ANY bookstore!) But these kinds of books are not written for the closed-minded skeptic. In fact, if it weren't for me, you just see how long it would take you to come upon those books (likely NEVER). Sure, these books could very possibly blow the fucking buttons off the clamped-down, logical mentality of a closed-minded skeptic, if given a fair chance, but I doubt a closed-minded skeptic could actually read and comprehend more than a few pages... but, more likely, HE WOULD NEVER FIND THESE BOOKS. These books are like "FUBU" clothing: For Us, By Us. In other words, "if you don't get it, and if you're not LOOKING FOR IT, good luck!"-- because you're fucked! You'll NEVER find it, unless you're already on the right track. (By the way, "On The Right Track" is a great Gary Coleman movie-- I can't recommend enough! [Well, okay, I can... and I think I just did... it's a bad movie, actually.... funny, though!])

There are dozens more books I could suggest of a similar nature, but the problem with most of these books is that they are obscure and often written under pseudonyms by people who don't want to be labeled as "crackpots." I have discovered that these people are actually people of impressive status, despite the counter-culture nature of their material, but this knowledge would do little to assure the reader that they are credible authors. Another thing that doesn't help one goddamned bit: these books are written by people who sometimes might claim to be "magicians" and just as often, they will quote people like Jesus, Crowley, Paracelsus, Steiner or Castaneda while in the same breath they will quote more "respectable" figures such as Einstein, Jung or Bohm, weaving the threads together in a style similar to the Nobel Prize winning "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid." While most of these anonymous "crackpot" authors have vastly more knowledge of science, literature, philosophy than your average closed-minded skeptic, these authors are simply not afraid to state the most outrageous of ideas, if only to "break" the reader's mind into accepting its limited understanding of "reality" and to clearly place NEW signposts which point to the old, preexisting labels people have wrongly used to understand their world. Point being, many things we simply accept as "fact" are not fact at all.

Imagine my surprise when I saw "The Conscious Universe" compared to "Godel, Escher, Bach: The Eternal Golden Braid"! This was what convinced me to spend the $25 and actually BUY "The Conscious Universe." You see, in high school, I dated a girl whose stepfather was a well-respected physicist. He was smart but weird and he really had no time for his family at all. I can still recall clearly that I so wanted to pick his brain, but that there was obviously some sort of family tension: he worked upstairs all hours, but his family lived downstairs and had a regular life. I hung out with my girlfriend's mom, her little sister and would only occasionally speak to the physicist. One day, he caught me in his study, reading "Godel, Escher, Bach..." and asked me if I was interested or something. I had been reading it, page by page, day by day, after school whenever I got the chance. I remember that the book was written in such a way that even an idiot punk-rock high schooler like me could actually grasp the concepts and take aways something meaningful from each chapter. He let me borrow the book and it was pretty much the beginning of a lifelong fascination with "reality."

With all that said, take it however you will, I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand "the meaning of life" (or at least the nature of life) a little better. For those of you who wish oh-so-desperately to perform some sort of "magic" or believe in some kind of "religion," this may just be the book that allows you to let go of your inherited belief systems. Same goes for all you level-headed scientists out there. This book will either be what you have been looking for... or it will be something you were afraid of all along. I always love it when something "irrational" is staring a rationalist right in his face and he shakes his head and says, "Well, I don't know [what it is], but it can't be [what it appears to be]." It's kind of like when democrat mops the floor with a republican and the crowd is cheering, but the republican shakes his head and gives a wry smile, like he's talking to a bunch of idiots. Or like when everyone cheered when Condoleezza Rice was sort of asked to declassify that PDB and she went on as if the cheers were completely meaningless.

ALL COMMENTS LOST-- Upgraded to a better COMMENTING SYSTEM!

2004-04-08T22:11:00.000-04:00

Yay! I mean, "BOO!" I don't know what I mean... I enjoyed all those old comments, but whoever the jackass is that designed the original blog template/commenting system I ripped off apparantly crapped out or something.

So, I think I found an actually somewhat respectable commenting system that works really well and isn't just run by some yokel who makes crappy blog templates in his spare time. And man, that WAS a crappy blog template. Took me forever before I realized I should just redo it completely. All in all, it would have been much faster if I just made a template myself and started googled "comment blog free" (like I just did) from the get-go.

Anyhoo, I look forward to the better comment system. Hopefully, every post won't get chopped in half or end with a comma inexplicably.

,

(ha, get it? I put a comma there!)

Increasingly, I find the need to spread my non-committal approach to nothingness far and wide

2004-04-06T22:02:00.000-04:00

1. Your "personality" is simply a computer / robot with a "memory" device known as a brain that records your experiences. Your history and experience is not what "drives you," nor is it really "what you are." You feel pride that YOU are YOU, but this is ignorance. What drives you is nourishment (air and food), which flow through your body and brain cells, where you collect your history and experience. The energy of the nourishment flows through the neurons and enlivens the "memories." It is like electricity flowing through a computer: igniting and "starting" your programs. Everything you believe is "you" is just a collection of experience, which can be changed at the drop of a hat.

Your personality HAS changed over the years, correct? You've built other programs on top of your old programs. Each program modifies the prior ... but, at any time, the whole "system" could be easily destroyed, given a significant jolt (i.e. brainwashing, trauma, etc.).

The most basic energy which sustains all these "thoughts" would be the "substance" you consider "yourself." Your "thoughts" are simply PROGRAMS which act within a larger "Operating System." They are not YOU, because "YOU" can be changed according to the program which is being run at the moment. What you "identify with" is simply a collection of programs which operate independently ON TOP OF a pre-existing OPERATING SYSTEM. So then, the OPERATING SYSTEM is what is actually YOU.... What YOU ARE is the energy that runs the programs, because the programs can be "upgraded" over the years... and in certain instances, specific programs become completely OBSOLETE-- but YOU still live!

Therefore, YOU ARE NOURISHMENT. You are simply the force which runs the programs. You are the PRIMARY OPERATING SYSTEM that runs the programs. As such, you are the AIR you breath and the FOOD you eat! Stop eating, you die. Stop breathing, you die. Eat or breathe the "wrong stuff" and you become "screwed up." Eat prions from a mad cow or smoke a little weed and all of a sudden, you're a "different person." If you eat enough of the wrong stuff, you will ingest a virus which eventually kills the entire operating system: you are dead or diseased.

2. Religion all says the same thing (see #1). And, if you strip away the PROPAGANDA of conflicting religious doctrines, religion simply says #1.

3. You are part of a "conscious universe," proliferated by consumption of the vital (air and food [energy]). A fraction of NOURISHMENT sustains "YOU" (air and food).

4. "God" plays "hide and seek" with himself through a variety of bodies and throughout a variety of experiences. The conscious universe experiences itself by separation. (If we are not talking about "air and food," we are talking about charges of elementals and the interaction of separate bodies, which feed on the same sustenance.)

It's simple and simply bizarre, but only understood if you understand #1. This is religion. Yet, religion pits robots against each other, based on the "programs" each "computer" decides to run.

5. #1 is simply called "meditation" in all its forms. Meditation = a kind of thought and a thought is nothing more than a program based on a prior operating system. In order to run any of these programs, a specific operating system is a necessary foundation, based on a 0/1 or yes/no logic. In the case of life, 0 (no) = starvation and 1 (yes) = nourishment.

Politics are a disease of the mind

2004-04-02T03:05:00.000-05:00

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but I will anyway.

It seems like there is some kind of almost-revolution going on lately in America. On one hand, you have the crazy clamp-down of the conservatives and on the other, the finally recognizably coherent audible wails of protest from the liberals. During the first 2 years of Bush's war, it seemed that people were happily getting in line to goose-step their way to a more secure homeland (with a few "paranoid" murmurs in the background). How quickly things have turned regarding 911. Why, I remember, it seems just yesterday, the people who were screaming "foul" were nothing more than paranoid internet conspiracy theorist kooks! Even the outspoken media rebel, Howard Stern, was calling 'em all "crackpots." And yet, now, if you listen to Stern, he seems just as infected with this "dementia."

Let's go back to when things were more normal in America, just about a decade ago... Tipper Gore's PMRC was a failed joke, legalized abortion was a done deal, people's bare asses started showing up on primetime television and the media was "too damned liberal" for a handful of very vocal fatheads who appeared on boring political shows very few people even cared to watch. This was a time when arguing about ideology almost seemed like a frivolous waste of time in a land where everyone was becoming more and more free... and who had time to argue about nonsense when there was fun to be had and money to be made?

Does anyone remember when all the major internet sites blackened their screens in protest to proposed internet censorship legistation? That was about 10 years ago, too.. Things were different back then; most everyone took their freedom for granted and leftist political activists were considered annoying nutjobs or simply immature and uniformed. Global warming wasn't really an issue, right? It was just a bunch of hippy alarmists mucking around. This sentiment that everything was "a-okay" seemed to have lasted right up through George W. Bush's "s/election." It seemed that most people were content to presume all the votes were counted and it was just paranoid to believe an election could be stolen in the "land of the free" with so many people to keep their eye on things.

Well, it seems like, all of a sudden, people just really started distrusting the media and authority in general. I wonder what took so long. It's natural to rebel against authority! That's why we have the Bible; to explain and restrain this natural inclination.

And yet, while some people are freaking out about it (ie. Howard Stern) and some people are doing something about it (ie. Al Franken), it still seems like most people are acting like nothing is really going on. The common man is too busy trying to find work and the more elite (media class) are doing the same! Not since Reagan have I seen such wonderful political comedy on my boob tube-- and it is a boob tube: as I suckle at the teat of Mommy Media, I ingest whatever nourishment she can possibly produce from such a poor, steady diet of garbage and poison. What's my alternative? Am I to turn myself invisible and travel around the globe, spying on politicians and bureaucrats? Mommy Media is all I've got. Whether she's "liberal" or "conservative" media, I really only have two options to consider: I'm either for or against something I have no control over; whatever Mommy has to give me.

And as "...Uh, Reverend D. Morton" pointed out while commenting on a previous blog entry of mine, the media is all about "getting the story first"-- Print it FIRST (justify your job as a newsperson), ask questions later (reevaluate your worth as a newsperson)... And, by the way, later, it all becomes too convoluted to figure out, anyway-- all according to plan! We take it for granted that we are being lied to, anyway, don't we? We just choose the side we believe is probably (hopefully) lying the least. But, we're full of shit, too. Our egos choose our political affiliations and our egos are always "right," aren't they? This is politics in it's most basic form.

And, yeah, America is a nice place to live, so it's easy enough to just say "fuck it" and go with the flow, however disruptive it may be to our peace of mind and our way of life. Maybe we lost a great computer job and now we work at a hotdog stand, but we still have to get by in society, don't we? We have our OWN lives to worry about. Let the media worry about policing our country and our government (whatever they tell us, we'll react to accordingly)-- and let our government worry about policing the world (whatever they tell the media to tell us, we'll react to accordingly). This is why so many people were content to accept the fact that Bush "won" the election: "Yeah, it was close, but come on, how many times can you recount the votes?" <--- complacency, acceptance... but, really, what else are you going to do but accept it? Make a fool of yourself (and possibly a target) by demonstrating against the government? Come on, we all know that when a peaceful protest gets rowdy, it's all thanks to the government agents who dress in civilian outfits, join the protest and then start trouble, thereby contaminating the political voice of the people who (technically) are supposed to have some say in a "We The People" type democracy such as ours. We The People don't have the power, we simply have the lives the power controls. Our government was meant to be small and simple, but that government has spread its wings over the years, signing thousands of bills and expanding into areas never intended by the originators of our government. This didn't happen under a blanket of secrecy, necessarily (although plenty of it did), but through a facade of honesty: the media: "journalstic integrity."

Want to control a gang of outlaws? Exploit them in the media, then suddenly stop all coverage of their actions. The outlaws will suddenly think their time has passed. (ie. 60's motorcycle gangs, LA gangs, etc.).

I am reminded of something my grandfather said. He was a man who died before I ever met him, but I remember that my mother (a Christian freak) used to quote him fondly (as if he was the biggest genius of all time), "'The day we can see people in our own living rooms, talking in boxes, the end of the world is near.'" Of course, she would say this whenever something really "indecent" was on television, something that really upset her. And it was as if my grandfather was Nostradumbass or something to her: she firmly believed that Satan was the "king of this system of things" and that Armageddon was coming.

Strangely, I see this attitude all over the internet, even among people who are not religious freaks. I see the words all over the place in sympathy with Apocalyptic sentiment: "the media, media, media... control, control, control... evil, evil, evil..." Flashes of John Carpenter's "They Live" flicker throughout cyberspace. The Illuminati! The Bohemian Grove! Etc. Etc.

Well...

Let's put it all in perspective. This crazy idea might not be so crazy after all, but it just may not be so "evil" or Apocalyptic, either.

Think about it: politics are shit. Yes, we all can get caught up in them, but when really inspected closely, they are shit.

Now, people will scream, "POLITICS ARE NOT SHIT! POLITICS ARE IMPORTANT! YOU HAVE TO GET INVOLVED OR IT WILL BE YOUR FREEDOM THAT'S TAKEN AWAY!!!" And they will mean it. They will mean it whole-heartedly. The reason people care so much about politics is because LIFE is politics; governmental politics are only every-day life on a grander scale.

And that is perhaps why my grandfather in fact was a genius of Nostradumbass proportions. The most important part of a political debate is NOT "who is right." A political debate is just like any other argument: what the thinker thinks, the prover proves. Both sides of the debate can argue for centuries and neither will actually "win" the debate. But with the magic of TELEVISION, it does not take centuries to win a debate! It takes only days of instantaneous idea-transmission via propaganda. What is important in politics is simply how many people you can get on YOUR SIDE. It is simply a war. And it can simply BECOME a war, with physical violence and everything. And with television, time does not move so slowly. It does not take long to rally people around a political cause. It does not take long to find yourself in a physical war, thanks to television... much faster than newspapers, western union... or carrier pigeons.

All of this POLITICS is simply a rebellion against authority. Either side refuses to accept the other's authority and, in the end, one side will win (temporarily). However, to FULLY win, in the most extreme scale of "winning," one side simply must become TYRANNICAL. And, just as simply, that tyrannical figure then takes position as "authority" and sets itself up to be overthrown. It is a cyclical, natural cycle. Politics is shit. Time-delayed cyclical, natural shit. Just as fertilizer feeds the plants, the decaying politics of the elders feeds the next generation.

Jello Biafra once sang, "Anarchy sounds good to me 'til someone asks, 'who'll clean the sewer?'"

I will clean the fuckin' sewer. Happily. Until the sewer mafia breaks my legs and takes over my territory, anyway (ie. NYC's first janitorial service imported from Vermont).

Carlos Castaneda is PURE CRAP!

2004-04-01T12:53:00.000-05:00

About 10 years ago, when everyone was reading The Celestine Prophecy, most of us knowing full well that it was nothing more than fiction, I read or heard somewhere that, "if you liked Celestine Prophecy, you'll love Carlos Castaneda's 'Don Juan' series." So, I guess it was 10 years ago that I bought the first book in the series. As I remember it now, it was "okay," but didn't prompt me to go out and buy more... nor do I remember it being the "real deal" at all, but mainly about the ingestion of different drugs.

Well, recently, I saw references to Castaneda's "Journey To Ixtlan" twice (the 3rd book in the Don Juan series) by 2 people whose words I actually respected, Tom Marshall and Ramsey Dukes (keep in mind, neither Tom nor Ramsey said "Journey To Ixtlan" was a great book or anything, they were simply referring to it. So, last night I picked it up at Borders. Man, am I glad the cashier pointed out that I can return it within 14 days for any reason for a full refund. I will be returning it later today, after work.

As soon as I started reading it, I thought, "This guy is lying. He's just telling a story. This is supposed to be real or something?" I read the first 4 chapters, then I flipped to the end of the book and read the last 3 chapters (these are the chapters which deal with the "reality" of Carlos Casteneda's experience of "stopping the world" without drugs of any kind, meeting a spirit coyote and all other sorts of horseshit. Naturally, at the very end of the book, Carlos has the opportunity to "tackle his ally", but decides not to. I suppose an ally is supposed to be like your Holy Guardian Angel or something, but after a brief discussion with Don Juan and some other Done Genero (sp?) dude, Carlos decides he's just not ready for such a freaky, sad ordeal. Of course not! Either he's saving it for a future book in the money-making series, or else he realizes that he doesn't want to claim this level of spirituality, since he couldn't back it up with any real experience or knowledge. It has to be quite an ordeal to keep all your lies straight throughout a series of 10 books or so.

Man, this was the most obvious bullshit I've ever read-- and I've read A LOT of occult literature. Wow. I am actually shocked that people recommend this book (or any of Carlos Casteneda's books). I'm not EVEN going to finish reading it for kicks.

If you're one of the people who has been duped by this man, check out this fascinating website which gives a blow-by-blow of his various lies and explains where he got his ideas from.

Total conman. I think I remember Howard Stern making fun of him, now that I think about it. Carlos was charging a fortune for some bullshit "magical passes" class or something like that, as an old man trying to make ends meet.

Jon Stewart, The Daily Show & The Bohemian Grove / Club (Cult?)

2004-03-31T08:57:00.000-05:00

(For all you knee-jerk trained monkeys out there, the Bohemian Grove event and the Bohemian Club is not "just a conspiracy theory.")

I recently heard Jon Stewart of the Daily Show mocking a book that referenced the Bohemian Grove / Club (cult?). I forgot the title of the book, but it had something to do with politics and it probably mentioned the fact that most of the important, powerful politicians and business leaders are part of this Bohemian Club and their strange, secret ritual they perform. Jon Stewart is a guy I like with a show I enjoy (and I agree with many of the views presented on the show), so I was a little bummed when Jon said offhandedly, "... sure, if you believe the politicians get together and worship a large stone owl!" (audience laughs).

Well, the truth of the matter is that this is what they seem to be doing. I don't know if they're really worshipping the owl or what, but the lame thing here is that Jon Stewart wrote the notion off completely without realizing that actual video exists of the event and that, despite the media's total ignorance of the Bohemian Club, it is completely and totally real... it just seems unreal.

Now, I didn't set off looking for info on the Bohemian Club. I was actually just trolling around for more information on the Temple of Set, after discovering that Edred Thorsson is a member of the organization. I learned, to my dread, that the Temple of Set was formed in 1970 by an (apparently) actual child-molesting Satanist named Michael Aquino. I'm not kidding when I say "child-molesting Satanist." (Take a look at the court transcripts presented below). Most educated people "know" that Satanists don't really molest children or any of that nonsense, but in this case it appears they would be wrong. Michael Aquino was a member of the Church of Satan and buddies with Anton LaVey (who formed the Church of Satan). The details of Michael Aquino's child-molestation case are quite damning, if not alarming.

As I researched the Temple of Set more, well... things got more interesting as I suddenly found myself reading about the Bohemian Grove ceremony. Now, this is not a conspiracy theory. This is a real event which the media totally ignores. Basically, the richest and most powerful people in the world, including several US Presidents (if not all), go to Bohemian Grove in the middle of all these gigantic California redwood trees where they dress in red, black and silver robes and burn a human effigy to a giant stone owl (CLICK FOR PHOTO).

Now, I was already familiar with the Bohemian Grove thing, but hadn't given it much thought before I realized they performed this bizarre ritual and, like so many occult organizations, remain so very secretive. I had figured that rich and powerful pukes meet in secret all the time; it's called a business plan-- and ALL business wants to "take over the world." But, there is something very odd about the most powerful figures on the planet acting like a prehistoric mystery cult.

A man named Alex Jones actually videotaped the Bohemian Grove ritual with a secret digital camera. It is a real event, the important and powerful attendees freely admit it and now we have video proof of the event. You can even order the film online (details to follow...) to view with your own eyes.

BUT PEOPLE STILL DON'T BELIEVE IT. WHY? Yes, it seems unbelievable and one would certainly wonder why the heck they're sacrificing a human effigy to a giant stone owl, but believe it BECAUSE IT'S TRUE, even if you don't understand it.

Then, I found the following thread on Memes.org. The thread was started by someone who simply posted a picture of the front of Alex Jones' video with the title: "Alex Jones :: Is he on Crack?" As you can see, people (like Jon Stewart) just think you're a kooky loon for simply speaking the truth! (When was the last time a crackhead videotaped a sacrifice to a giant stone owl? And how is the physical evidence of a videotape somehow indicative of your crack-smoking mental state?)

What I thoroughly enjoyed, was the response this thread got from "Adam Kaboom" using a Disinfo email address.

Following is the thread:

Mind Virus: Alex Jones :: Is he on Crack?

(click picture for enlarged legible version for reading)
Posted by: VALIS on Nov 21, 2001 - 07:31 AM
"Alex Jones Has Blown Bohemian Grove Wide Open!" - John Sergeant, World of Wonder, UK Channel 4

"This is like something out of a Hollywood movie, where teenagers are out camping in the wilderness and come over a hill and witness some devil cult in black and red garb sacrificing some poor soul on a bloody altar." - Alex Jones

THE REPLY FROM ADAM KABOOM:
"Re: Alex Jones :: Is he on Crack?

he may be on crack but i used to live about 15 miles from bohemian grove...with a member of the rosicrucians...

the closest incorporated town of any size is santa rosa - spanish for saint's rose...about 20 miles away

it lies an hour north of san francisco

an hour south of san francisco is santa cruz...spanish for saint's cross...the rose and the cross...rosy cross...rosicrucian...

in the center of this geographic cross, in san fran, is a monolithic scottish rite masonic temple...of course a little to the southeast is the rosicrucian museum...

bohemian grove, retreat for the world's most powerful "dignitaries" and prostitution central...

lots of actors perform there and what i can say about that is that there are lots of theater performers living on the russian river and at harbin hot springs that perform at the northern california renaissance faire...lots of mdma...the ***** and tell drug...possible mossad activity in the area...

any kind of drug you can think of can be found here, on the russian river...russian river road turns into mark west springs road...which goes up to lake county...home of harbin hot springs...www.harbin.org...you can drive as fast and as crazy as you feel like on this stretch because cops WILL NOT pull you over...cuz you might be transferring methamphetamine and they want that to occur...

in lake county california, near middletown is an indian reservation of pomo indians where many of the people that died at the jonestown massacre used to live...jim jones used to live in ukiah, before moving to guyana...which happens to be about an hour north of bohemian grove...harbin is an hour northeast of bohemian grove...

many of the US govt's infamous MKULTRA ops took place in this masonic stronghold i am detailing here...one of the people that was strongly implicated in MKULTRA hearings in congress is michael aquino...founder of the temple of set...off shoot of the church of satan...which was founded in marin...aquino also was tried for child molestation and despite enormous amounts of evidence against him...he is free...

why?

because US army psyops still finds him extremely useful...i was subjected to psyops in aquino's backyard for most of the past two years...lots of satanists distributing LSD there...and methamphetamine, mostly...

when we read about different supposed programs of mind control, the monarch method most closely resembles the techniques i was subjected to...

assassins are glorified in this area...mythically...

i am a stewart...so i read up on the family background...found out it was stewarts that gave the templars refuge from the pope in the 13th century...as they fled "infected" with hashishin memes...hashishin is the word that hashish and assassin come from...the hashishin, in alamut, were a radical psyop oriented sect of the ismaili muslims...

the templars are the precursors to modern day skull and bones sects...why do you think the illuminati are attributed with so many assassinations...ok..so i put this all together myself and in a santa rosa book store i suddenly run across a book entitled Templars and Assassins: Heaven's Militia and guess what i found out...that michael aquino has done a very positive review of this book...

ok...aquino is said to have a fascination with nazis...from his garb to his methods...operation paperclip was the op that landed many german intelligence and propaganda specialists in american army uniforms within a few weeks of the end of WWII...remember that scottish rite temple i mentioned? well if you drive north on the road on which it sits, the road turns into the Presidio which is the street aquino lived on when he was charged with child molestation and when he ran a US army day care center...perfect place for the abduction of homeless people [lots of forced s&m stuff in the area] and when i first moved to the russian river, a woman told me that many abductions of homeless people and prostitutes occur in the area and she mentioned the temple of set and she also spent a lot of time counseling women who had been victims of this...she was too vocal...she is in jail on a tax violation...

my mother came over from germany in 1951

why did i end up in all this?

for having the nerve to father Jam Echelon Day...remember that?

why was i targeted with this particular combination of ops?

well...to either get me to join them in some intelligence capacity, playing on my loyalties to the stewart-templar link and the nazi link...

or

to get me to think that even my parents are in on this, thus increasing likelihood of my psychological destabilization, thereby separating me from the people i love for various reasons...

they needed to discredit me and i think they actually attempted to drive me crazy...

by the way, i am not on crack...

adamkaboom@disinfo.net "

For your own enjoyment, check out the memes.org thread here and see the other replies from dopes who still can't put 2 and 2 together and see everything from the all-too-easy perspective of a "modern rationalist."

Now, as for the REST of Alex Jones' material, it may just be "conspiracy theory" and it certainly seems too insane to be real, but as for the Bohemian Grove video in particular, this is the real deal and it can be ordered from http://infowars.com/videos.html.

Re-write: Phish and Hell's Angels (soberly this time)

2004-03-25T22:06:00.000-05:00

Is Mike Gordon a pedophile?

1. The young girl told police that Mike didn't do anything bad to her and her father (the Hell's Angels leader) is on drugs (from here -- I'm not sure if that means that drugs were supposed to have impaired her father's judgement or what, so don't blame me for that statement).
2. The girl's parents and Mike Gordon released a joint statement saying, that after many conversations, they have come to the conclusion this was all a big misunderstanding.
3. Mike made a brief court appearance and walked out a free man.

Case closed, I say.

As far as the Hell's Angels go,If I thought this was a widely-read site, I sure as hell would be a lot more careful with what I say. I posted my previous blog entry out of boredom, while drinking beer and listening to Phish late at night. Most of my posts here are just drunken rambling.

It's not fair to judge the Hell's Angels by their bad press. That would be stereotyping them all as criminals and hot-heads. And besides, that is one group I certainly wouldn't want to piss off! Check out Hunter S. Thomson's "Hell's Angels" and some other book synopses here. Who in their right mind would want to make themselves an enemy of the Hell's Angels? Not me. In my earlier days, I used to have a fantasy of becoming a Hell's Angel, in fact. Kind of like my fantasy about joining the Freemasons or Ordo Templi Orientis. If I knew what these groups were really all about, maybe I'd have made the effort to join any one of them by now. I'm sure that I'm not tough enough to be a Hell's Angel, but the idea of being a free-wheeling badass certainly beats 9-to-5 working in an office. I've walked past the Hell's Angels' NYC headquarters and wondered what would happen if I knocked on the door. Would I get my ass kicked just for disturbing them?

But, no, I don't think the Hell's Angels should be outlawed. America certainly wouldn't be "the land of the free" if groups were judged and outlawed for the actions of a few members. But, I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to consider the notion that the Hell's Angels might have beat the shit out of Mike Gordon FIRST and asked questions later, seeing that they were frantically searching for the daughter of a LEADER of the Hell's Angels and found her in a remote area with a freaky-looking weirdo. In fact, I don't even think the Hell's Angels would be offended by this idea. Maybe I've got it all wrong, but my impression is that "if you fuck with the 'Angels, you're going to get your ass kicked." And Mike Gordon certainly did fuck with them, by taking their 9 year-old daughter for a ride on his scooter without at least informing them first.

No doubt about it, Mike showed "poor judgement," as they said. But, with the crazy fantasy lifestyle he's led for the past 20 years, I bet he shows poor judgement all the time. Kind of like David Crosby? Maybe this little incident brought him back down to earth a little bit.

I do still wonder, though, what the connection is between the Hell's Angels and rock n' roll. Maybe there is no real connection to the music industry any more than there is for any other person, but somebody hired them as security at that famous Altamont festival and now here they are again backstage at a Dead show. I doubt these are the only 2 incidents where they've been in close quarters with huge musical acts. I know they ride bikes and live a free lifestyle, but are they somehow connected with the music industry? Do rockers just generally view them as friends in that "sex, drugs & rock n' roll" kind of way or what?

I mean, when I see a biker, I definitely think of rock n' roll, but if I was in the Rolling Stones or the Grateful Dead, I'm not sure I would actually ever come in contact with a Hell's Angel. Why? For the same reason that I would be too afraid to knock on the door of local Hell's Angels headquarters.

For Those About To Rock, I Salute You, But...

2004-03-22T23:34:00.000-05:00

To keep this as short as possible (and therefore less boring), I'll cut to the chase: I have 700 "albums" on CD, vinyl and cassette. Way more than half of these are rock and fall into the usual subgenres like classic, indie, punk, metal, etc. You get the picture: very anglophile. For the most part, I'd say all of it is "weird" or at least "quirky," if not "offensive." Something a small-framed, artsy white boy can get into.

Throughout my 20's, I'd go through these phases where I'd think I was just plain bored of music. It was hard to find anything weirder than I already had, hard to find anything more rocking, it was just plain hard to find anything interesting anymore and rock music seemed more and more like the same old thing over and over again with a new spin and less heart. Or, maybe I was just getting old.

When Twee Pop came out, I was all over it like a fly on shit. I got over it. I didn't have the "issues" other people had with bands like Andrew WK, White Stripes, The Strokes, The Vines (and now Jet), but the thrill just didn't last for me long, either. Not because the bands are "sucky copycats," like music snobs might say, but just because I'd heard something similar before and I was already tired of it before the new spin was put on it. So, by that measuring stick, even the originators would have to be "sucky." But, they're not. Sometimes, it's just time to broaden your horizons and try something new.

About 5 years ago, I bought this Mozart fortepiano CD on a whim for $4. I had heard about the "Mozart Effect" and thought it might be good background music while I worked. Not long after this purchase, I had spent a couple hundred more on classical music, snatching up as many different composers as I could. I soon learned that it wasn't always wise to research music on the internet, since the written word does not do classical music justice unless you are actually already familiar with classical music, which I wasn't. I bought some Mahler and Rachmaninov that were disappointing (especially since they were 2 choices where I actually opted to shell out more than $18), but the great thing is that I'm not bored of them yet. If anything, they've grown on me rather than growing tiresome like so many other rock purchases I've made.

My 2 favorite composers so far have turned out to be kind of a surprise to me-- Bach and Mozart. This was a surprise to me simply because I've always liked music that a lot of people describe as "weird" and here I am a fan of the 2 biggest names in classical music. I can honestly say, though, at least I'm not a big fan of Beethoven's 9 Symphonies (although I wish I could afford Gardener's sped-up version)-- or ANY symphonies, for that matter-- and, also too and furthermore, I happen to really dislike at least half of Vivaldi's "Four Seasons" (but I think that might be just because I hear it on TV during the holidays). And, yes, I'll admit: my other favorites would have to be Vivaldi, Schubert, Chopin and Tchaikovsky. Predictable? I don't know. There's too much out there to know what the hell to buy!

Although those mentioned above are my "favorite composers" (whatever that means), I would have to say that my favorite disc for thorough and active listening is Messian's "Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps (Quartet for the End of Time)". I swear I have heard this weirdly beautiful music in movies before (and I am suspecting Ingmar Bergman at the top of the list). This music was created in prison using whatever instruments were available: violin, cello, clarinette and piano. This odd mix, combined with Messian's "bird song" teeters like a bird on a wire between creepy and innocent. It has the unnerving feeling of both cinema and cartoons: serious and playful, like watching a curious kitty tangle with dangerous Christmas lights.

But, I have been focusing on Bach the most lately. I love the cello suites, the organ, piano... hell, I even like it when he has fat ladies singing in a foreign language!

There's lots of sound to enjoy over and over with nothing to groove to. Thank god for nothing to groove to.

Now, here's where it gets weird. Pay attention. Don't leave me as soon as you get disgusted! Imagine my surprise... when I found.... an article online.... discussing the simple fact that Phish are big fans of Bach and their music is based off the idea of a FUGUE! It makes so much sense if you know what a fugue is! I never noticed it before, but there it is! These 4 music geeks met at Goddard and basically created a style of spontaneous "rock" music, for lack of a better term, that has it's foundations in Bach and the fugue (and just about every other style of music they could squeeze in there!).

How did I find this article? Quite simply, all of a sudden, out of the blue, I really started to like the few Phish albums that I had dared to purchase over the years (about 3 in 10 years). I got more and more interested in Phish and, in the last 3 years, I have bought up ALL of their studio albums -- about 10 in 3 years! (This was around the same time I was getting into classical music and realizing that I really love Bach!)

I just discovered this Phish article TODAY and was pleasantly amused and surprised! For the last few months, especially, I had been thinking that it's rather odd to have to describe my musical tastes as being "mostly into classical and Phish," but it turns out I'm right on! I really thought the two styles of music were a big, ridiculous clash (and maybe they are), but I also just discovered that Trey (guitarist from Phish) is releasing his 4th or 5th solo album in April that is all classical music! ...Nice.

Ya know, it's reeeaaaally easy to put down Phish. Lord knows I did for years, even though I've been a casual listener of Phish for the last 12 years or so (I would say, "I like 'em, but I hate 'em," with a wink). Unless you're really familiar with Phish's material, something about them just seems geeky and lame. And maybe it is. I don't really care. It takes hours of patience to even get through an eighth of their material. But, any band that can change focus so drastically on every single album and still make a cohesive "style" out of real jazz/gospel/bebop/real blues/bluegrass/acid rock/real funk (the black kind)/acapella, etc. all wrapped around a Bach-inspired "fugue" style of intricate musicianship is okay in my book. Zappa's got nothing on these guys.

I just recently discovered the LIVE PHISH series and am saddened to think of how much money I will spend on this series. Twice a year, the band releases 3 full shows as a digitally-remastered 3 or 4 disc album. That's 6 live albums a year at $18 - $30 a piece. The sound is unbelievably flawless for a live recording straight to 2 channel DAT. And, to my surprise, all those stinky hippies were right in college: "Phish is meant to be listened to live, man!" The studio albums, as great as they ARE, are sort of like a "formal introduction" to the real deal... and that is weird, my friend. This band got HUGE on their unlicensed bootleg CASSETTE TAPES a full decade before they actually started releasing the material in a proper digitally remastered format! They are the first band to make a fortune off live concerts while simultaneously allowing the free trade of bootleg recording at each and every venue. Not only do they encourage live taping, they remaster soundboard DAT's for the "phans" and use the profits for charity... and they are STILL multi-millionaires several times over! This "stupid little band" from my hometown whereabouts who I thought would wash up and dry out long ago! I wish I had paid more attention in the beginning, because this grassroots campaign has proven to be truly astounding. This "family" network grew to gigantic proportions under the media's radar-- possibly the largest largely ignored movement in recent history?

This band must have sold their soul to the devil because I can not believe they can spontaneously do this stuff night after night, 3 - 4 hours a night, and make it so drastically different each time. It's not like they're fucking around, either. It's not like they "jam" in one key and they just happen to fall into something that gels for a few minutes. Not at all, that's the stuff other "jam bands" do. Not Phish. This shit sounds like they're cutting a brand new studio album that they've rehearsed for weeks. In other words: flawless! I mean, if this band sucks, then every other band on earth must be sub-suck by a few generations, because I haven't heard this quality musicianship ANYWHERE else in my 700 album collection (except for the Classical, of course).

It's hilarious to me, that after years of being casually amused by this "stupid hippy" band from my hometown area, I have finally come to see them for what they are: as Rolling Stone called them, "The Most Important Band of The 90's"... which is pretty funny, because I remember a time when Rolling Stone made fun of them, too (circa 1993, "A Picture of Nectar" album review).

With No Regard To Anyone else, I present to you...

2004-03-22T12:24:00.000-05:00

Some links I don't want to forget to check out later:
http://www.top-cat.com/index.php?cursite=TC&curpg=Features

http://sitellite.org/

http://www.fatscripts.com

Bush's Fake News

2004-03-17T23:18:00.000-05:00

So, is this Wag the dog bullshit something that just goes on ALL THE TIME?

When Bush stole the election, I thought maybe elections were fixed all the time. Now, I'm beginning to think my paranoia about the news being bullshit propaganda isn't such a paranoid fantasy after all. Well, actually, maybe it is a bit paranoid... since it seems Bushco's fake news was exposed, just as their fake election was exposed.

A few days ago, an editor of the NY Post called in and confessed to Howard Stern that she believes the media is afraid of the government... and that someone higher up in the NY Post is really not acting in the interest of fair and unbiased journalism. I took a closer look at the New York Post the last couple days and I noticed that all the stories really do seem to be masterminded with a conservative spin. Little things all throughout the paper, like Howard Stern pointed out, even the "Letters To The Editor" section seem contrived.

I watched CNN more closely last night, too. I'm buying into this idea that the media is afraid of the government. After all, the government can use the FCC to issue gigantic $500,000 fines to any station they feel like for alleged "indecency" when in fact the laws regarding "indecency" are limited to the "7 dirty words," as described in comedian George Carlin's famous routine. However, the FCC goes beyond the written law and adds some vague "standards of decency" which is not written down legally anywhere and which no broadcaster can refer to in order to make sure they are not "breaking the rules." That works quite in favor of the FCC, doesn't it? What's worse: if the broadcaster objects to the FCC's $500,000 fines and would like to challenge them in court, the FCC can keep the issue completely OUT OF COURT indefinitely while refusing to renew broadcast licenses. This is an effective way for the government to silence any media which becomes too "fair and unbiased."

But more likely, I suspect that the same special interest groups that support Bush simply happen to control a great portion of the media.

Where is this "liberal media" we heard so much about when Clinton was in office? In fact, I heard the term "liberal media" THROUGH THE MEDIA. What does that mean?

I've recently heard that the first ever liberal talk radio news network is coming March 18th. First EVER? In contrast, there are supposedly 80+ conservative talk radio news networks (did I hear that right?) I saw this on CNN last night... there was some lunkhead conservative saying that there was no liberal news networks "because nobody wants to hear it."

Really? Nobody in this country wants to hear a liberal perspective? I doubt that. It seems like the word "liberal" has been painted as practically "communist" with the most general of brush strokes. When I compare dictionary definitions of "liberal" and "conservative," I'll be damned if liberal doesn't look a lot better at least theoretically. When I compare politics, conservative politicians don't seem all that conservative these days. They seem like damn evil monsters.

Sometimes, things are funny

2004-03-16T11:43:00.000-05:00

So, you'd like to... kill yourself

Someone beat me to my goal

2004-03-12T08:08:00.001-05:00

I can't believe it myself, just last weekend I mentioned that the one ridiculous thing I would definitely do if I was filthy rich was have a solid gold toilet made. I've thought about this for a few years at least, now. I just thought to Google search "solid gold toilet" and am shocked to learn that some guy in Hong Kong made not one, but TWO solid gold toilets!
Here's the full scoop.

Crazy Drunk Guy AWESOME TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS

2004-03-11T22:16:00.000-05:00

YOU HAVE GOT TO LISTEN TO THESE!!!!!!!!!
CLICK HERE!!!!!

Start right off with the first one, "squeaky, squeaky, squeaky" and go on from there.... You will not be sorry.

Familiarity breeds contempt (so imagine what breeding must do)

2004-03-10T18:50:00.000-05:00

I wanted to see if I was a lone, crazy nihilist, so I started looking around to see if there were any groups of people out there who seemed "normal" and were not into the baby-making scene. Turns out, I'm a normal realist and there's plenty of people out there just like me.

I was happy to find that there are at least a few groups out there who are "against" child-having as a PERSONAL choice, but not as far-out-there as groups like the Church of Euthenasia or The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT).

What gave me the MOST hope yet, is a book called....

The Childless Revolution (2001)
by Madelyn Cain
From Amazon: A fascinating and incisive look at a growing demographic: women without children. Due in part to birth control, later marriages, and the emergence of two-career couples, 42 percent of the American female population is childless, representing the fastest-growing demographic group to emerge in decades. These women are reshaping the definition of womanhood in a fundamental way, yet they are largely misunderstood. Whether childless by choice or by chance, they are alternately pitied and scorned, and are rarely asked directly about their childlessness; like the elephant in the living room, childlessness is a taboo subject.

42%! Dude, half the women out there don't want kids! More than half of that half is probably located right here in NYC.

Believe me, I have no intentions of opting out of my current relationship, but if my gal decides she just needs a god damned baby more than anything else, at least I know there's half a chance that I could find someone out there who has no interest in baby-making (that half a chance is actually 42% of the chance that I can find anyone at all to be with...) The likelihood of finding another person out there I really "click with" is pretty slim and the odds that this person is also anti-baby are even slimmer... but at least I know there's a LOT more women out there than I suspected who don't want kids! Yay!

I would suggest all you fuckin' baby-lovers go out there and read a book called

The Parenthood Decision (1998)
by Beverly Engel
From Amazon: Deciding whether or not to become a parent (and if so, when and how) is one of life's biggest decisions. For some people, the choice to have a child is intuitive -- something they've always known they would do. Nonetheless, questions arise for them. How can I know if the time is right? What are my real reasons for wanting a child? Are my motivations questionable? For others, the question is whether or not to have a child at all. What if I want to parent and my partner does not? Am I capable of being a good parent? Is my partner? What about money issues?

Judging by the 1 and 2 star reader's responses on Amazon, I would say that this book cuts through the bullshit "magic" and "wonder" of the biological impulse to "make a little miracle" and may actually shed a little light into the minds of people who seem to want to have kids regardless of how poor their current outlook is and how many fucked-up mental problems they have.

At least I know I'm nuts. As Cat Stevens said, "I can't keep it in. I can't keep it and I gotta let it out."

I'm not 30 yet, but after 3 days of "celebrating" our birthdays about 3 weeks early, I sure feel 30.

2004-03-09T16:57:00.000-05:00

I think I can kick back on the partying now, but I'll be damned if we didn't agree to have people over this weekend. More than half of our birthday gifts were alcohol. We also got the serious heavy-duty corkscrew with the cool lever action. That's an example of a perfect gift because, yeah, it's awesome to simply close and open a lever and have a wine bottle open easily, but I'd much rather struggle with a $6 corkscrew than pay whatever outrageous price those must surely cost.

Also, this 3rd day of sobriety, I still feel like everything in my body is "off."

Okay, okay, I don't love Whitney Pastorek....

2004-03-05T14:19:00.000-05:00

I've since Googled her and found a bunch of short stories she's written and are featured at various places all over the internet. I have discovered that she's an acquaintance of Dave Eggers, who wrote one book I enjoyed, and appears to hobnob and move/shake in semi-important (fame-wise) circles, which may give some people a thrill. She has also interviewed the White Stripes, which gave her quite a thrill, judging by her ridiculously lengthy article on the whole process of interviewing her favorite band on earth! In this interview, she used her lit-school writing skills to articulate her teenie-bopper-like adulation.

Whatever happened to asking rock stars questions and printing their answers? I barely care what rock stars think, so I certainly don't care what the interviewer's impression is of them! The interviewer is the filter, the article is the medium and, god damn it, the medium is not the message! Well, okay, the medium is the message if we're talking about art, in which case the artist is actually in control of the message delivered through the medium. I'll be hornswaggled in buttermilk if a celebrity interview is art, despite the existential need for validation of music-writer-nerds and wanna-be-Barbara-Walterses. I can make up my own mind without the smiling hero worship provided by the Entertainment Tonight mentality.

But, maybe the "art" in the case of this White Stripes interview is how the artists manipulate the interviewer into saying just whatever the White Stripes want, generally speaking, through this filter of Whitney Pastorek. This reduces the interviewer to a puppet on a string, rather than the self-important critic and journalist. In this case, The White Stripes prove to be very talented artists; they can tune up the guitar and sing rock songs, but just as skillfully, they can wind up a writer to sing their praises. And even more impressively, they can wind-up a non-writer (me) to write something about the writer (Whitney Pastorek) who wrote about them in the first place. The White Stripes oeuvre and mystique are magical weapons for self-empowerment and we shall all bend to their will!

It's weird to me that otherwise intelligent people can become fawning douchebags in the presence of celebrity. True, in this case, I wanted to read about the White Stripes here, not Whitney Pastorek, but that does not make me a fawning douchebag. That just makes me an ordinary douchebag with a mild curiosity regarding the White Stripes. I want to know what they think, what they've said and done, in their own words. I don't want to read the impressions of a giddy school girl. But, I digress...

The day becomes longer and I am more bored, so I go back to see what more I can learn of Whitney Pastorek via Google. It soon becomes clear to me that she does not like to display pictures of herself publicly. Or, what I mean is, she chooses to display pictures of her feet rather than a mugshot (charming or annoying?). In fact, she seems downright interested in footwear, I'd say. In one story of hers, entitled "Cartwheels," in the first paragraph's third sentence, she's relating her attraction to some guy on the subway and his sneakers. She writes: "Adidas, new, tastefully gray (none of the fluorescent orange stuff the kids are so crazy about these days)." Oh brrrrrother.

I start to wade in her circle of friends, as Dan Clowes might say, "looking for a reason to hate" them as well (but, I say this in good humor). I see that a great many of them are writers as well as designers, entrepreneurs, inventors, idealists, and basically they seem to endulge every creative impulse they have. I'm not putting them all down, mind you, because that pretty much sums up me and most of my friends that I have known, who have been mostly writers, artists/designers, etc. since I did go to an art school and mostly hang out with "idea people."

There is a point in life, though, when certain people eventually come to realize, that while they can be agents for change, visionaries and geniuses, ultimately opinions are like assholes: everyone has one-- or, in some cases, everyone IS one, depending on how opinionated they actually are (myself included, of course). At that point of realization, something happens to a person... suddenly their thoughts and feelings are not as important as they once were... perhaps fluorescent orange sneakers aren't just for kids... perhaps the White Stripes are just a couple of lucky musicians who are no more important than the bum you kicked out of your hallway this morning...

I wonder if Whitney Pastorek is part of the newer crowd that started to frequent local dive bar, O'Hanlon's, in recent years. Suddenly, a new "black-rimmed-glasses and Manhattan-Portage" kind of snooty crowd started flocking to O'Hanlon's in droves. By all appearences, their countenance suggests that anyone who is not "unique" like them is not at all welcome to talk to them. A different kind of conformity and herd mentality. They reserve a certain expression of disdain for people who would wear fluorsescent orange sneakers (for example). I judge them not solely (ha, ha) on appearances, however, as they simply did not get along with any of the previous regulars there (I, personally, never bothered to go out of my way to befriend them, after seeing a number of unsuccessful attempts by some of the regulars, who I did not feel the particular need to snub in any one of my previous visits to O'Hanlon's).

Interesting. Here I am an artist by trade and I even wear black-rimmed glasses... and here I am, judging those I deem "too judgemental"... I really should get along with them just fine! Shouldn't I? And yet, I opt now to travel several blocks out of my way, when I feel like going to a bar, to the even-more-divey, more rockin' bar (which shall remain nameless, but is hidden nicely in Astoria). Strangely, this bar is filled with people in bands, with tattoos and black-rimmed glasses galore-- and yet, everyone is really mellow and really cool to everyone else. Perhaps because the majority of people there are "uniquely" cool, everyone has relaxed their disdain and I slide in as "cool" under the radar. Or perhaps it really is just a better group of people.

In any case, no, I don't really "love" Whitney Pastorek like I said before. Yeah, she shares many of my own opinions... but, what do I care? I'm an asshole!

Hello once again and...

2004-03-04T16:55:00.000-05:00

Thank you, memepool, for your never-ending source of fun-ness.

Nothing Is Temporary, Only Permanence Is Fleeting

2004-03-03T15:50:00.000-05:00

This is the title of my new novel and CD combo-pack coming out this Spring. Look for it. Just kidding.

Porn That's Safe For Work

2004-03-03T15:10:00.000-05:00

Yet another link taken from memepool, this link makes me want a new wardrobe badly. Monica's been telling me for a while now that I should get some more stylish clothes. She's right. Everyone of these guys looks like he was dressed by the Fab Five. Check it out, this is what I need for my birthday, christmas, etc. Expensive clothing also makes for a nice surprise gift.

Ha, ha! I need to change my NYC Blogger Description!

2004-03-03T15:05:00.000-05:00

I just noticed that my site is finally up at nycblogger.com and the description I submitted is:
"i kid myself: 5 minute post sessions a couple times a week basically to share a cool or funny link or brief something. Nothing long-winded or very serious here."

I should correct that last line to read: "Nothing long-winded or very serious here, UNLESS I'M DRUNK, in which case I get SERIOUSLY LONGWINDED!"

I forget, I only started this damn thing to store links instead of clogging up my bookmarks in Internet Exploder. Old habits die hard, I guess, and new ones grow quickly. I blog my dick off lately.

I love Whitney Pastorek, writer for The Village Voice

2004-03-03T14:38:00.000-05:00

She is a fellow Astoria, Queenser who slams blogs, bloggers, Brooklyn and Death Cab For Cutie in a single article: to be found here.

And, since she claims to constantly Google her own name (Whitney Pastorek, Whitney Pastorek, Whitney Pastorek, Whitney Pastorek) on a daily basis to keep up with what bloggers are saying about her, perhaps she will find "i kid myself" (or as it is currently called, "i drink myself ™®©2004") and tell me I suck. I would be honored.

DO ME

2004-03-01T15:19:00.000-05:00

If you haven't yet begun daily visiting memepool.com, here is yet another reason why you should.

Eliminade

2004-02-28T15:32:00.000-05:00

"Crazy, toys in the attic, he is crazy..." goes the music in the background by a band I had once written off as "lame" on an album I had completely written off as "totally lame" several years ago. Listening to it now, it is hard to imagine why or how I could have ever thought that. In case you don't know what I'm talking about, the album is Pink Floyd's The Wall.

Suprise, suprise, I am actually going to call this "high art" from now on, in contrast to the entertaining novelty acts like so many of the other bands I had once held in so much higher regard. I suppose 12 or 15 years is enough span of time to change your mind about something. I am guessing that I simply did not like The Wall because I was introduced to it by people I considered wastoid idiot losers. I suppose it is possible that I have now developed into a wastoid idiot loser and this is why I have finally come to regard The Wall with the same sort of awe and enthusiasm as a high school stoner who can't be bothered to brush his teeth or bathe and takes advantage of one-legged chicks.

But, I wonder if these high school stoners really had any depth of understanding when they listened to The Wall. I know I only sort of vaguely "got it," but then again, I wasn't trying too hard to "get it" anyway, since I had already written it off. Slow music just seemed ponderous to me back then, I guess. Although, now that I think about it, these same stoners had introduced me to Black Sabbath, which is also quite slow. (There's another interesting flip-flop for me: growing up in the 80's, I first saw the Blizzard of Oz version of Ozzy on MTV and on faded t-shirts of kids who went to BOCES, chewed tobacco and did wheelies down the street on their junkyard BMX bikes. I decided Ozzy was a loser. Then, somehow, I got the idea that Ozzy was cool, once I saw a film of Black Sabbath during a middle school music class where it was described as "acid rock." ACID ROCK! Now, there's a cool term I had never heard before. I thought it sounded more "badass" than "hard rock" or "heavy metal," but had no idea what acid actually was at the time. Then, I met these stoners who gave me acid and played Black Sabbath in the van as we drove around in a fishbowl with wheels staring at the outside world. Then, I decided Ozzy was definitely cool.)

But, anyway... The Wall is one of the few examples of music that is utterly depressing which is totally uplifting. I am getting old.

Time-Plated Sky Tomatoes

2004-02-28T02:35:00.000-05:00

I realize that I am often longwinded with the written word (though to know me and to speak to me, you would sometimes wonder what it takes to get a simple "yes or no" response from me). I am the self-appointed king of thinking up universes of contradiction and intrigue which I refuse to share with even my rational "everyday" persona, a persona which I conveniently consider a simple "cloaking device" through which I can navigate a rather disturbing universe I have unfortuantly not thought up all by myself... or have I? Here I am, "thinking," of that which I perceive and denying it all within the same breath... (dude, it gets way less stupid, but not for a few paragraphs...).

Give me an email address, and I will bore you with probing questions and loony pontifications. Give me a "blog" and I will mercilessly destroy us both. If you really want to really get in sync with a mode of thought that will allow you to just "take it easy" in a nice room with padded walls where you are waited on night and day by nice people with sippy cups of Thorazine, please read on, because this is about the most frank I've ever been openly in a secretive manner on a fairly-public-yet-secret forum such as this. And the next time you even think of me, you will most likely wonder what the fuck I was even talking about that one time you read this and perhaps wonder more what the fuck I could possibly be thinking of currently...

This "cloaking device" I refer to is thee ole "social personality" which is... well... My behavior and speech is a tiny piece of the overall puzzle that needs not just "work" but a severe overhaul or about-face and I am trying to reorganize my brain to fix this incredibly debilitating problem. I'm sure even some physically handicapped people have a "leg up" on me in the attitude department. You will see, once I give you a clearer peek into my world, how this reorganization of my mental faculties for the "improvement" of my "self" (ie. disguise) would get a bit tricky. Or, possibly, you will be shocked at what simple concepts I have trouble comprehending, such as "right" and "wrong". The fact that I remain a social retard is not just because I'm a lazy asshole, though some people will certainly believe this to be the case (more on this idea of "belief" later...).

However, once this piece gets in line (my entire concept of "reality"), other pieces should fall into place: better social skills, better job, better home life, better attitude... and yet, they all sort of "go together," so it's not just as easy as fixing ONE thing (my brain). Because of this society of which I am an integral part (according to my "self," anyway), I can't just "get it together" quite so simply with the expectation that everything will fall into place after I've corrected my own failings as a human being. My perception of everything necessarily depends on everything else, despite the sort of "common-man" psychology which explains that, in order to feel at peace in the world, "you need to love yourself first" (and all that jazz). I happen to love myself quite well, thank you very much. I feel 100% that my understanding of -- and relation to -- "reality" is sufficient, if not better-than, other individuals' understanding and "relational rationalization" (one's place in the world), which leads to a certain acceptable degree of satisfaction and self-love for them (and me, for we are the same).

I often feel these so-called "normal" individuals are unthinking and marginal creatures, to be quite honest, as in the case of George W. Bush (if he is, in fact, the creature he presents himself to be). I do not feel that I am "better than" anyone, however, including George W. Bush, although the thought is quite tempting because his reality seems so inferior to my own (this will soon become hilarious, if you perceive this to be my snobbery). To clarify, I feel that the totality of one's thought puts one in one's own specific substrate of a greater sort of "Universal "Marginality." In other words, unless I am missing something (which I might be, due to my own marginality), I feel that consciousness itself is marginal and the varying degrees of capabilty of conceptualization of "realtiy" are simply the TOTAL EQUAL SUM of one's own world of marginality. There is no end in sight to the looming questions of "meaning" of and within existence and each level of understanding provides its own meaning, which is equally its own authority and lacking in totality of a "perfection." Therefore, the smartest person on earth, and even the dumbest person on earth, exist in a world to a degree of their own making which, unless tipped off to the supremest secrets of the universe are utterly meaningless and wholly closed systems of understanding and interpretation of what-can-never-be-known; each creature exists according to degree, but no creature exists according to the highest degree of everything in terms of complete and total underestanding. By this logic, a person in a coma could equally be as enlightened as Einstein, whose once-perfect theories are currently dissintigrating into partial realities as we speak... Science, religion, culture and art fight for supremecy, but each is equally marginal, mundane, wrong and right without justification (or, more accurately, justified within its own jurisdiction).

To better explain, I will use a recently popular example of what educated people seem to feel is a good example of all four conflicting worlds rolled into one, and this is the Westernized concept of "Buddhism," a school of thought which has been investigated and appropriated by science, religion, culture and art for the simple reason that it seems to be, at least on the surface, a "common sense" view of reality to a certain degree and which provides certain perceptable results in practice which is not limited to dogmatic interpretation, such as stress-relief in physical terms and "meaningfulness" in psychological, religious and cultural terms.

In the popularized Western psychological viewpoint of Buddhism (i.e. "fake buddhism"), there is a whole "right way" of being which depends on "right thinking" and "right action." It has been described as riding in a wagon with a misshapen wheel. This one imperfectly-shaped wheel represents the suffering of daily existence, which is simply part of the "wagon" (or reality) you were given (born into). Now, in order to maintain balance and "not fall off the wagon," one must constantly work at one's balance. One must constantly strive to see things "right' and not be a victim of the emotions of the ego. One must be aware of the odd off-tempo rolling of the misshapen wheel; one must anticipate its peculiar motions and react accordingly to achieve proper balance. He must understand the nature of suffering, he must learn to work with the "misshapen wheel" because he can not simply ignore it, lest it catch him off guard and throw the wagon into the ditch. If he falls out of the wagon, his only option is to learn from the experience and try again, because in reality, the "wagon" is not something he simply decides to climb into in order to "go for a ride," but something he was born into; it is the reality of day-to-day life. But "the wagon" will always have that misshapen wheel because life is not just what one wishes it to be. The misshapen wheel represents the obstacles along the path. In this way, the wagon is constantly rolling along with its defective wheel, so he must be mindful of that wheel in order to maintain proper balance. In time, his "balance" will get better and, with practice, he will get used to the rolling of the misshapen wheel (ie. struggle). When a person gets "used to" the misshapen wheel, he learns how to "ride" the wagon of life, despite the difficulties the journey presents. In other words, when nature rears its ugly head, do not let it catch you unawares.

Remind you of alcoholism at all? Alcoholism isn't a disease, it's a mindset. (And mindsets are not diseases unless you are talking about "memes." And if you ARE talking about memes, then every idea is, basically, a disease. A meme is a term for a "mind virus" or self-replicating idea or belief, whether good or bad-- but, usually, an idea that can't be 'shaken' is bad, as it borders on obsession.) Hmmm, so is alcoholism is a weakness or a "sin," as certain religions would have you believe? Is a sin to be weak? Hmmm... don't jump to answer that just yet...

I feel it necessary to point out, my interest in Buddhism waned once I started to perceive it as ultimately a "unique sort of nihilism," which I fancy as my uniquely unpopular opinion. I believe I once referred to it as "Satanic," though I did not actually mean that it was "created by Satan (since I have no use for the concept of "Satan" whatsoever). What I meant was that, while nihilism is skeptical and denies all existence, Buddhism is *hopefully* skeptical and denies all existence. The basic premise of Buddhism is that "all is illusion" and the "greater reality" is something that can only be grasped by denial of the "ego-self" and service to others. Therefore, this "greater reality" is not capable of explanation to those who have not grasped it themselves, which is rather a convenient loophole. In practice, it appears to be a warped way of creating meaning and wonder out of the everyday mundane events (the mind has a natural tendency toward boredom), which is sort of a self-imposed hypnotism and one can quite easily draw parallels with any other wacked out idea or religion that might involved "brainwashing" and "reprogramming." This leads me to wonder: what exactly IS "brain-dirtying" and "initial programming"... am I wrong to assume it is ANYTHING ELSE which has been experienced PRIOR?

There is a lot of truth in THE BASIC WESTERNIZED VERSION OF BUDDHISM, but ultimately, is it truthful ... or is it just a way to spend your life in order to obtain some degree of self-imposed satisfaction (and, really, is there any other kind)? Buddhists are more often penniless beggars or self-deluded phonies than they are universally respected unique individuals. There is no doubt that there is something very truthful in the basic message of Buddhism, but beyond this very basic message, there are a lot of big ideas about the universe, the soul, God, etc. that a sincere seeker will have trouble proving FOR HIMSELF if he is not just looking for something to believe in for the sake of comforting himself and if he is not simply willing to accept as FACT something which other people tell him. With that "authority" in question, the whole concept boils down to a "glass half full or half empty" kind of belief system. A "glass half full" world view is fine up to a point, but in order to internalize it fully, one would have to be brainwashed and reprogrammed.

Believe it or not, at this point, I have found solace in only one idea that seemed simple-minded to me when I first heard it about 10 years ago, but is holding up more and more every time I think about it. And lately, with my ever-crumbling belief systems, I seem to test the theory quite a bit. It most certainly will sound strange to you if you've never heard it, but here it is, the one belief I have come to almost fully accept:

"Nothing is true. Everything is permissible."

This is a false truth by it's own words: "Nothing is true."

Another false truth which I accept is : "What the thinker thinks, the prover proves."

This is equally true (though false, according to any objectionable "thinker" or "prover").

These very "truths" rely on the participant's perception and observation, when in fact the participant is the one who is seeking the "answer," and therefore he is also the "questioner." Only to the questioner, can the answer be proven!

Regardless of any contradictory evidence, answers can be found to justify the beliefs of ANYONE regarding ANYTHING at ANY TIME. And history shows this in convoluted ways by which nobody can agree fundamentally and truthfully, which essentially proves this law. Historians will agree that contradictory evidence does not deny "THE SIMPLE FACTS OF HISTORY," yet they will disagree on what is actually historically TRUE!

If everyone agreed on ANYTHING, that one thing would AT LEAST be true, but as it turns out, regarding the most iinfinitesimal quantifiable knowledge, nothing has been decided. Only through relationships with other things can the essence of any thing be understood and by that understanding no glimmer of ultimate truth can be obtained outside of the observers' limited perception of projected reality.

What is totally bizarre to even consider is that these statements that "nothing is true, everything is permissible" and "what the thinker thinks, the prover proves" is supported by science, religion, philosophy and psychology as well as art and culture. When trying to pinpoint the actual truth of a matter -- let's take the actual subject of "matter" as an example-- a person will find that there is no truth at all. The whole method of science exists because people project their ideas about reality "out there." Through analysis, their concepts "come to life" in the realm of the observed. But, what is observed invariably is perceived through the filter of the observer, whether it be his instruments of dissection or his mental capacity to understand. But, the science of yesterday is proven wrong by the science of today.

So one could say that science is never true, always false, but that would be wrong according to the microscopic world in which Science exists, quantifiable knowlege. Science is true for the moment; it is progressive logic. For instance, you wouldn't look at Sodium Chloride crystals and say, "Bah, there's no Chlorine in there!" The reason for this obvious rationale is simply because science has an ever-expanding realm of "truth" and Science itself has proven that Sodium Chloride crystals include Chlorine. But Quantum Physics, Superstring Theory, Nonlocality (Not to mention the Holographic Universe theory) all show science to be completely "unreal" according to our existing "scientific model," which those of the scientific community will simultaneously dismiss in lieu of the "future" and laud as the highest achievement in terms of the "past."

Coming back to the truth of the "matter"-- what is matter? Slowly vibrating energy? Waves or particles? How about both? How about this: for all our knowledge and experience with breaking things down into smaller things, we're left with a gaping hole in scientific logic, or the "scientific model" of the "past" (our "current"). Attempts at an explanation can only be initiated by projecting our ideas onto "reality" and coming up with some wild conclusions which do not serve a previous scientific model. That's the "truth" of matter!

As for religion or purpose, each individual has his own version of "truth." And every individual's world allows him to experience his truth to the fullest. The universe gives ample leeway for that person to simply change his mind one day and formulate a completely different set of beliefs which he will wholeheartedly consider "truth" from that point on, regardless of the fact that he now considers his previous "truth" to be completely false and regardless of the fact that this previous truth, which he now believes to be false, was something that he once considered to be "100% true." Imagine Luther and the reformation! Imagine believing in the Easter Bunny! It's all true, until you find something else that seems "more true" which renders the previous belief "utterly ridiculous!"

This is why two people can argue opposing viewpoints, completely secure in their belief that the OTHER person is "looking through blinders" and only believes whatever he WANTS to believe. Quite simply and unequivocally, the universe allows BOTH people to come away from the argument satisfied that THEY are right and the OTHER person is wrong. But, is this point I just made "unequivocal" or is it just MY belief? Certainly, to me this is true, but perhaps to you it is not... does that just prove the point I made...?

;)...

Or maybe YOU ARE RIGHT and I AM WRONG? Interesting weirdness there, isn't it? We are trapped. "What the thinker thinks, the prover proves." The thinker doesn't "prove it" to others, he proves it to HIMSELF. If others "want to believe" in what the prover has proved, they will... but is it just a matter of choice, after all? Well... that's what 2 people engaged in an argument seem to think: "Oh, you just believe whatever you WANT to believe, regardless of all this evidence I give you!" The universe not only ALLOWS this, but the universe SUPPORTS IT. Nothing is true... and yet, everything is permissible, for "what the thinker thinks, the prover proves." If you don't "think" it, you're not likely to "prove" it. And, never having proved "it" (the other person's "truth"), you will simply stick to the "proof" of whatever else it is that you have "thought."

So, what is "proof" and what is "thought"? Consider for a moment a "4-WORLD REALITY" :
- SOLIDS (rap your fist on a solid table, for this is what has "materialized" and what most scientific thinkers consider to be "reality").
- IMAGES (think of yourself on a solid goLd toilet; if you try hard enough in the "real world", you may earn enough money and this might become a reality-- you may just buy a "solid" gold toilet in the material world).
- WORDS - consider the phrase "TIME-PLATED SKY TOMATOES" -- no matter how hard you try, this phrase could never become a reality because the "image" is too fleeting. It has a certain "feeling," but just what the hell is a "time-plated sky tomato?"
- FEELING or "SPIRIT" - before someone told you what "happiness" or "sadness" was, there existed a reality which for you was real, but might have been difficult to express in simplistic terms-- For instance, when you were a baby, you were "happy" when you suckled, "sad" when you had indigestion, but all you could do was smile and giggle or scream at the top of your lungs because you had no words in your "reality" to utilize.

Were you a "moron" as a baby, as Science tells you, "naive" as Art and Culture tell you, or were you "Pure" as Religion and Philosophy tell you? Simple answer: you were all of the above and one schoole of thought does not invalidate the other. It is simply "what is."

All of this bothers me because it is not just concepts floating around "out there." It is all very important to daily interaction. People KILL each other based on their beliefs (for example).

As another "for instance," I probably COULD be satisfied and happy as a cut-throat businessman, if I didn't have this belief that there are limited resources and that when one person profits, another is denied profit. But, in a capitalist society, there is no other alternative. There is only small and grand scale variations of this same concept (if my belief in "limited resources" is actually "true"): If I land a job, then obviously, someone else has been denied the job. If I make a billion dollars exploiting a 3rd world country, I provide jobs and bring money to some people while denying those less fortunate and adding to their misery by polluting their water and rendering their land useless. However, simply by being employed in the good old USA, I am contributing to this unfair global economy in which the stronger Western economies prey upon the weaker nations and bully them into submission. Is this just a "liberal distortion" or is this "reality"? Well, as we have pointed out above, history is not necessarily the "reality" everyone agrees to, for there are differing opinions and realities of everything that has ever taken place, each of which exists in its own fabricated reality.

In a way, as you can probably already tell, I lean toward the Buddhist and Christian ideals of "service to others," despite the fact that I believe neither ideology, just the same way I would feel pity for a dying animal and do my best to help any creature from unnecessary suffering. This inclination of mine is based on personal experience, not reward in the afterlife or threat from some Overlordy Loving Creator Deity. But, in the case of contributing to the Evil Empire of Western nations, it is a bit like the Shroedinger's Cat Theory, which I'm sure you've heard before. (Simplified: If a cat is in a box, you do not know if it's alive or dead until you open the box. It is in a state of "neither-dead-nor-alive" simply because the observer must resign himself to the truth of the matter that he DOES NOT KNOW FOR CERTAIN until he opens the box.)

So, Before I came to understand the global economy as I now understand it, where the "advanced" Western nations prey upon the weaker nations, I had no clue what I was contributing to as an American citizen. Now that I DO know what I am contributing to, is it morally wrong to contribute to an economy which oppresses a large population... or is it still in that state of "don't know" as it previously was before I "opened Shroedinger's box," as it were? .

.. Well, obviously, since I DO KNOW the situation (at least, the situation as it has been DESCRIBED TO ME by news sources which MAY or MAY NOT be telling the truth), the state of "don't know" no longer exists for me, if I am willing to believe the things I am told. Despite the fact that the global economy is STILL THE SAME, regardless of my ignorance or understanding, if I accept the BELIEF now that I am contributing to an economy which creates 3rd world suffering, I have accepted the belief that now I "DO know" and I will either continue to contribute to the Western economy or I will decide it is "morally wrong" and refuse to contribute.

Now, this "thought process" leads me to the idea that action should "morally" reflect awareness. In other words, if you KNOW something is "wrong," you should not willfully participate in its wrong-ness. It seems like a no-brainer, doesn't it?

But, what are morals? In my case, as I said, these ideals come from personal experience which cause feelings of empathy or sympathy. By acting "morally," I would simply be acting to prevent another creature from having to endure any suffering WHICH I CAN COMPREHEND, because comprehension is a crucial aspect of "morality," "sympathy," or "empathy."

It is interesting because I have to admit, like most people, there are instances involving certain people in which I feel compelled to say, "Well, I just have NO SYMPATHY for someone who acts like THAT!!!" So, what am I really saying? Am I the "Holy Moly of all Holies" and by my High Decree I find these people guilty, simply because I do not comprehend their actions? Yes! That is exactly what this "morality" is! Why do you think George W. Bush ansered, when asked, "How do you know same-sex marriage is wrong?" he answered, "BECAUSE I JUST KNOW?!" Because he belives himself to be the "HOLY MOLY" of ALL HOLIES and to know unequivocally, what is "RIGHT" and what is "WRONG"... Think about that! This guy is OUR PRESIDENT! Shocking? PERHAPS! But it depends on who you "are"....

Most people do not have any sympathy for murderers, rapists, etc. But, after careful consideration (and consider it carefully, don't just go "with your gut, like George W. Bush"), isn't it logical to assume that there is some reason these people behave this way? I am not assuming that their actions are a "righteous" response by any means or that their actions were even "acceptable" by anyone's standards but their own. But, what I AM suggesting, which is obvious if you think about it, is that their actions WERE acceptable BY THEIR OWN STANDARDS, whatever they were. This is a hard thing for people to stomach, though it is a rather ambiguous statment which is simultaneously OBVIOUS to anyone...

Here's a bizarre question: Is it being "too liberal" to feel "sympathy" for Hitler? What about "Satan?" Mmmm, yeah, if you're like most people, it certainly is "too liberal," if not "completely insane." But, try to keep in mind the nature of the discussion thus far. We are basically dissecting value-judgements here in light of a larger value-judgement which effectually doesn't even exist, so the nature of this probing question is practically nonsense, despite the fact that it may sympathetically unnerve you to even consider it. I certianly am not pro-violence of any kind (and especially any large-scale violence; I am merely "thinking," which is something that the Universe seems to have created me to do, since I do tend to "think" whether I actually desire to do so or not, as evidenced by my tossing-and-turning episodes at 2 am, while I readjust my many most comfortable pillows... so if this train of thought bothers you to any degree, please blame it on the Universe which has, by default, forced me to "think" and please do resist the urge to burn me at the stake as a "witch" or "satanist" or prosecute me as a "Nazi sympathiser," "communist," or whatever other narrow-minded preconceptions your limited world may represent the REAL WORLD and, therefore, myself, as to you within your world... Thanks!)"

The Rolling Stones have an album called "Their Satanic Majesties Request" and a song called "Sympathy For The Devil." Pretty outrageous stuff, I guess. I'm not even exactly sure what any of that means. In the case of "Sympathy For The Devil," it might mean that the devil got a bum deal, so the Stones have sympathy for him or something? Or, it might mean that there are certain people out there who are acting i"n parallel" with the Devil (and therefore in "sympathy with" and therefore there is "sympathy for" the devil, which is a far less emotional statement and is far-removed from the notion that the Rolling Stones themselves actually are sympathetic to the devil's plight). This is one of the many insanity-inducing trains of thought I get lost in while riding the subway (imagine that! A train of thought on a subway!). Did the Rolling Stones know something really brilliant I have yet to even think of (quite possibly!)... or were they just rebellious punks trying to make a quick buck with shock value marketing techniques? Well, "history" tells me that they did show a short-lived interest in Satanism when they created the soundtrack for a film by Kenneth Anger, who is a practicing "Satanist" (whatever that is) called "Invocation Of My Demon Brother." But, Mick got freaked out and wanted out of the Satan game real quick all of a sudden after one of their guitarists died (Brian Jones). This reminds me of a certain "history" I read about Led Zeppelin... marketing? I tend to think so... but, I won't delude anyone's illusions...

The Stones are AFRAID of the devil? According to "history".. yet.. let's really think this through here... This again boils down to belief. I have a strange feeling that if the Rolling Stones ever really WERE into "Satanism," they probably didn't REALLY believe it all that much to begin with (judging by their other "histories," such as their albums and all other biographies which failed to mention any interest whatsoever in "Satan")... And, sorry to say for all you Christian fanatics, but my interpretation of thier "history" as a group of obviously marketable musicians is that they were just slightly rebelling against a Christian upbringing, which is obviously, according to "history," quite a natural thing.

Yes, at leat in my opinion, in any instance they slapped the word "Satan" or "devil" onto their product, this was nothing more than a marketing gimmick at a time when it was culturally profitable. The next question is, of course, "Why was it profitable?" The answer is just as obvious: because the climate was accepting. Probably, like many kids who've been raised Christian, the Rolling Stones thought the whole Biblical set-up stunk and it was really God who is to blame for the way things turned out. This was the climate, the "reality" of the times. After all, God made this place, right? Not Satan! Heck, God even made Satan, right?

But, the interesting thing is, even if the Stones originally had "Sympathy" for the devil, even in a "devil-may-care" sense (appropriate!), eventually the Rolling Stones seem to have actually come to BELIEVE in the Devil to the extent that they "historically" got scared of and quickly backed off all that Satanism stuff! Their own belief was the only thing that made Satan real to them, as they had apparently originally set out to shock and rebel! If they really BELIEVED in Satan to begin with, they would've been scared to death from the get-go! Obviously, they didn't and obviously they weren't! They got close to "the devil" because they had nothing to fear, but in the end, whether it was superstition or reality, the got freaked out by Satanism. It doesn't matter what your belif is, the Rolling Stones themselves, at least according to "history," appear to have become frightened due to their association with "Satanism."

Satan is always a rough topic. To some people, Satan is bigger than God because he represents the everyday sensual reality of everything they live everyday-- all the good things in excess that God disallows; the pleasures of the flesh, which are here to be experienced in magnitude! On the other hand, God represents things yet to come, despite the fact that he has actually created all this "sinful" physicality. Or, if this line of reasoning is rejected, on must agree that whatever it is that the thinker thinks, the prover will prove it in relation to God, Jesus, Satan, and "right" and "wrong." For the people that tend to believe in Satan or a "devil," this belief is reinforced by every misfortune of every single day, while belief in God is predicated on the mercy shown in the weakest moments and the "cup half filled" mindset of hopeful nihilism, as is also expressed in the "common sense" logic of "Westernized Buddhism."

When this is all added up in the end, there is not too much comfort to be found when the only thing that can be believed is a statement which invalidates itself:

"Nothing is true. Everything is permissible."

I agree, at this point, with this statement, because I have not been able to find one instance in whic it is not the ultimate truth, much to my dismay! Whole-heartedly, I say this and am fully aware that I speak from with a microcosm which appears to represent "the macrocosm," for lack of a better description. However, within this whole-heartedly accepted belief system or, more appropriately, simpy "logic," the first sentence ("Nothing is true") disproves itself by it's own criteria, for if nothing is true, how could the observation that "nothing is true" actually BE true? And, by the logic of the first sentence, the following sentence is also invalidated, for if nothing is true, the statement that "everything is permissible" must surely be a lie to some degree.

Enjoy life.

Anyone Who Is Either Upset By or Thrilled By or Surprised By "The Passion Of The Christ" Is An Idiot

2004-02-25T19:19:00.000-05:00

What I don't understand is the upset over the "antisemitic"-ness of it. I was even more surprised to hear that people are quoting the Catholic Church's statement in the 40s or 60s or something saying that Jews were not responsible for Jesus' death.

That's not EXACTLY what the Church has said. Unless I hear this new statement people are referring to, this is the official version I know:

"True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ." -- Nostra Aetate IV Vatican II

Did Mel make a movie about modern-day Jews? Nope. Anywhere in the movie, does Mel say that Jews of today should be held accountable for the death of Christ? I doubt it. I think Mel is saying exactly what Nostra Aetate IV said in the opening statement. The movie deals with the final 12 hours of a character's death in a religious myth. It doesn't address the next 2000 years.

The whole concept of Christianity is predicated on the crazy good / evil, turn the other cheek / Holy Crusades, God of Love / God of Wrath (but-not-like-Satan-wrath), Perfect / Jealous God (but not like "jealous" in a bad way, of course).

Am I wrong when I remember that (?):

0. "Jesus Christ" isn't even a real name and the mythical figure known as "Jesus Christ" is ripped off from earlier myths, as is Moses? This isn't conjecture; it's pure fact! (Unless you believe in the "Satanic Time Traveller" conspiracy in which Satan went back BEFORE the birth of Jesus and planted a dozen or so myths that closely resemble "the true" Christian myth in surprising detail.) The man crucified in the Bible was called Yeshua Bar-Josef.

1. The "Messiah" of the Old Testament simply meant "rightful King of the Jews," a la King David, and there was no righteous inference at all implied with the title "messiah". (i.e. The Jews were sick of being pushed around by other races and wanted a Jewish King). Later, the term for "Messiah" was purposely replaced with "Christ," which hails from Greek origin ("Christus") and sun worshippers who actually revived Mithras and Osiris myths within this newly created so-called "Christian" religion. (There's a reason the New Testament isn't anything like the Old Testament; the 2 religions were "grafted" together.) [Also, the term "sun worshipper" is a bit lazy, but for the sake of this nonsense, brevity is key the point.]

2. When the Jews told Pilate to release Yeshua Bar-Abbas rather than Yeshua Bar-Josef (the guy who would later be called "Jesus Christ"), they obviously didn't feel he was a "messiah" (i.e. rightful leader of the Jews) or they would not have asked Pilate to let Barabbas go. Indeed, the Bible even says that when Pilate put a little inscription on Jesus' cross that read: "JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS," the Jews corrected Pilate and said (paraphrasing), "Hey, don't write that! Write that this guy SAID he was King of The Jews!" In other words, the Jews were like, "Screw you, Pilate. Our rightful king will come, he is not dead on that cross!"

Or the actual conversation, if you prefer it is this:
"And Pilate wrote a title also: and he put it upon the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title therefore many of the Jews did read: because the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city. And it was written in Hebrew, in Greek, and in Latin. Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate: Write not: The King of the Jews. But that he said: I am the King of the Jews. Pilate answered: What I have written, I have written.(John 19:19-21)

If the Jews felt that Yeshua Bar-Josef was "the messiah," they would have asked for Pilate to let Yeshua Bar-Josef go, since more than anything, they wanted to rule themselves. They probably thought this Yeshua Bar-Josef guy was an annoying nutjob, which if you think about it, he just might have been.

3. Still, the Jews did ask for Bar-Abbas to be let go. And, to this day, you've got Jews on one hand and Christians on the other. Christians turn the other cheek, but in the end, the Christian faith really condemns any and all who do not accept Christ... unless they've flopped on that, too and now a person doesn't even need to accept Christ to be Christian or maybe they've flip-flopped and decided Christianity isn't really "right" per se, but will still get you in God's good graces... I mean, I really don't know what The Church(es) are saying these days.

With all this known ahead of time, how can anyone be surprised that Jews are depicted in an "anti-semitic" fashion in a movie about Christ which was directed by a man who is head-over-heels about the subject of Jesus? What next? Are the Romans going to stand up and complain, too? The Christian religion is not about making nice with the Jews. Why the shock? How can Jews expect to change another person's religion? (I'm not saying they DO, but for anyone who is shocked and outraged by the "antisemitism" of Mel's Christ-flick, they must be shocked and outraged by the very Bible as well, which I'm sorry to tell ya, doesn't paint the Jews in a very good light).

Let's just recap with 2 quotes:

"And Pilate wrote a title also: and he put it upon the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title therefore many of the Jews did read: because the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city. And it was written in Hebrew, in Greek, and in Latin. Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate: Write not: The King of the Jews. But that he said: I am the King of the Jews. Pilate answered: What I have written, I have written.(John 19:19-21)

AND

"True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ." Nostra Aetate IV Vatican II

I mean, doesn't that say it all? Where's the surprise factor here?

Designer Wanted Ad

2004-02-24T11:28:00.000-05:00

"You must be highly organized, articulate and be able to bring out the best in yourself and others."

+ Well, it depends on how organized, intelligent and personable the others are.

"You must be comfortable sketching, thinking broadly and conceptually while working in a team environment."

+ Yeah, that sounds easy, but you know it's annoying. They have a certain style of "sketching" in mind and want you to be overflowing with ideas.

"You must also be comfortable doing consistently great work. You must be super proficient in Illustrator and Photoshop."

+ In other words, "we'll get rid of you as soon your ideas appear to have dried up. Why do you think we are constantly looking for designers on Creative Hotlist?"

"Strong project management skills are also required."

+ Because we're just raking in an easy paycheck while we put our hired help through the ringer.

Freaky Movie-Based-On-Play Alert

2004-02-21T13:43:00.000-05:00

The Shape of Things is a movie from 2002 - 03 that features "Phoebe's boyfriend" from Friends in big-nose make up and double-chin makeup and glasses and some other actors. And, and, and. There were only 3 others actors, to be exact, the same ones who performed the original play this film is based on. Sure, there are background extras, but they don't count.

The fact that this was based on a play explains why I thought the acting was terrible at the start of the movie; it was the over-acting theatrical style of acting so that people in the back rows can see the nuances of the performance. Still, it was annoying enough that I wandered out of the room to go look on the internet to see if I could find the Spun soundtrack online. To my dismay, there was never a soundtrack released for the movie, though it had one of the kickin'-assinest soundtracks I've ever heard! Man, I searched long and hard. And hot and sweaty. I was wearing birth control! There is only an "unofficial soundtrack" that was posted via mp3s on the movie's website's message board when it was first released. Annoying. Annoying sentence I had to write just to explain that. But, not as annoying as reading this must be.

So, back to the movie The Shape of Things... I went and made coffee and sat back down, casually watching the movie and simultaneously reading The Cave of The Ancients by Lobsang Rampa (some douchebag who pretended to be a guru who was really an English Sci-Fi writer in the 60's-- and yet, people believe he really is somehow a reincarnated Buddah!).

Suddenly, I noticed that the movie-based-on-a-play had become really interesting. It wasn't turning out like I thought it would at all.

By the end of the movie, I decided that anyone who has any interest in Art should watch this movie. I enjoyed it, though it was annoying. But, not as annoying as what I've just written. I want to become a movie critic.

American Idol Causes Problems

2004-02-17T15:27:00.000-05:00

Office hilarity click here: clickity click

Metropolis

2004-02-16T15:56:00.000-05:00

I go back and forth on the anime thing. I want to like it, I want to hate it, but mostly I can take it or leave it. I have really fond memories for Voltron (especially the Vehicle force Voltron I version, which was played in NY only on Sundays at 10am at the time when Lion force Voltron III was being played every weekday twice in a row). I also used to like Transformers and Tranzor-Z. I realize that none of these is proper "Anime" (especially Transformers), but the robots and the big-eyed people is what I like/hate about anime. I've recently seen a lot of supernatural anime that sort of strikes my fancy as well, like Doomed Megapolis, but as much as I'd like to really be an anime geek, I can't get into it as much as I would like.

Why would I want to force myself to like anime? Because I remember being so impressed with these cartoons as a kid. They inspired me to draw and filled my head with all sorts of ideas, creating an appetite that was later to be filled by heavy metal airbrushed album covers, skateboard graphics and Eightball comics. Speaking of appetites, I remember staring at the robot rapist illustration by Robert Williams on the inside of Guns N' Roses "Appetite For Destruction"album cover and wishing to hell it would come to life. I wanted to see more detail on the red metal guy. Maybe I should've bought a poster or something).

Anyway, so now you know where I stand on anime. I'm not a big anime geek. I had seen Akira and thought, "yeah, this is okay..." but the other day, as I'd been thinking about Voltron again and annoyed by the fact that the series is no longer in reruns and the annoying fact that there are no DVD box sets or anything, I decided that maybe I'd rent some anime and see if I liked it more these days. Maybe it would fill this Voltron void.

I found Metropolis in Buttbuster and it looked promising, so I rented it. It was made by "the creators of Akira and X and the godfather of anime" and the production budget was a whopping $15 million. That's a lot more than I thought people were spending on anime. It took 5 years to make the movie and the back of the box said that this was the new achievement in anime, to which all others would be compared. So, basically, it's better than Akira and that's a really big deal.

This movie was great. It wasn't really juvenile at all and it did exactly what I'd hoped it would--it inspired me to sketch and want to make cool graphics again (as opposed to wondering what's so "cool" about cool graphics, which is the rut I've been stuck in lately). There's no big robots or anything in Metropolis, but there is a bunch of Asimov type labor robots. The animation is way better than Akira was and for once I found myself really digging the clash of illustration styles (highly detailed backgrounds vs. goofy almost Popeye-like characters in the foreground). Around the same time I was thinking how much I liked this contrast, Monica walked through and commented that she's starting to "almost really like the big eyes now," which is exactly what I was thinking. The characters move smoothly, like old Disney cartoons. Almost rubbery. This is totally unlike Voltron, for instance, which rehashed as many scenes and character poses as possible, causing the characters to move around herky-jerky.

Also missing was the lack of annoying English dubbing. There was no ridiculous acting or stupid little kid's voices screaming like brainless brats at the top of their lungs. The DVD had 4 languages you could switch back and forth. It was really satisfying to switch from French to Japanese to English and realize that the same amount of effort was put into the acting so that the vocal qualities, volume and mood were all the same on a completely separate track from the background music and sound effects. I was getting an accurate translation of the movie, rather than some hackneyed approximation.

I have this movie for a week and I do believe I'll watch it again. I may even go buy some anime DVDs. It's kind of nice to get that feeling of wonder again from something that's not illicit. But right now, I'm going to check out this anime cartoon on the Cartoon Network. I have noticed that the Cartoon Network has about 5 or 6 anime series on at the moment and I'm going to see if I can enjoy them like a 12 year old. (Later note: I discovered that most of Cartoon Network's anime sucks the same way Pokemon sucks, but Cowboy BeBop is kind of cool.)

Ha, ha, Britney thinks she looks pretty hot here, I guess

2004-02-10T22:09:00.000-05:00

click here and scroll down! Click the other pics, too! For a sex symbol, she sure does have some nasty teats. (No nudity, safe for work).

Naqoyqatsi

2004-02-08T10:50:00.000-05:00

Don't rent this. I know it's on your Time Warner Cable "indie" section, but don't rent it. Maybe get the soundtrack, though. I love the music (violins and whatnot), but the movie's pretty bad. I mean, like, bad.

Maybe my problem is that I don't follow through with some of my ideas that I eventually come to consider "lame." There are so many works of art and creative entertainment out there that suck, but obviously somebody's getting paid to write that sucky book or make that sucky film or design that sucky t-shirt or make that sucky music.

FIRECLOWN!

2004-02-06T22:42:00.000-05:00

Some really weird spacewarp I've been in lately... For the last couple years, I've been reading a lot of RAWilson stuff and Discordian stuff and so the concept of the "eschaton" is not something foreign to me. Somewhere along the line, my interest in the numinous led someone to suggest RAWilson. My interest in RAWilson led someone else to suggest AOSpare and my interest in AOSpare eventually had me looking into the "Chaos current."

Well, just recently, since I put up my Blogger (a week ago?) I've noticed a "Fresh Blog" called ESCHATON. The first time I saw it, I thought, "ha, ha, cute," but frankly I grew tired of that word a long time ago. I kept seeing this ESCHATON blog, though, so I finally checked it out and it appeared to be an anti-bush blog. **(An eschaton is the "world as we know it... right... NOW!" So, every moment, the world is ending. There goes the end of the world. There it goes again. And again. Etc.) So, anyway, in RAWilson's "Illuminatus" trilogy, this group is trying to "immanentize the eschaton," meaning "bring an end to the world as we know it" (like that REM song). So, this ESCHATON blog is trying to bring about the end of the Bush-era world. I like that concept.

Anyway, once I checked out what the blog was about, I was satisfied and figured I'd never return. So, now check this out (here's where it gets kind of strange to me):

When looking to read more conjecture about multiverses and chaos "reality," I have been known to check out Chaos Matrix, which has just about all the information you could want on the subject, including free e-books and lists of suggested reading. Some time ago, I came across a suggested reading list from some guy named FIRECLOWN which was actually called "Fireclown's Basic Book List." I thought that his list looked promising since I had at least heard about a few of the authors on the list during the course of my own research and I figured one day I'd get some of the books. Well, I lost the link to Fireclown's list, so some time later, I Googled "Fireclown's book list" because "fireclown" was easy enough to remember. Well, it turns out this Fireclown guy's book list was reproduced ALL OVER the web, so I figured people must respect this guy's opinion. I decided at that point to definitely buy something on the list that I didn't already own.

I decided to buy "S.S.O.T.B.M.E.," which was #5 on Fireclown's Basic Book List basically because I already had read 3 of the first 4 books and nothing on the list interested me more than the description Fireclown gave to the curiously-titled "SSOTBME," which was described as one of the ur-texts of the Chaos current AND, when I looked it up on Amazon.com, it had a cover featuring the artwork of AOSpare, of which I am a big fan. When SSOTBME finally came in, I was surprised to see FIRECLOWN'S quote on the actual BACK of the book AS A REVIEW:

"This book made me realize I was a magician, not insane. Or at least both a magician, and insane. Great, funny, a Grimoire disguised as an essay, only 96 pages long ( I like short books, and often, short women), as well as the best book to give to people if you want them to think you are smart and goofy, as opossed to stupid and psychotic. Find it. Buy it. Read it blind drunk the first time, maybe the second time too..."

--Fireclown

I thought, "Who the hell is this Fireclown guy?" Both Phil Hine AND Peter J. Carroll (well-known and respected authors in the Chaos current) had been quoted with favorable reviews on Amazon.com, yet this guy who goes by the name of "FIRECLOWN" is the one they actually choose to slap on the back of the book?! So, today I Googled "who is Fireclown?"

It turns out that a very prolific sci-fi writer by the name of Michael Moorcock wrote a book in 1965 originally called "Fireclown" which was later changed to "The Winds of Limbo." This gets more interesting to me because, in this novel, the Fireclown was sort of apocalyptic figure of chaos who came to destroy everything. In the beginning of the book, you think the Fireclown is against the political systems and the unnatural way of life we live, but it turns out that the Fireclown is against human intelligence and really just wants to wipe out everything because intelligence is unnatural. That's a pretty intersting concept with some pretty interesting connections to authors like RAWilson and AOSpare and Discordianism. It's interesting in relation to psychology, religion and any sort of spirituality in general.

So I start reading more about Michael Moorcock and find out that his 40+ sci-fi novels all involve the same archetype of a "superman"/god character, though he goes by different names and is presented differently in every sci-fi universe Moorcock decides to write in for the moment. Ultimately, this archetype is fighting a futile battle to destroy the world or destroy chaos, but it's a never-ending cycle throughout many universes in many times and places. I can't believe someone made a career while sticking to a theme (albeit it different each time) over a stretch of SO MANY BOOKS. That's truly impressive.

What's also impressive is that it turns out Michael Moorcock has worked with several musicians on several occasions, including Blue Oyster Cult and Hawkwind, and influenced dozens of others, probably including the band Fireclown, I would guess. Also, apparently, one of his scripts is being turned into a movie, probably thanks to the success of all the Philip K. Dick adaptations and Lord of the Rings movies.

But, what's most interesting of all to me, is that on Michael Moorcock's website, if you scroll to the bottom, you will find on the right side, a box that says ESCHATON and that box is indeed a list of the updates on the ESCHATON BLOG.

My, my... what a small ~~world~~ multiverse.

Sheryl Crow Must Be Murdered

2004-02-06T13:03:00.000-05:00

We can not risk the possibility of her ruining another classic song the way she has already ruined Cat Stevens' "The First Cut Is The Deepest." This song used to be one of my favorites of his, but hearing Sheryl Crow's whiney rendition 500 times a day on the radio has just about ruined the song for me forever. I suppose it doesn't help that the women in the office love to sing along with it under their breath, but that's actually Crow's fault, too. If she didn't record the damn song, it wouldn't be on the radio, and women wouldn't be singing it under their breath and annoying the fuck out of already annoyed-as-fuck coworkers.

Basically, every time that song comes on now, I just leave the office for 5 minutes.

Steve Jobs Is My Hero

2004-02-06T12:24:00.000-05:00

I love most of what the guy does with Apple. As head of Pixar, he told Disney to suck it last week, as he closed negotiations on continuing their relationship going forward. He released a very tactful statement, actually, saying that Disney would not be a part of Pixar's future successes. Now, it turns out, some people at Disney want to kick out Eisner and hire Steve Jobs as the CEO.

I love that! It's kind of like when Wilco's record label cancelled their contract with the band, after paying 100's of thousands of dollars for the studio recording and then REHIRED them the very same month under a sister label, essentially paying for one recording TWICE. That's got to be some kind of record (pun intended).

Also: I had a job recently where I was forced to use a PC (a Sony VAIO and a Dell) and HOLY SHIT did they suck balls. I'm not unfamilar with Windows-- it's just as easy to use for me as either OS 9 or OSX on a Mac. The computers themselves just sucked compared to even the G4 Quicksilvers I use at work and home (nope, neither has dual processors and neither is a G5). I understand that PCs are an economical solution and good for most word processing and web-related minigraphics bullshit, but MAN oh man, I predict some big changes from Microsoft in about a decade-- copying Apple once again, of course.

Woody Allen Is A Strange Feller

2004-02-06T10:11:00.000-05:00

I caught some 20 minutes randomly of Wild Man Blues the other day. Now there's a movie I never thought about watching. Cameras basically follwed his New Orleans Jazz band through a small European tour (I guess, I only caught 20 minutes). Wood Allen thinks a lot of himself when he's not acting like a neurotic dork in one of his movies. It was bizarre watching his early morning conversations with his former daughter-turned wife about how people perceived him. At one poine his daughter-wife said something about his celebrity role as an "older gentleman" and he corrected her by saying, "well-loved older gentleman." His daughter-wife actually seems smarter than him sometimes, explaining to him certain social graces (some might call it "nagging," but the relationship seemed more like Larry David and his wife on Curb Your Enthusiasm-- in other words, Woody seemed like a dipshit.)

20 minutes was enough and I flipped to something else, but I was surprised to find that Woody was basically the band leader and he could play his clarinet quite well. I like New Orleans Jazz (or is it called Dixieland?) and have liked it ever since I saw Killing Zoey back in high school. After 20 minutes of Wild Man Blues, I went and found my Pee Wee Russell Cd and popped it in. Since then, off and on, I've been downloading free + legal mp3s off dixieland jazz bands' websites.

So, for the past few months I guess I mostly listen to classical music and now I'll mix it up with a little dixieland jazz. I'm rockin' pretty hard.

Idol worFriendship

2004-02-06T00:14:00.000-05:00

My list of semi-celebrity email penpals grows! To my surprise and delight, famous people with brainy ideas totally geek out when they find people who are interested in discussion. It surprises me that authors who've already spent years writing down intricate thoughts will gladly take the time to write a total stranger a sprawling email full of brilliant new copyright-free insights and anecdotes. It's too bad Philip K. Dick is dead!

Remember Acid?

2004-02-05T23:14:00.000-05:00

Nobody seems to believe me these days if it should ever come out that I did the stuff over 100 times. And I'm not exactly bragging about it these days. But the fact that nobody AT ALL seems to believe this fact almost kills the fun of having ruined my brain in the effort to go "even further," since the memories are so incredibly vague that I might has well have only bothered to do it a mere 20 times or less.

The only thing I have to go by is the fact that I happen to remember sitting down with one of my regular tripping partners and figuring out that for 2 years straight we'd done it just about every weekend, after realizing that a person's brain needed about a week to rest up for the hallucinations, etc. to be "worth it." Occasionally, we'd do it a couple times in one week and the overall period of time we used the stuff spanned about 6 years (my first trip in 9th grade, my last trip in my sophomore year of college). But, for 2 years straight (somewhere between mid-11th grade and the summer after freshman year of college), we were doing it religiously on the weekends. 52 x 2 = at least 100 times. I would guess 130 in all, usually 2 or 3 hits, but occassionally up to 6.

There was a time when I thought everyone in the world should do acid at least once. Now, I would have to say that's probably not such a good idea. It is, in the immortal words of a feller I know, "like someone took a magnet to my brain." Not permanently. I feel fine, it's just that all the fun stories I thought I'd be telling my grandchildren is a bit foggy. Besides, like everyone else, they probably wouldn't believe me!

Anyone with acid stories, please feel free to leave a comment.... AFTER STARING AT THIS
...and reminiscing.

No Logo by Naomi Klein

2004-02-05T12:14:00.000-05:00

I just sold this book online. As I was packing it up, I was almost sad. I made $6 by selling it. Big deal. It was really interesting, but annoying to be interested in. Why annoying? It's an in-depth examination of the greedy business I happen to be a part of as an art director/designer and the nasty consequences of the "nothing personal, it's just business" approach to getting the "most" out of your existence, monetarily speaking.

Before Trump started saying "nothing personal, it's just business" every week on The Apprentice "reality" series, I had a boss for 4 years who said that all the time to everyone with an "innocent" naughty child grin. Pseudo-buddah senses tingling. Business is personal because it involves people, whether or not you pretend this particular set of human relationships is a simple game of Monopoly, survival of the fittest or whatever.

Anyway, No Logo was a good book. Now that I'm getting rid of it, I wish I finished it, rather than skim the last 3 chapters. For a mere $6. But, I probably would have never gotten around to it, anyway.

If there's one thing I enjoy, it's not the other things

2004-02-02T22:42:00.000-05:00

For anyone who might have or have had a fascination with "demons," be they inner or outer, some interesting and productive ways of exploring what your problem is might be H.A.M.R. or Ray Sherwin's Theatre of Magick and Book of Results. I could list obvious choices like RAWilson, NLP, Austin Osman Spare, Phil Hine and Peter J. Carroll (and I guess I just did), but in all honesty, the most interesting things I've found to explore the Twilight Zone just happen to be free or almost free. The one major exception is the newishly-published collection, Ethos, which will set you back about $30 if you order it from abebooks.com. The Master Game has a nice way of summing up a few dozen traditional concerns about this sort of Creative Psychology that makes a nice, cheap primer instead of reading a few hundred studies of comparative beliefs and comparing the "sacred texts" your own damn self.

Things I Don't Understand

2004-02-01T19:05:00.000-05:00

What about the ones that are skinny with a big ball on the top? They don't even have that weird metal lattice support structure. Why don't those break during crazy wind storms or something? Why not make the whole thing fat, instead of skinny with a ball at the top?

vs.

Graphic Design

2004-01-30T14:56:00.000-05:00

Annoying and Overdone Elements and Phrases Associated with Graphic Design.

Diagonal Arrows - Honestly, it served no purpose to begin with. Who's the idiot that started this trend and what was he trying to point to? The future of lameness?

Numbers As Letters - Y34H, 7H47'5 JU57 50 R34LLY C00L. And meaningful, too!

Bad Flash Vectors - With a Wacom tablet and Flash, it is now easy to create mediocre vector graphics in the blink of an eye. It's the new "style." No, wait, it's just a super easy way to draw poorly. There are good Flash vectors and there are bad Flash vectors. I'm talking about the bad ones. The ones where the illustrator has depended on the "smooth curve" or "sharp corner" properties of the pencil tool and essentially creates a lame, continuous-width stroke outline drawing. It can look cool sometimes, though, despite itself.

Super Tech Whatever - There's two versions of this: the multiple-layers photoshop "sci-fi lasers" look where everything looks like a mess in some kind of confusing, overblown futuristic environment (often fast-motion blurs are involved, tiny "computer data" type, thin lines and repeating shapes). The other version of "Super Tech Whatever" is straight Illustrator/Freehand Vectors that involve simple and repeated shapes (lots of circles), lines and many chopped up and recombined polygons with the overall effect referencing moving parts in simple machinery (like the inner workings of an audio cassette), race car lines and abstract, meaningless logo marks. Combined with some fake vector paint drips and a recognizable form, such as a hand or person, you suddenly have....

Urban Graphics - Graffiti is boring, but here's where stuff starts to look interesting. I don't mind urban graphics so much. I'm not much of a hip hop guy, so that says something, I guess.

**Many examples of the above can be found on any website where designers are invited to participate, like Threadless.com or DeviantArt.com.

"The Art & Science of" - Falls in the category of "use other words, please." Incidentally, the phrase, "use other words, please" also falls into this category as this has become a popular put-down on thee ol' interweb lately. Also note, terms like "thee ol'" and "interweb" are equally annoying and played out, as are the terms "played out," "played," "done," "done-to-death," etc. This could go on forever, so I'll stop here.

No wait, I have one more:

"Are you married to it?" and "Well, I'm not married to it." - The phrase that has become the annoying replacement for really liking a concept (i.e. "loving it" leads to "marrying it.") Interestingly, this cutesy expression is never used in a positive declarative form such as, "I'm married to it" or "I'm married to this idea" or even, "I like that so much, I think I'll marry it!" This brings me to the conclusion, therefore, that this is nothing more than an adult evolution of the childish wisecrack, "Well, if you love it so much, why don't ya marry it?!"

...
Why did I bother to make that list? Because when trends come in, I'm forced to follow them to some extent for clients who think it's wicked cool. Everything has its place... but not really. If you'r copping an urban look because you're a hip hop act, maybe it's time to do something different. But, I like the Chapelle's Show graphics on Comedy Central. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm not married to anything. And I'm bored.

MUSIC + GAMES (bored but not really)

2004-01-26T23:30:00.000-05:00

If you're like me, you're a boring person because only boring people get bored. Too old to drink like I used to without looking like a homeless person, I have decided to occupy my time with other things like candy stand and sporkle. I've never been fond of video games really, except old, old, old style arcade games like pac-man, galaga, r-type, arkanoid, etc. Thankfully, those games can be played in their all-original glory right on your computer with emulators like macmame. No more of that shitty Atari pac-man or that damn Palm Pilot "Gobble" (although, don't get me wrong, I like Gobble quite a bit on the subway-- Hardball is my new favorite, though).

Back to the point, you can find me into the wee hours of the morning sometimes playing multiplayer billiards eightball or multiplayer bowling over at the aforementioned candystand.com. If you find yourself up against "13" or "FU" or "PP" or "CU" or "QT" or "00," those are just a few of the names that I (along with everyone else there) have come up with for initials. If you're shooting pool at 2 am with "FU", who knows? You might just be playing me. Over at Sporkle, I happen to be obsessed by the incredibly slow-moving and hard-to-control pegball and I often play with people from New Zealand for some reason.

It's no wonder I have no free time for excitement like real-life bowling or billiards. Or even hanging out with my girlfriend mindlessly watching TV. It's like a trance. Like the old ladies at their slot machines. Just keep playing.

Also, I got something at work from Marlboro's new "record label," The Copper Label, featuring 12 songs by pop standard roots rockish Americana bands I've never heard of. But, since it mostly sounds like Swag, Wilco, New Pornographers, Richard X Heyman, Fountains of Wayne, Dandy Warhols, a lot of March Records bands and tons of other stuff I've been listening to for the last 5 or 6 years, I'd say this was a pretty good deal (free)! Sure, it would be easy to want to hate a dopey marketing gimmick slapped together by Marlboro. It would be easy to assume all the bands were talentless, soulless, faker wannabes. Frankly, it would be too easy. A cop out. And fairly disingenuous, too, since the songs are well-crafted, well-played and well, well, well, Marlboro isn't shoving rap-metal up my ass. I can see some music snobs putting this down in that superior manner only to discover years later that one of their new favorite bands was actually on that Marlboro CD. Too bad for them. Suckaz.

COOL LINK

2004-01-26T14:03:00.000-05:00

Nadira Cashola

This is the coolest thing ever. Check out those seasonal $365 bills! Beauteeful! Ingenius way to literally make some cash with the internet.

Constantly interrupted + Extreme Elvis link

2004-01-24T20:55:00.000-05:00

I try not to cuss all the damn time when I write, but that is going to be a little difficult at this moment... I'm going to flip out!

I have come to the conclusion, as much as I like to be a feminist rather than a "sexist jerk," that all the women I am familiar with constantly need to vocalize their inner thoughts. When they're not busy interrupting you to say whatever is on their mind, they are simply choosing to listen to the voice inside their heads over the actual sound coming from your mouth. They can always get you to repeat your frivolous words by simply asking "what?" enough times until they have actually maintained the focus required to hear and understand what you're saying.

And now I understand why older men are often quiet, "hen-pecked" buggers who look like the life was sucked out of them somewhere around my age. I also understand why women are often so easily offended; they're too busy hearing what they want to hear and saying what they want to say to actually hear what you're saying. (<-- This actually just happened to me, so fuck you!)

Yes, yes, I suppose this could apply to guys as well. It just so happens that when I actually do hang out with guys they are nothing like this, but I suppose that could be due to any number of factors. However, to show I'm fair here, I'd like to point out that women are simply the latest group of humans that have come to annoy me. Pretty much last on the list, actually. I got sick of kids and most of my male friends years ago.

I work with all women and spend my free time with my girlfriend and her friends, who happen to be all women. I like women, I really do. I prefer them, in fact, to just about any other type of human you could present me with. But, I am about to blow a fuckin' gasket if I get interrupted or ignored one more time. I just felt the urge to spasmodically slam some doors or smash something over my head or smash my head into a door and then slam the door on my head.

Roll the hate comments. But, first realize that every fucking day of my life I open my mouth ONLY to repeat what I've just said or, possibly worse, to be interrupted so many fucking times that I can't remember what I originally wanted to say.

And the funny thing is I barely ever speak! Maybe that's why I felt the need to start bloggin'. Nobody will interrupt me here. Nah, actually, I just wanted a place to store links and stuff... Come to think of it, I should probably go watch some videos of Extreme Elvis to get me in a better mood. Nothing like watching a fat naked Elvis impersonator drink his own urine from one of his blue suede shoes and then shove a microphone up his butt. (That particular show I'm describing is the one labeled "Paradise Lounge 2/16/01" in the Audio/Video section.)

Alice Donut

2004-01-24T11:40:00.000-05:00

Been listening to Alice Donut for the past week. The band was nice enough to put all 7 of their old albums online in mp3 format [ go here ] and I was lucky enough to discover it in time to download them all.

I've always wanted to hear more of them and now that I have, I'm pretty sure that this would have been an all-time favorite if I had stolen "Donut Comes Alive" instead of "Hairway To Steven" when I was a kid. They got your fast, your psychedelic, your hard as hell headcrushers and funny tunes about nonfunny subjects, too!

I'm not sure why a band this great is so obscure. Maybe they made the mistake of staying on Jello Biafra's record label. I mean, Jello Biafra. Come on! I for one wouldn't have intentionally bought anything from Alternative Tentacles since the age of 15 or so. Let's face it, those bands suck (don't they? I wouldn't know! I never listen to them!). One might assume, by taking a look at their great cover art (and by that I mean "bad"), that they put about as much effort into marketing their music as Helios Creed (another obscure but awesome mofo).

Anyway, yeah, this band probably would've been my favorite at some point. Every album is pretty different, though all negative as hell in a fun and rocking way --and I don't do the negativity rock these days (well, as much as I *should*, anyway).

If you go about downloading, let me recommend the following "mix" (and don't forget to WAIT FOR THOSE CHORUSES! They're the best!):

1. Lydia's Black Lung - donut link
2. Mother of Christ - donut link
3. Egg - donut link
4. Untidy Suicides - donut link
5. Hang The Dog - donut link
6. The Tingler - donut link
7. Magdalene - donut link
8. She Loves You, She Wants You - donut link
9. Annie's Empty - donut link
10. I Walked With A Zombie - donut link
11. Dreaming In Cuban - donut link
12. Big Cars & Blow Jobs - donut link
13. Green Pea Soup (about Linda Blair) - donut link

#'s 1, 10 -13 = fun rock tunes
#'s 2 - 6 = pretty heavy and loud
#'s 7 - 9 = how many alternative bands were Alice Donut fans, anyway?