koganbot | Rules Of The Game #16: Vaccine Protects Against New Ideas

For some reason (there are glitches in the software) my column this week first went up without the final three paragraphs, making the title unintelligible. But it's fixed now.

The Rules Of The Game #16: Vaccine Protects Against New Ideas

My thoughts didn't quite coalesce this week, though as Jack Thompson once pointed out I can't do a "Hero Story" every week (or live a hero story every week, for that matter). But where my thoughts are leading to is: How do we break out into the wider world? That is, how do we - meaning you and me and the people in our corner of the livejournal galaxy - bring our ideas to the wider world, but more important how do we bring our minds to the stories the wider world could tell us, if we knew where to look and what to ask?

EDIT: Here are links to all but three of my other Rules Of The Game columns (LVW's search results for "Rules of the Game"). Links for the other three (which for some reason didn't get "Rules Of The Game" in their titles), are here: #4, #5, and #8.

UPDATE: I've got all the links here now:

http://koganbot.livejournal.com/179531.html

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"but more important how do we bring our minds to the stories the wider world could tell us, if we knew where to look and what to ask?"

We look, listen et al for the "surprise" you listen for in music in
everything that we do? We push against the fears that hold us back? We savor the flavors?! We look for ways to NOT let our every day
work/play/rest routines rule our every thought and feeling? At which I am a miserable loser, unfortunately. Just a squirrel trying to get a nut.

What I like best ab your inquries is what I remember a long time ago liking ab philosophy. I know it's a mantle you don't want to have anything to do w/ but it's true. Your insistant, pushing questioning to the point of edginess. As if, really, what could possibly be more important than talkiing ab it?! It's your 'so what' punk philosophy.

You've mentioned b/f you eventually grow disenchanted w/ the dreams or hopes you have for your favorite pop divas. Maybe what you want in Britney is to see her live boldly, fully, w/ her own disenchantment(s), aging? But so what, I suppose?

I'm sure I missed more than half what you said in this piece. Even if it is a little disjointed, it's one of the first few I'd go to re-read.

Take care, Jack

Current song faves: LCD Soundsystem's "All My Friends," Paris' "Not Leaving W/out You," Lily Allen's "Cheryl Tweedy," Robyn's "List of Demands," Willie Nelson "I Let My Mind Wonder."

I get the feeling that

mooxyjoo and

byebyepride have a vision of philosophy as Socrates and Plato asking questions without necessarily coming to conclusions (as opposed to being Platonists).

Tired, I was surfing the TV yesterday, and ran across this Alabama vs. Georgia college football game. I don't care ab either school and don't follow college football very closely but I can zone out to almost any competative sports, the game was really close, and there were only a couple minutes to go. So, I'm watching, and I swear on my record collection, out of the blue, the announcer asks, "What's happened to Britney's career?" So confused by the question was the analyst that he could only reply, "What?" And then, weakly, "Is she a football fan?" "I'm sure she is," asserted the announcer. So it seems concern for Britney is everywhere.

I don't read press music reviews (gigs, albums, whatever), as a general rule. This is mainly due to not reading music magazines or newspapers very often! But even I do read a paper with a 'reviews' section I skip past them UNLESS I've already heard the album/band/whatever and have formed my opinion. I suppose then it's mainly to see if the reviewer agrees with me.

BUT I have lots of time for features and interviews that go into more depth and length picking apart the music, or that tell me about the artist themselves. This isn't the fault of the writers but the editors - I'm sure you'd have terrible trouble summing up Ashlee's album in 100 words, Frank! 10 words or 1000 words = easy, 100-300 = absolute nightmare to do the music justice and say something substantial. But even relaxed editing or unlimited space online can't change the fact that any writing about the music itself is only hearsay until the reader has listened to it. An informative interview can tell me all sorts of interesting things about Fergie - why in particular she has written an entire new album about goat cheese, perhaps, and the goats she met and drew inspiration from during the recording process. As a fellow goat cheese lover that will get me hooked enough to seek out her album. But the review over the page will almost certainly read 'Fergie's dire new offering reeks of sheep cheese'.

And that's why I never made it very far into music journalism at university. I felt frustrated having writing about music I had no enthusiasm for, and even the stuff I did love, I felt my writing didn't do it justice and I was constantly calling goats by sheep names due to my limited musical vocabulary.

But back to the suggestible thought-train: the exception to my non-press review reading rule is Popjustice (I read the rss daily on my friends page). But even then I don't read the formal 'reviews', only the editorial/news blog written by Peter himself. I trust his opinion on most pop matters just like one of my lj friends - reasonable levels of intelligence and the poptimist receptiveness to all good music however it is made - and know his taste well enough to ignore him when he says 'this is AMAZING' about something clearly un-amazing. I did worry at one point that I was too forgiving towards song X just because Popjustice had been bigging it up. Recently our opinions have diverged slightly but I'm still willing to give the music PJ mentions a try. Has he infected me with plague? I dunno...

Rules Of The Game #16: Vaccine Protects Against New Ideas

where is the wider world?

Re: where is the wider world?

the Britney problem

Vulnerable to suggestion