DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> DC Viking: November 2006

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

When Good Bands Go Bad

If you’ve been consuming music for long enough, you have a few of them in your collection; albums (or whatever you call an LP of mp3s) you used to really love that have been rendered nearly un-listenable due to subsequent releases by the artist. ‘August and Everything After’ by the Counting Crows is a good example. This was one of my favorite CDs in college. It was a little depressing, but it was great rainy day music, and at the time I thought it was pretty good. I remember listening to it and thinking to myself, “Wow, these guys are going to be good, I’m excited for their next album.” Then they put out 2 crappy disks, and by the 4th album they were so hard up for material that they covered a Joni Mitchell song. Not good.

When I listen to the album now it’s still decent, and it still reminds me of college and sitting around my room drunk and vaguely depressed after getting shot down by some girl at a party; but the memory is tainted. I can’t listen to ‘Omaha’ without thinking about ‘Hanging Around’. When I hear ‘A Murder of One’, I jam out for a minute to the last song on the album, enjoying its slightly redemptive tone after what turns out to be a pretty disheartening record. Then I think about the love theme to Shrek and I throw up a little in my mouth before I put on something by Big Head Todd and the Monsters.

Tons of artists fall apart like this, and it’s not just the sophomore slump that bands fall into when their first album is better than it has any right to be. I’m talking about records so bad that the reputation of the band is thoroughly destroyed forever; records so bad you find yourself in arguments at bars and parties defending the first record of a band that’s most recent work was the soundtrack for a movie about a CGI ogre. Liz Phair is another perfect illustration. If you have to add a disclaimer to your appreciation of an artist with, “I mean her old stuff,” that’s a pretty good sign that the career has gone of the tracks somewhere.

Why does this happen? Obviously, creating just one album that is any combination of artistically impressive, entertaining, and/or successful is extremely difficult. A let down on subsequent efforts is to be expected. But to put something great out there and follow it up with something so awful that you sully the reputation of the first seems to stretch plausibility. It’s like Tom Brady throwing 5 touchdowns one week and then suddenly playing badly enough to get cut by the Patriots the next.

I’m not sure what the underlying reasons are. I don’t know anything about creating music. I’m a consumer. My exposure to the creative process is limited to tagging along with a musician friend of mine when his band took weekend road trips to rock outposts like St. Cloud, Minnesota or Aimes, Iowa. The only two things I learned about producing rock music on these trips is that most bars in Midwestern backwater towns have shitty sound guys and it’s hard to save enough cash for studio time when you let me drink on the band’s bar tab. But even if I can’t identify the root cause that makes these artists suddenly embarrassing, I have a pretty good idea of when a band is at risk of suddenly going in the tank after putting out some good music. Bloc Party, Gnarls Barkley, I’m looking at you.

After listening to enough music, you can almost feel it when a particular band has shot their wad. I’m not saying I can identify a one hit wonder when I hear them %100 of the time, but there are certain bands that I hear and think to myself, “I hope they invested wisely.” And I’m not saying they should hang it up, either. If I could get paid to put out shitty records that traded on the excellence of my first, I’d do it in a second. I just wish I could listen to ‘Exile in Guyville’ on my iPod without feeling the need to explain that Liz Phair used to be good to any one that might glance at my display.

Side Note: The Hold Steady was excellent at the Black Cat in DC this weekend. I think the first time I saw them the band may have been a little tighter, but the second time around was definitely more fun. If they’re coming to a city near you I highly recommend taking in a show.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

I don't think that's David Letterman on the phone

I’m not one to spend my time scouring blogs and posting nasty comments about what somebody has taken the time to write down, and I happen to believe that there are major issues with our immigration policy that need to be addressed, but I ran across this post this evening and couldn’t in good conscience let it pass. This is an actual Top 10 list of the reasons illegal aliens are a threat to the American way of life that someone posted. I thought the blogger was joking until I got down to about reason number seven. My comments are in italics. Enjoy.

10. Proliferation of foreign flags being flown in US and in some cases
American flags being burned.

Um..huh? I didn’t realize that someone flying another flag was a threat to the U.S. We’ve managed to survive Pearl Harbor, a Civil War and American Idol. I don’t think someone with a Brazil sticker on their 83’ Civic is going to be the thing that finally topples the Republic. And most people entering the country illegally are here because America is nicer than their own country. I don’t see a lot of people getting totally pissed about the improvement in their way of life and torching the flag, but heating oil prices were pretty high last winter, so maybe there was an epidemic I missed.

09. Sacrificed goats and various other animals due to rituals being performed in Adams Morgan, etc.

There must be epidemic of goat slaughtering going on in the Morgan that I didn’t know about. That’s two epidemics I was unaware of. Maybe the immigrants needed something to cook over their pile of burning American flags. If you want to avoid this kind of barbarity while visiting Adams Morgan in the future my advice would be to skip Heaven and Hell on the weekend.

08. Ethnic fiedoms and enclaves being established in certain neighborhoods and speaking native languages and refusing to learn English.

I’m guessing that he meant to write fiefdom here. When insulting people for not knowing the language it’s a good idea to give spellcheck a quick click before hitting publish.


07. Identity theft mainly involving social security numbers.

Ok, this may be a problem, but I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that most identity theft is perpetrated with the goal of buying a lot of crap that you haven’t paid for. Wait a minute…how can illegals afford so many goats and flags? I’m ordering a credit report right now.

06. Demeaning the institution of marriage to obtain US citizenship fraudulantly.

Sorry. The gays are already doing this. You’re stealing talking points here. Unless you’re referring to gay immigrants you have to come up with a new reason number 6.

05. Degradation of what it means to be a patriotic American and earn citizenship legally.

Point well taken. All patriotic Americans must earn their citizenship legally. Except for those Americans that were born here after we stole the country from the Indians. They don’t have to be patriotic.

04. The ability of Mexico, Latin America and other countries to ignore their responsibility to improve their economies and way of life for their poor.

I happen to agree with this one. Crap. On the bright side, these countries are just following the example set by the U.S. with regards to our poor. Except for Latin America. That isn't a country.

03. Gang-related violence and the corresponding costs to jail felons.

Like we wouldn’t have this problem without immigration issues. I saw “Boyz in the Hood” twice man, I know what’s going on in Compton.

02. Costs associated with the healthcare, and social services. etc, required for the uninsured and unemployed.

Again with scapegoating of illegal immigrants for the way we’re screwing up our own country. Cause the immigrants are the reason we spend more money than any other country for middle of the pack health care. Project much?

01. Terrorism (remember Sept 11th).

Stealing talking points again here. Set aside the fact that the 9/11 report stated that the attackers snuck in through legal loopholes, everyone knows that Saddam is the one responsible. Doy.

Labels: , ,

The Fantasy Football Question

I write this at the risk of exposing myself as a gigantic nerd. Years spent carefully cultivating a self image that is equal parts brilliant cynic, drunken rogue, and passionate renaissance man are about to be flushed down the toilet. Playing fantasy football alone is not grounds for being forced to wear the Scarlet D, but the reality that I spend time thinking about the marketing and societal ramifications of fantasy football will surely out me as a capital d Dork.

While watching an NFL pre-game show several weeks ago I heard one of the studio announcers say something to the effect that people who took part in fantasy football leagues were losers. I’ve heard similar thoughts expressed on numerous occasions by ex-football players and coaches as they babble their way from cliché to cliché while they try to announce a game. Criticisms range from labeling fantasy football a distraction that takes away from the game to the oft repeated charge that it re-aligns team loyalty.

The first problem with announcers and color commentators belittling those who play fantasy football is that they are insulting their consumers. Maybe the customer isn’t always right, but I still don’t see how abusing someone for how they choose to utilize your product makes financial sense. If my ritual of folding a jumbo slice in half to create a pizza sandwich was suddenly greeted with screams of derision and open mockery, I would most certainly get my jumbo slice down the street the next time I felt the need to consume two thousand calories of dough and cheese-like substance in ninety seconds. Similarly, your average fantasy football geek is going to watch the NFL broadcast that devotes the least amount of airtime to calling him a sexless pipsqueak. It’s simple avoidance, really.

The second issue is this; why should I feel any loyalty to a professional football team? I know all about the heard mentality of man, and the desire to belong to something larger than yourself, yada, yada, yada. But why should I care about the geographical differences between the New England Patriots and the New York Jets? If I were a pure purist of the football faith, I would respect the Patriots more for their ability to win three out of four Super Bowls in the salary cap era than because I may have been born just outside of Boston (i.e. New Hampshire). And if I were a pure purist, which I am not, I would not be cursed to root for the Minnesota Vikings merely because I was born in the suburbs of Minneapolis and had the profound misfortune to have been raised on a steady diet of Bud Grant, Tommy Kramer, and Leo Lewis.

The gigantic corporations that are NFL franchises care nothing for me beyond my ability to pay for their product, nor should they. They have no loyalty to their fan base. As season tickets become more expensive than a used car, there is a noticeable lack of discussion among NFL ownership about what the skyrocketing cost of attending games does to the ability of blue collar, die hard fans in cities like Pittsburg or Cleveland to show up on Sunday to throw batteries at opposing players. Stadium seats are slowly being filled with more affluent ‘fans’, and the people who used to show up four hours early to drink beer and cook brats are having the same parties at home instead of at Heinz Field. There is nothing morally wrong with this effect and it probably reduces the amount spent on game day security and sanitation as an added benefit.

I believe in the basic principles of economics and if the forces of supply and demand dictate that a nosebleed ticket for an exciting match up between the Tennessee Titans and the Oakland Raiders is $120 plus parking and concessions, far be it from me to suggest the possibility of a federal subsidy on stadium pretzels and watered down beer; but owners shouldn’t be surprised when the fan base starts showing more loyalty to players on their fantasy roster instead of the players on the crappy home town team. Likewise, the networks shouldn’t be confused when fantasy football geeks stop watching the actual games and instead sit in front of their computer every Sunday waiting for statistics to update. Imagine it; large groups of semi-drunken men huddled around pizza crusted laptops while they anxiously await the latest download of fresh data. This is the second greatest fear of the NFL; the first greatest being that everybody goes outside and plays a pickup game of touch football. But let’s be serious here, that’s never gonna happen.

Labels: ,

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Dems win Senate: What it means for me

Everybody is talking about the election and what the Democrats taking congress means for the country. Donald “Uncle Remus” Rumsfeld and his unknown knowns has been shown the door. Bush the Elder has already sent in one of his guys from the glory days of Iran-Contra to impose a little realpolitik on the Pentagon. So good stuff there, but the political landscape for the next two years is not radically different than what we would have had with a GOP congress. Don’t get me wrong, I did a little victory dance when AP announced that Webb had shown Mister Maccacca where he could put his good ole’ boy act, but not much is really going to change. Republicans are so afraid of sharing ideological ground with Dubya at this point that they were going to force him to change course on Iraq anyway, and Bush doesn’t have the political capital to do much more right now than clear brush in Crawford. So the GOP was going to hide under their collective desks for two years anyway and not do anything to antagonize the voters.

The Democrats will come in and make a show of bipartisanship. They’ll pass a few bills with GOP support. They won’t be able to get anything controversial past Bush, and they’ll be walking on eggshells. They realize that the voters have them on a pretty short leash. Once you get the electorate awake, you have to be careful what you do while they are still paying attention. So in the end, slightly better for the good guys, but no major accomplishments that the Democrats will be able to point to at the end of the day. And as long as there is someone keeping an eye on George, making sure he doesn’t have Ted Kennedy strapped to a water-board in Cheney’s basement or something like that, I’m cool with not fixing Social Security for a couple of years. Just don’t break anything worse than it already is and I’m happy.

The real change to come out of this election will be an improvement of the local bar scene. I know this sounds like a stretch, but bear with me. Roughly 35 Republican elected officials are going home to Jesusland. I don’t know too much about how these staffs are comprised but let’s assume that each of these 35 Republicans has 5 senior staff. Each of these 5 senior staffers has 5 or so assistant senior staffers and each of these underlings has 5 or so assistant-to-the-assistants, interns, admins and assorted political leaches hanging around, wasting my oxygen. So that’s 35 X 5 X 5 X 5 or 4,375 fewer Republicans. Since I have no idea what I’m talking about, let’s also assume that holding leadership of the House and Senate, along with the individual committees of these august bodies requires the services another 300 or so Republicans that will now have to hit the road. I know zip about lobbying but I’m going to assume that losing 35 seats and the majority in both the House and the Senate is going to reduce the demand for conservative-type lobbyists, also known as fuck-sticks. Let’s say that each elected official can support 5 fuck-sticks, which means that DC is now 175 fuck-sticks lighter. The mistresses and wives will probably go home too. Knock off another 50. By my completely arbitrary and almost certainly inaccurate calculations, 4,900 Republicans will be leaving the city come the end of the lame-duck session. Running a search for bars in DC on AOL’s Cityguide produces a list of 285 bars of varying quality and repute. I’ll grant you that most of the people I’m describing here would never hang out someplace like the Velvet Lounge or DC9. In fact most of them probably drink in Bethesda, but I’m making a statistically tenuous argument here and I’ll be damned if I’m going to let something like the facts stand in my way. 4,900 assholes. 285 bars. That’s 17.2 fewer assholes per bar.

What does this all mean for me? It means that on the average night out I’m much less likely to run into some self important blowhard that keeps spilling his Dewar’s and water on me. I really hate that. First of all, respect my personal space. Second of all, who orders a Dewer’s at Madam’s Organ?

17.2 per bar. That’s a lot of jerks that will be quickly removed from my life. Those three girls at the end of the bar, wearing pearls over their sweaters and talking about how feminists are ruining it for everyone and making it much tougher to get a guy to buy dinner? Gone. The dude next to me giving frat boys everywhere a bad name while he tries to decide which of the three girls at the end of the bar will be most impressed by that fact that he gets coffee for Rick Santorum? History. Mike Dewine? Totally gone, and thank god, because he always blows his cigarette ashes all over the place when he gets hammered. That’s just plain inconsiderate.

4,900. 17.2 per bar. Expelled. Re-located. I know that they’ll be replaced by similarly self-important Democrats, and while I find them only slightly less distasteful on a personal level, I tend to agree with their politics. Also, their women are a lot better looking and are a lot less likely to remind me of Katherine Harris.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Election Day Haiku

Time to vote again
Can we replace all of them?
Adlai S. was right

Labels: ,