Metal Machine Music

[nomadthethird]

yeah I dunno not to be overly cynical (esp. about something I don't know too much about) but it really seems like it's fucked no matter what angle you approach from. surely it's more effective & cost-effective to get people not to do the drugs in the first place? which I realize is a futile struggle, but in terms of allocation of scarce resources perhaps they'd be better place towards preventative measures. clearly though this is your field of expertise & i'm just a dilettante. btw, good on ya for medical school, good luck & that.

See, this is the tricky point, because preventative measures have been proven not to work. In fact, early childhood drug education is actually linked to higher rates of drug use later in life!

Also, why would we shoot our own economy in the foot? There's a reason the government allowed drugs into this country in the first place, and it's because widening the income and achievement gap has always benefitted capitalism/capitalists.

 

[nomadthethird]

anyway, I don't doubt your description (reminds me of A Scanner Darkly) though I'd bet like any disastrous private industry there are plenty of well-meaning people mixed in.

Haven't seen that, is it good?

Luckily suboxone is a much, much better alternative than methadone, which is just murder to your immune system and has more abuse potential being a full mu-opioid receptor agonist (rather than a partial one like suboxone). But the problem is the expense to the average user. Very difficult for most of them to come up with a lump sum to pay a shrink (insurance doesn't usually cover it unless it's a GP doing the script writing) and then you have the whole waiting list issue which complicates matters from the standpoint of an addict, who might not be around for another year to wait for a spot in an inpatient clinic.

There is actually hope now, medically, for the first time ever...but what makes it so difficult is the big business inaccessibility angle on it...

 

[zhao]

scanner darkly was hugely dissapointting for me... but i did find the super rare La Monte Young rock band double CD that i mentioned and absolutely no one gave a shit about earlier.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Haven't seen that, is it good?

scanner darkly was hugely dissapointting for me...

nah the movie is pretty ehh though still better than most attempts to adapt Philip K. Dick novels to film (not counting the incomparable Blade Runner of course). I meant the book (which is of course loads better) esp. in the context of the drug trade & the rehab industry & how the two are connected. I don't want to say more lest I give too much away. anyway I rate A Scanner Darkly right up there with like Alexander Trocchi & Burroughs as far as novels about drug addiction. though much, much crazier b/c it's Philip K. Dick we're talking about.

 

[shudder]

+1 for scanner darkly the novel

-1 for cluelessness about hip hop and attendant racism

+1 for 21 questions (so sue me, I'm just that romantic)

-1 for most fiddy

 

[zhao]

Droid:

apologize for the very long delay, but finally listened to Bone Machine by this Waits.

the instrumentation and arrangement is inventive, and works for what he is doing. the songs are well written enough, and the voices varied.

clever moments, such as The Ocean Doesn't Want Me. Little Rain and Whistle Down The Wind are real pretty and even touching, and Such a Scream has a semblance of real power. but do i feel it?

no.

it weighs so far on the side of theatricality, and the posing... someone play acting roles. and the resulting music is like little cutesy hall-mark cards of loss, forged love-sick letters, and stock illustrations of pain.

Josef K and others have said that it's ALL theater. sure, but there is self conscious efforts at approximating emotional depth, and then there is (seemingly) effortless, pure magic. if the later is hard to define, just think the difference between Keanu Reeves and that woman in Carl Dreyer's Passion of Joan of Arc.

i suppose this line of thought can be framed by a question of authenticity, but i'm not entirely sure if that is all, or exactly, what this is about. i guess there must be examples of "fake" or in-sincere artists achieving great moments of transcendence, although i can not think of examples...

overall it's well produced pop-noir of some merit. but i would rather listen to Howling Wolf (or Leonard Cohen) any day, week, month, or year.

 

[zhao]

and i did listen to MMM again too.

sure it has musical ideas. about 1.5 of them, on repeat for an hour.

so like with Tom Waits, my original estimation on both stands.

 

[zhao]

i mean just listen to ANY song from the early American gospel/blues/southern tradition, makes Tom Waits look exactly like the poseur that he is.

if i wanted to be harsh i would say this guy is a Bourgeois commodified soul-less perversion of that tradition, made for clueless yuppies. but i'm not that mean

 

[Sick Boy]

But you did just say that, albeit passive-aggressively, and I'm starting to feel like you actually believe it too.

 

[zhao]

But you did just say that, albeit passive-aggressively, and I'm starting to feel like you actually believe it too.

oh i absolutely believe it, have believed it, and just had my belief confirmed by his most "out there" and "experimental" record as recommended by a trustworthy source.

 

[Sick Boy]

oh i absolutely believe it, have believed it, and just had my belief confirmed by his most "out there" and "experimental" record as recommended by a trustworthy (on all other topics) source.

My problem is not particularly with your disliking of him or his records in particular, but your constant stratification of people based on how much their interests diverge from yours. In this thread, and others.

 

[zhao]

My problem is not particularly with your disliking of him or his records in particular, but your constant stratification of people based on how much their interests diverge from yours. In this thread, and others.

thanks for telling me what your problem is. now i know

and i also like how you do not even attempt to defend the album in question on formal terms, in opposition to my critique, but instead start with the personal attacks.

 

[Sick Boy]

thanks for telling me what your problem is. now i know

and i also like how you do not even attempt to defend the album in question on formal terms, in opposition to my critique, but instead start with the personal attacks.

I don't feel the need to, really. Music criticism bores me. I will defend the assertion that because I don't feel the need to, this makes me a "clueless yuppie" though.

 

[zhao]

I don't feel the need to, really. Music criticism bores me. I will defend the assertion that because I don't feel the need to, this makes me a "clueless yuppie" though.

awww... did that likkle harsh phrase i tacked onto the end bother you? so, so sowee...

it is what i think of this guy, his music, and his intended audience. do you want some tissue? i know you feel bad now but don't worry, i will re-affirm your underground street credibility on a dubstep or grime record soon enough.

 

[Sick Boy]

awww... did that likkle harsh phrase i tacked onto the end bother you? so, so sowee...

it is what i think of this guy, his music, and his intended audience. do you want some tissue? i know you feel bad now but don't worry, i will re-affirm your underground street credibility on a dubstep or grime record soon enough.

Unnecessary. I do not, and never have, asked for that. I'm not interested in credibility. You are.

 

[zhao]

this is stupid. say something relevant about this fake bluesman and his fake blues or shut up.

 

[droid]

and i also like how you do not even attempt to defend the album in question on formal terms, in opposition to my critique, but instead start with the personal attacks.

Im glad you listened to the LP and thanks for taking the time to reply, though i have to add that I dont think I claimed it was his 'most experimental record'.

Your criticism of it... i find it somewhat strange. You essentially laud it on a musical level, but then say you don't 'feel' it. Why? Because you've already decided that he's a poseur and everything he does is fake.

Now that's fine and all, but I'm not sure what it amounts to really, its certainly not a critique in 'formal' terms - more like yer basic rockist authenticity argument 'I dont buy into it because Ive decided its not the real deal', GENUINE blues/boho etc... is a million times better because its, well, authentic...

Like most people I vaccilate between rockist and popist positions on music, but it seems to me that this kind of criticism of music based on its perceived authenticity and preconceptions of an artist (which Ive certainly been guilty of in the past) serves more to act as a justification for self-aggrandisement and the 'stratification' (thks SB) and the pigeonholing of others who have inferior tastes who have 'bought' into the fakery - all of which serves no real purpose other than to make the critic feel superior.

That's an approach that I don't believe is very useful or dignified to/from someone who is obviously so knowledgeable and passionate about music.

 

[STN]

I thought we'd all accepted that we all knew his persona was exactly that: a persona, and it was just whether we found that persona interesting/worth adopting or responding to or not? I personally don't.

 

[Sick Boy]

I thought we'd all accepted that we all knew his persona was exactly that: a persona, and it was just whether we found that persona interesting/worth adopting or responding to or not? I personally don't.

This is what I understood. I'm not sure what more I can add.

 

[zhao]

Im glad you listened to the LP and thanks for taking the time to reply, though i have to add that I dont think I claimed it was his 'most experimental record'.

Your criticism of it... i find it somewhat strange. You essentially laud it on a musical level, but then say you don't 'feel' it. Why? Because you've already decided that he's a poseur and everything he does is fake.

Now that's fine and all, but I'm not sure what it amounts to really, its certainly not a critique in 'formal' terms - more like yer basic rockist authenticity argument 'I dont buy into it because Ive decided its not the real deal', GENUINE blues/boho etc... is a million times better because its, well, authentic...

Like most people I vaccilate between rockist and popist positions on music, but it seems to me that this kind of criticism of music based on its perceived authenticity and preconceptions of an artist (which Ive certainly been guilty of in the past) serves more to act as a justification for self-aggrandisement and the 'stratification' (thks SB) and the pigeonholing of others who have inferior tastes who have 'bought' into the fakery - all of which serves no real purpose other than to make the critic feel superior.

That's an approach that I don't believe is very useful or dignified to/from someone who is obviously so knowledgeable and passionate about music.

the "inventive" bit i was giving him too much credit... there are some unusual percussion sounds, that's it.

on a formal level, compared to, say Scott Walker's new albums, it is as inventive as Amy Winehouse. (Winehouse is similarly derivitive, but don't bother me nearly as much. hardly at all in fact... will have to ponder as to why)

the various voices that he does are desperate attempts to not repeat the 1 trick he knows.

his entire project is still largely one of mimicry. aping the bluesmen and song writers that have come before.

to be honest i was really trying to be nice with the first part which sounded like faint praise.

seriously, droid. i don't know how familiar you are with the blues/gospel tradition. but any one of them just make this guy sound total shit!

I thought we'd all accepted that we all knew his persona was exactly that: a persona, and it was just whether we found that persona interesting/worth adopting or responding to or not? I personally don't.

well there are good thespians and horrible thespians...