https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
19-07-2016: distracted by debates with enemy ancaps and show reviews but the new inri009 is started
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
switching focus to i did your mom
it's taken me a little longer than intended, but i'm back at this. i spent the last few sessions working on a different recording, only to push the date forward to june, 1998. this is the new inri009.
there will be a write-up shortly. the track is purposefully unsettling, as so many of these tracks are, but it's even more tongue-in-cheek than initially apparent. it's coming, probably in the morning.
given my gender switch, i grasp that this is just that much more fucked. hey. go listen to hamburger lady and get back to me on that.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
there will be a write-up shortly. the track is purposefully unsettling, as so many of these tracks are, but it's even more tongue-in-cheek than initially apparent. it's coming, probably in the morning.
given my gender switch, i grasp that this is just that much more fucked. hey. go listen to hamburger lady and get back to me on that.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
swans.
swans. fuck.
swans...
i feel like i should have a novel to write, here. i've stated a few times that the shortest reviews are the best shows. it kind of doesn't matter.
i'm ultimately going to refer you to the vlog, other than to point out that i wasn't paying a lot of attention to the show in the weeks leading up to it. i made a choice a few weeks ago that i'd wait to see the show before i heard the disc. it was part out of pragmatism: i've been closing discs this week. so, i kind of stumbled the few blocks there, and then stumbled the few blocks back, after.
i really should have been tired. i only had a few hours worth of sleep. yet, i got a boost of energy walking out that lasted me until well into the next day. i think this was as psychological as it was anything else; the excitement didn't hit me until i was there, and it didn't peak until i walked out.
in hindsight, i can see that the show was *meant* to have a kind of mystical quality to it. i point out in the vlog that the feeling gira is alluding to in describing a spiritual connection is really just the coming together of human beings. i think it's ultimately a sad reflection on the neo-liberal era that it's most important artistic creators are so alienated from social connectivity that they misinterpret social connectedness as something divine. but, then again, that's why we do the organized religion thing in the first place, right?
the show was in a deconsecrated church. at the end of the day, discussions and debates aside, i'd certainly rather worship with swans than with any kind of organized religion.
if you've yet to experience swans, you likely only have a few weeks left in which to do so. i cannot overstate how strongly i recommend doing so.
here is some footage from the show:
here is a full set:
& here is the day's vlog, with a more lengthy review:
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2016/07/12.html
swans...
i feel like i should have a novel to write, here. i've stated a few times that the shortest reviews are the best shows. it kind of doesn't matter.
i'm ultimately going to refer you to the vlog, other than to point out that i wasn't paying a lot of attention to the show in the weeks leading up to it. i made a choice a few weeks ago that i'd wait to see the show before i heard the disc. it was part out of pragmatism: i've been closing discs this week. so, i kind of stumbled the few blocks there, and then stumbled the few blocks back, after.
i really should have been tired. i only had a few hours worth of sleep. yet, i got a boost of energy walking out that lasted me until well into the next day. i think this was as psychological as it was anything else; the excitement didn't hit me until i was there, and it didn't peak until i walked out.
in hindsight, i can see that the show was *meant* to have a kind of mystical quality to it. i point out in the vlog that the feeling gira is alluding to in describing a spiritual connection is really just the coming together of human beings. i think it's ultimately a sad reflection on the neo-liberal era that it's most important artistic creators are so alienated from social connectivity that they misinterpret social connectedness as something divine. but, then again, that's why we do the organized religion thing in the first place, right?
the show was in a deconsecrated church. at the end of the day, discussions and debates aside, i'd certainly rather worship with swans than with any kind of organized religion.
if you've yet to experience swans, you likely only have a few weeks left in which to do so. i cannot overstate how strongly i recommend doing so.
here is some footage from the show:
here is a full set:
& here is the day's vlog, with a more lengthy review:
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2016/07/12.html
j reacts to a longstanding recurring dream (thirty years....)
i just woke up from a recurring dream that i've been having for a
really, really long time. thirty years? it's not every night or
anything, but i definitely recognize it when i have it. i'm not going to
add this to the liner notes for confused because it's kind of
tangential, but it's a good example of the kind of thing that will end
up on the aleph-disc. i've also had this discussion quite a bit over
various fora, so it should be familiar to secret admirers.
despite what certain christian apologists may argue, this genetic v. environment debate is largely rejected altogether by science. christian apologists? well, this you-don't-have-a-choice nonsense is not science but a "progressive" opinion coming out of the religious fundamentalism of everybody following "god's plan". if you paid close attention in sunday school, this denial of agency in gender roles should be entirely logical to you. yet, it's truly hard to make sense of it, otherwise.
remember: i'm not a christian progressive. i'm an anarchist. so, i have a strong attachment to the idea of a tabula rasa. my politics make no sense if we're all genetically determined. if that were true, i'd have to concede to some conservative concept of "human nature" and fall into the standard hobbesian apologism for deep totalitarianism. i readily concede that humans are assholes, but i blame capitalism and not biology. that's the point of being an anarchist: that abolishing capitalism will abolish this right-wing concept of "human nature" and allow us the freedom to decide how and what we want to be. if we have no way out of this, we're stuck with the police state - and the most violent forms of repression and surveillance become justified. i don't have any patience for this middle-of-the-road liberal nonsense: we can either transcend capitalism or we can't.
and, i believe that we can. but, we need to be able to change. the technically correct statement comes from chomsky: we don't yet understand humans well enough to know if we have a nature or not. yeah, well you probably fell for a strawman. your source probably sucks, and that's your epiphany, there. the term is currently meaningless. but, the way it's thrown around has to essentially be right-wing propaganda. otherwise, just give me a gun and get the fuck off my lawn.
so, because i'm an anarchist and not a christian progressive, my biases are towards tabula rasa rather than genetic predetermination. and, because i don't get my science from left-wing political rallies, i've run into quite a bit of push back on my refusal to uphold certain types of loaded sloganeering. let's be clear on that point.
real scientists will tell you that there's no evidence for a genetic basis for gender nonconformity. in fact, it's not even considered to be a psychological condition, let alone a genetic one. think of it like this: suppose your daughter wants to wear pants. nobody even cares anymore. you might even buy your daughter pants without even thinking about it. but, suppose your son wants to wear a dress. well, that's seen as some kind of mental illness. the only mental illness here is repressed misogyny in the parents! yet, i'll acknowledge that it's an empirical question. sort of. what do the studies say?
the truth is that they're all terrible. one of the studies you see thrown around to argue it's genetic relies on the reversal of flawed notes. so, the doctor that did the study has acknowledged that he falsified data and even sexually assaulted the participants. such a study ought to be completely discarded. instead, advocates of the genetic theory just negate all of the notes. this is their core argument. see, the staunch truth is that this is the best they can do in terms of presenting evidence in favour of a genetic basis for gender non-conformity. they may also throw some studies about twins at you, but if you look at the data closely it invariably actually contradicts their argument.
what i can't make sense of is why any scientifically literate person would consider it to be a valid hypothesis in the first place. it's behavioural. genes don't code for behaviours. that's religious thinking. but, in the sense that it remains an empirical question, i need to see a properly designed study. unfortunately, such a study would no doubt be unethical.
i can accept some concept of hormonal imbalance as a complicating factor, but i remain convinced that the issue is primarily environmental. so, we have another straw man: i'm arguing it's a choice and that conversion therapy should be attempted. which is completely ridiculous...
the argument that we are shaped by our environment is not in any way the same as the argument that we have a choice in our sexual orientation or sexual identification. that should not need to be stated. i often have a difficult time arguing this point, because i can't even make sense of the implication. the reason, again, is that i'm not a christian progressive. i'm an anarchist. the only reason you would come up with such a ridiculous assertion is if you're framing the issue in terms of a religious debate. so, these christians come at you with this idea that it's a choice and you're evil or something (i don't even know...), and your response is "no. it's genetic.". so, if i'm rejecting the idea that it's genetic, i'm taking the side of the christians you're arguing with.
i've made this argument about nihilism. i've been accused of nihilism, because i'm so openly atheist. but, an atheist cannot even make sense of nihilism, because it's framed in religious terms. likewise, i cannot make sense of these arguments from progressives because they are framed in religious terms.
so, no i don't think it's a choice. not exactly. i think it's a consequence of the stochastic processes of the universe. see, that's another atheist thing: i believe in chaos and randomness. your life is not determined by some supernatural force. you were not "programmed" by anything or anyone. you are a consequence of chance, and may have come out entirely differently had certain events in your life been different.
so, when i think back to being a girly boy at the age of four or five, i think it's obvious that the reason is that i spent all of my time with girls. i had a mother, a grandmother, two aunts, a sister, a female cousin and little girls living in the houses around me. dad was around, but kind of distant. that's not genetic, and it's not a choice. it's just a function of chance. if i had an uncle or a boy cousin or there was a little boy across the path, things may have been different.
but, that doesn't mean it's a good idea to enforce an arbitrary gender binary, either. remember: not a christian progressive. an anarchist. i reject the nuclear family, too.
the recurring dream places me in a field with a baseball glove. it was t-ball, technically, not baseball. i'm very young - 4. 5. i'm supposed to be paying attention, waiting for a ball from the sky, but i don't really care. i'm more interested in picking flowers. well, i'm in a field. that's what i usually do when i'm in a field with my grandmother. a ball rolls by me, and i choose not to respond to it. my dad whirls in in a rage, scoops me up and brings me to the car. he's ashamed. that's the dream: remembering his shame.
it's a quiet drive back to my mom's.
when we get home, he takes me out of the car, walks me to the door and promises he'll never make me stand in a field by myself ever again.
--
my parents were both libertarians, although they wouldn't have identified that way. my mom was a poorly educated white person, and had political perspectives (or lack thereof) that would be stereotypically associated with a poorly educated white person - support for social services and redistribution, peppered with a lot of xenophobia and social exclusion. not so much into the gays. but, my grandmother was far more liberal (small and big l - card carrying, in fact) and had a bigger effect on me. my mom struggled with addictions and would disappear for weeks at a time. i have almost no recollection of the elder trudeau, other than that my grandmother loved him and my mother hated him.
my dad wasn't really white, but he was more of the typical canadian - "fiscally conservative and socially liberal". he was, for a time, this strange canadian political animal: a progressive conservative. not an old tory. a pc, meaning he had strong support for progressive social policies but demanded that they be paid for through responsible taxation. you could maybe call him a tax and spend liberal, except to point out that he demanded the tax as much as the spend, which is usually a straw man when applied to liberals (who don't actually care about deficits). he was the only person i've ever met that was in support of the gst in the 90s - because he didn't want to see spending cuts. he voted for kim campbell, and defended it until the day he died. yet, he was also in the group that was highly critical of the reform party and never dropped his opposition to harper, instead opting for the right-leaning side of the liberal party. his perspective on social issues was always staunchly libertarian, whether he ever really realized it or not. the gays never bothered him, so he didn't bother them. the chinese never bothered him, so he didn't bother them. the blacks....well, maybe they bothered him a couple of times, but it's better to just get out of their way.
the point is that they were both into hands-off parenting. i had huge free rein from a very young age. this is another reason why i'm decidedly gen x: they were both very opposed to helicopter parenting and very much into letting me develop "naturally". i've grown up as an advocate of free range parenting, as well (i am an anarchist, after all). but, i think that this perspective is important to point out in the environment v genetics debate.
the reason is that the assumption was always that i'd grow out of it - which is genetic determinism. after all, i have male chromosomes, so my inner male tendencies should eventually over power and i'll in the end grow into a man. i'm just being a kid.
what i was trying to get across in my liner notes is that this is a type of naturalistic fallacy. in the end, i would not just magically become a boy in the absence of any instruction due to genetic determinism. but, it leaves open the question: if there was stronger instruction, might i have?
i don't know. i really don't.
what i do think that i can state with a lot of certainty is that the segregation was a bad idea, and i reacted pretty strongly to it. my parents never did this, but the school system did. the more that the teachers told me i wasn't allowed to be a girl, the more i insisted upon it. but, if you understand kids, you know that's how kids are - they want what they can't have, and the more you say "no" the more they push back.
i would propose that the error in approach was less in telling me what i can't be and more in failing to teach me what i "ought" to be. "you can't have this candy" is one thing. "have this apple instead" is another. the kid can't just magically fill in the blank that it should have an apple instead of the candy, it just dwells on not having the candy. the apple has to be presented as an option before it can be accepted.
of course, the apple can also be rejected. might i have rejected the apple and insisted on the candy? see, if you take my position on this, you have to realize that this is not pre-determined. the choices i would have made would not have been in a vacuum - they would have depended on the people around me. i can't consequently know if i would have rejected the apple had it been presented to me. i can just point out that it was never really presented. i was just told i can't have the candy.
and, yes i do think this is the right way to think about gender roles in kids.
so, i'm left with a complicated set of alternate outcomes:
1) had the system not tried to beat the girl out of me,
a) i might very well have grown out of it on my own.
b) or, i might have grown into it younger.
that would have depended on the environment around me. but, at least i wouldn't have internalized it and it wouldn't have become this thing i struggled with.
2) on the other hand, had the system more rigorously enforced maleness in addition to penalizing femaleness,
a) i may have been more effectively masculinized.
b) or the internalization may have been that much worse.
i think the key thing is in rejecting 2a) as some kind of ideal. this "ought" ought not be an ought. randomness is what it is. shit happens. but, kids need positive reinforcement one way or the other, and the ability to make these choices in a way that is free of shame or coercion.
so, i can't say what choices i would have made in the absence of coercion. i can only point out how the presence of coercion affected the choices i did make.
despite what certain christian apologists may argue, this genetic v. environment debate is largely rejected altogether by science. christian apologists? well, this you-don't-have-a-choice nonsense is not science but a "progressive" opinion coming out of the religious fundamentalism of everybody following "god's plan". if you paid close attention in sunday school, this denial of agency in gender roles should be entirely logical to you. yet, it's truly hard to make sense of it, otherwise.
remember: i'm not a christian progressive. i'm an anarchist. so, i have a strong attachment to the idea of a tabula rasa. my politics make no sense if we're all genetically determined. if that were true, i'd have to concede to some conservative concept of "human nature" and fall into the standard hobbesian apologism for deep totalitarianism. i readily concede that humans are assholes, but i blame capitalism and not biology. that's the point of being an anarchist: that abolishing capitalism will abolish this right-wing concept of "human nature" and allow us the freedom to decide how and what we want to be. if we have no way out of this, we're stuck with the police state - and the most violent forms of repression and surveillance become justified. i don't have any patience for this middle-of-the-road liberal nonsense: we can either transcend capitalism or we can't.
and, i believe that we can. but, we need to be able to change. the technically correct statement comes from chomsky: we don't yet understand humans well enough to know if we have a nature or not. yeah, well you probably fell for a strawman. your source probably sucks, and that's your epiphany, there. the term is currently meaningless. but, the way it's thrown around has to essentially be right-wing propaganda. otherwise, just give me a gun and get the fuck off my lawn.
so, because i'm an anarchist and not a christian progressive, my biases are towards tabula rasa rather than genetic predetermination. and, because i don't get my science from left-wing political rallies, i've run into quite a bit of push back on my refusal to uphold certain types of loaded sloganeering. let's be clear on that point.
real scientists will tell you that there's no evidence for a genetic basis for gender nonconformity. in fact, it's not even considered to be a psychological condition, let alone a genetic one. think of it like this: suppose your daughter wants to wear pants. nobody even cares anymore. you might even buy your daughter pants without even thinking about it. but, suppose your son wants to wear a dress. well, that's seen as some kind of mental illness. the only mental illness here is repressed misogyny in the parents! yet, i'll acknowledge that it's an empirical question. sort of. what do the studies say?
the truth is that they're all terrible. one of the studies you see thrown around to argue it's genetic relies on the reversal of flawed notes. so, the doctor that did the study has acknowledged that he falsified data and even sexually assaulted the participants. such a study ought to be completely discarded. instead, advocates of the genetic theory just negate all of the notes. this is their core argument. see, the staunch truth is that this is the best they can do in terms of presenting evidence in favour of a genetic basis for gender non-conformity. they may also throw some studies about twins at you, but if you look at the data closely it invariably actually contradicts their argument.
what i can't make sense of is why any scientifically literate person would consider it to be a valid hypothesis in the first place. it's behavioural. genes don't code for behaviours. that's religious thinking. but, in the sense that it remains an empirical question, i need to see a properly designed study. unfortunately, such a study would no doubt be unethical.
i can accept some concept of hormonal imbalance as a complicating factor, but i remain convinced that the issue is primarily environmental. so, we have another straw man: i'm arguing it's a choice and that conversion therapy should be attempted. which is completely ridiculous...
the argument that we are shaped by our environment is not in any way the same as the argument that we have a choice in our sexual orientation or sexual identification. that should not need to be stated. i often have a difficult time arguing this point, because i can't even make sense of the implication. the reason, again, is that i'm not a christian progressive. i'm an anarchist. the only reason you would come up with such a ridiculous assertion is if you're framing the issue in terms of a religious debate. so, these christians come at you with this idea that it's a choice and you're evil or something (i don't even know...), and your response is "no. it's genetic.". so, if i'm rejecting the idea that it's genetic, i'm taking the side of the christians you're arguing with.
i've made this argument about nihilism. i've been accused of nihilism, because i'm so openly atheist. but, an atheist cannot even make sense of nihilism, because it's framed in religious terms. likewise, i cannot make sense of these arguments from progressives because they are framed in religious terms.
so, no i don't think it's a choice. not exactly. i think it's a consequence of the stochastic processes of the universe. see, that's another atheist thing: i believe in chaos and randomness. your life is not determined by some supernatural force. you were not "programmed" by anything or anyone. you are a consequence of chance, and may have come out entirely differently had certain events in your life been different.
so, when i think back to being a girly boy at the age of four or five, i think it's obvious that the reason is that i spent all of my time with girls. i had a mother, a grandmother, two aunts, a sister, a female cousin and little girls living in the houses around me. dad was around, but kind of distant. that's not genetic, and it's not a choice. it's just a function of chance. if i had an uncle or a boy cousin or there was a little boy across the path, things may have been different.
but, that doesn't mean it's a good idea to enforce an arbitrary gender binary, either. remember: not a christian progressive. an anarchist. i reject the nuclear family, too.
the recurring dream places me in a field with a baseball glove. it was t-ball, technically, not baseball. i'm very young - 4. 5. i'm supposed to be paying attention, waiting for a ball from the sky, but i don't really care. i'm more interested in picking flowers. well, i'm in a field. that's what i usually do when i'm in a field with my grandmother. a ball rolls by me, and i choose not to respond to it. my dad whirls in in a rage, scoops me up and brings me to the car. he's ashamed. that's the dream: remembering his shame.
it's a quiet drive back to my mom's.
when we get home, he takes me out of the car, walks me to the door and promises he'll never make me stand in a field by myself ever again.
--
my parents were both libertarians, although they wouldn't have identified that way. my mom was a poorly educated white person, and had political perspectives (or lack thereof) that would be stereotypically associated with a poorly educated white person - support for social services and redistribution, peppered with a lot of xenophobia and social exclusion. not so much into the gays. but, my grandmother was far more liberal (small and big l - card carrying, in fact) and had a bigger effect on me. my mom struggled with addictions and would disappear for weeks at a time. i have almost no recollection of the elder trudeau, other than that my grandmother loved him and my mother hated him.
my dad wasn't really white, but he was more of the typical canadian - "fiscally conservative and socially liberal". he was, for a time, this strange canadian political animal: a progressive conservative. not an old tory. a pc, meaning he had strong support for progressive social policies but demanded that they be paid for through responsible taxation. you could maybe call him a tax and spend liberal, except to point out that he demanded the tax as much as the spend, which is usually a straw man when applied to liberals (who don't actually care about deficits). he was the only person i've ever met that was in support of the gst in the 90s - because he didn't want to see spending cuts. he voted for kim campbell, and defended it until the day he died. yet, he was also in the group that was highly critical of the reform party and never dropped his opposition to harper, instead opting for the right-leaning side of the liberal party. his perspective on social issues was always staunchly libertarian, whether he ever really realized it or not. the gays never bothered him, so he didn't bother them. the chinese never bothered him, so he didn't bother them. the blacks....well, maybe they bothered him a couple of times, but it's better to just get out of their way.
the point is that they were both into hands-off parenting. i had huge free rein from a very young age. this is another reason why i'm decidedly gen x: they were both very opposed to helicopter parenting and very much into letting me develop "naturally". i've grown up as an advocate of free range parenting, as well (i am an anarchist, after all). but, i think that this perspective is important to point out in the environment v genetics debate.
the reason is that the assumption was always that i'd grow out of it - which is genetic determinism. after all, i have male chromosomes, so my inner male tendencies should eventually over power and i'll in the end grow into a man. i'm just being a kid.
what i was trying to get across in my liner notes is that this is a type of naturalistic fallacy. in the end, i would not just magically become a boy in the absence of any instruction due to genetic determinism. but, it leaves open the question: if there was stronger instruction, might i have?
i don't know. i really don't.
what i do think that i can state with a lot of certainty is that the segregation was a bad idea, and i reacted pretty strongly to it. my parents never did this, but the school system did. the more that the teachers told me i wasn't allowed to be a girl, the more i insisted upon it. but, if you understand kids, you know that's how kids are - they want what they can't have, and the more you say "no" the more they push back.
i would propose that the error in approach was less in telling me what i can't be and more in failing to teach me what i "ought" to be. "you can't have this candy" is one thing. "have this apple instead" is another. the kid can't just magically fill in the blank that it should have an apple instead of the candy, it just dwells on not having the candy. the apple has to be presented as an option before it can be accepted.
of course, the apple can also be rejected. might i have rejected the apple and insisted on the candy? see, if you take my position on this, you have to realize that this is not pre-determined. the choices i would have made would not have been in a vacuum - they would have depended on the people around me. i can't consequently know if i would have rejected the apple had it been presented to me. i can just point out that it was never really presented. i was just told i can't have the candy.
and, yes i do think this is the right way to think about gender roles in kids.
so, i'm left with a complicated set of alternate outcomes:
1) had the system not tried to beat the girl out of me,
a) i might very well have grown out of it on my own.
b) or, i might have grown into it younger.
that would have depended on the environment around me. but, at least i wouldn't have internalized it and it wouldn't have become this thing i struggled with.
2) on the other hand, had the system more rigorously enforced maleness in addition to penalizing femaleness,
a) i may have been more effectively masculinized.
b) or the internalization may have been that much worse.
i think the key thing is in rejecting 2a) as some kind of ideal. this "ought" ought not be an ought. randomness is what it is. shit happens. but, kids need positive reinforcement one way or the other, and the ability to make these choices in a way that is free of shame or coercion.
so, i can't say what choices i would have made in the absence of coercion. i can only point out how the presence of coercion affected the choices i did make.
Monday, July 18, 2016
18-07-2016: talking through some sequencing decisions for inri004-inri009 (new inri009...)
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/skaters
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/confused-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/hey-god-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/schizoid-terrorist-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/relax
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/hurricane
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/skaters
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/confused-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/hey-god-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/schizoid-terrorist-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-did-your-mom-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/relax
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/hurricane
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
i think i'm done for the day, and while it was less productive in terms of quantity than i'd have liked, i think it was nonetheless productive in terms of quality.
i have added a hidden tracks to inri006, upheld my tracklisting for inri007, added bonus tracks to inri008 and first finalized and then moved the previous inri009 forwards to june (and likely into the place of inri012). the new inri009 will need to be 'i did your mom', which will need to be rebuilt tomorrow. i think that should be relatively quick.
i have added a hidden tracks to inri006, upheld my tracklisting for inri007, added bonus tracks to inri008 and first finalized and then moved the previous inri009 forwards to june (and likely into the place of inri012). the new inri009 will need to be 'i did your mom', which will need to be rebuilt tomorrow. i think that should be relatively quick.
refinalizing hey god (inri008)
bonus tracks added to inri008. audio permanently closed.
==
my recollection of the initial recording of this track is unfortunately somewhat vague. when we push our memories like i'm trying to, we become more likely to imagine the past in terms that never actually existed. so, how real is this vague memory of wanting to hear some backwards guitars? i fear that it's perilous to try and force my mind to be more specific.
it's at least fully consistent with what i know about the situation. this was initially the second track recorded in my basement studio in the fall of 1996. so, i was still at the point where i was looking to try things in the studio for the first time. as for backwards guitars? i was very interested in both zappa and hendrix (two of my biggest guitar influences) at the time, and that is actually blatantly obvious if you listen to inri000. they both used backwards guitars. there are multiple occasions on inri000 (and afterwards...) where the nods to both of these players are beyond heavy-sleeved. so, my vague memory at the very least makes sense.
how i made the jump from trying to create a backwards guitar solo to turning a song into a palindrome is another question and i don't really have a good answer besides stumbling upon it as i was listening to it. clearly, it is the case that this struck me as a good idea at some point along the way.
when i went to recreate the track in early 1998, i felt the need to recreate the palindrome effect. so, i never saved any version of the track in forward order (without the backwards overdub) or released it in any kind of way. for all these years, there has simply never been a forwards version of the track.
the remastering process over 2015 has finally given me the opportunity to create a forwards version and spin it off as a single for the express reason of documenting the track as it was actually initially written, which was as a fairly straight forward alternative pop song. that's a description that i do believe is very old. yet, i may be imagining the past, too...
the new album mix is a palindrome, as it always has been. the electronics mix is constructed using the same algorithm. the backwards mix is just literally that. combined together, the forwards and backwards mixes create the album version. the 2013 remasters are appended as bonuses.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 15, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 11, 2016. bonus tracks added and re-finalized on july 18, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
regarding the subject matter of the deleted vocals/lyrics, please see the following vlog (which is also available on inriℵ0).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, digital wave editing, loops, vocals, drum kit, tapes, production
released february 11, 1998
==
my recollection of the initial recording of this track is unfortunately somewhat vague. when we push our memories like i'm trying to, we become more likely to imagine the past in terms that never actually existed. so, how real is this vague memory of wanting to hear some backwards guitars? i fear that it's perilous to try and force my mind to be more specific.
it's at least fully consistent with what i know about the situation. this was initially the second track recorded in my basement studio in the fall of 1996. so, i was still at the point where i was looking to try things in the studio for the first time. as for backwards guitars? i was very interested in both zappa and hendrix (two of my biggest guitar influences) at the time, and that is actually blatantly obvious if you listen to inri000. they both used backwards guitars. there are multiple occasions on inri000 (and afterwards...) where the nods to both of these players are beyond heavy-sleeved. so, my vague memory at the very least makes sense.
how i made the jump from trying to create a backwards guitar solo to turning a song into a palindrome is another question and i don't really have a good answer besides stumbling upon it as i was listening to it. clearly, it is the case that this struck me as a good idea at some point along the way.
when i went to recreate the track in early 1998, i felt the need to recreate the palindrome effect. so, i never saved any version of the track in forward order (without the backwards overdub) or released it in any kind of way. for all these years, there has simply never been a forwards version of the track.
the remastering process over 2015 has finally given me the opportunity to create a forwards version and spin it off as a single for the express reason of documenting the track as it was actually initially written, which was as a fairly straight forward alternative pop song. that's a description that i do believe is very old. yet, i may be imagining the past, too...
the new album mix is a palindrome, as it always has been. the electronics mix is constructed using the same algorithm. the backwards mix is just literally that. combined together, the forwards and backwards mixes create the album version. the 2013 remasters are appended as bonuses.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 15, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 11, 2016. bonus tracks added and re-finalized on july 18, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
regarding the subject matter of the deleted vocals/lyrics, please see the following vlog (which is also available on inriℵ0).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, digital wave editing, loops, vocals, drum kit, tapes, production
released february 11, 1998
refinalizing useless (inri006)
hidden track added to inri006. audio permanently closed
==
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released & finalized on july 7, 2016. hidden track added and re-finalized on july 18, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
==
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released & finalized on july 7, 2016. hidden track added and re-finalized on july 18, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
j reacts to her own political irrelevance for the remainder of this century
listen, i've actually been over this repeatedly.
i do not feel that my politics are realistically attainable within my life time. this is why i would prefer to reject society and live in poverty in order to focus on art. i am entirely aware that i am so far outside of the status quo, that i cannot be coherently understood - except in a revolutionary context.
i consequently offer a kind of acid test, right. i would expect the status quo to reject virtually everything i say. so, if you find yourself of the opinion that i'm kind of extreme? sure. i agree with you. and, you're the status quo.
just understand two things:
(1) i expect a very small audience, because of the nature of my comments. i would be the first person to be shocked by the prospect of my audience growing. this would imply that my analysis is incorrect.
(2) the size of my audience has not and will continue to not have any effect on my comments.
i'm a musician. check out my tunes.
i do not feel that my politics are realistically attainable within my life time. this is why i would prefer to reject society and live in poverty in order to focus on art. i am entirely aware that i am so far outside of the status quo, that i cannot be coherently understood - except in a revolutionary context.
i consequently offer a kind of acid test, right. i would expect the status quo to reject virtually everything i say. so, if you find yourself of the opinion that i'm kind of extreme? sure. i agree with you. and, you're the status quo.
just understand two things:
(1) i expect a very small audience, because of the nature of my comments. i would be the first person to be shocked by the prospect of my audience growing. this would imply that my analysis is incorrect.
(2) the size of my audience has not and will continue to not have any effect on my comments.
i'm a musician. check out my tunes.
Sunday, July 17, 2016
ok, i'll be caught up by the time i'm done eating and switching back to listening for the week. that was actually a needed rest for my ears, and i'll be better off for it. i have nothing scheduled until the 21st (a play)/23rd (psychic tv)/25th (mri). i should be up to inri014 before the 21st, and ready to pivot some time in that period. i think...
expect some closures over the next few days.
expect some closures over the next few days.
Saturday, July 16, 2016
new post at the alter-reality
july 16, 1996
good morning. i've been up all night playing civ 2. how was your night?
it's been a pretty good summer, so far. i've very much gotten into the routine of staying up all night and sleeping during the afternoon, which is a habit i can trace back a few years to when i used to live with my mom. when she got a new tv, she moved the old one into the basement, which is where my bedroom was. it was a nice, big tv - but very old. wood frame, with two dials on the front. uhf/vhf. it was around as long as i can remember, so it must have been from the 70s. at first, i used to stay up to watch conan and then get tired and fall asleep right after or even during it. i had to, because conan was the funniest thing to ever exist in the history of the universe. but, the habit of staying up late is something that builds on itself. you stay up a little later, you sleep in a little later; eventually, you're up all night. soon, i found myself watching muchmusic after conan; they always played better music at night. then, i was staying up even later to watch reruns of the original star trek series, which they were interestingly playing on cbc kingston. maybe somebody in the station went to high school with shatner, or something. kingston used to be the capital of canada, but it was eventually moved up the rideau river here to ottawa because kingston was considered to be too vulnerable to a sneak attack by american forces. those bastards are always trying to invade us, so we have to be careful. it's about half way to toronto, which is still close enough to get channels here in ottawa on basic cable. within a few years, i'd guess i'd seen pretty much the entire series - much of it several times.
i even found myself staying up even later, mostly for the purposes of reading. by the time i'd got to high school, i'd read almost everything that stephen king had ever written. i also read a lot of science fiction including a lot of isaac asimov, especially the foundation series. the gaia theory narrative was very interesting to me. some nights, i would stay up reading until lunch time. this wasn't always really a choice, either - sometimes i just got lost in it.
so, the idea of staying up all night is not something that's new to me. i'm only 15, but i've been doing this regularly over the summer for many years, already.
it is a little different this year, though, for a few reasons. one is that i'm not living at my mom's this summer. mom didn't really care when i went to bed. dad doesn't either, really, but my stepmother claims she is a light sleeper and doesn't want to be woken up because she has to work in the morning. also, i might wake the dogs up (we have two golden retrievers). i'm well aware that there's an unwritten and unenforced rule that i should be in bed, but i also know that nobody is going to give me grief so long as i don't wake anybody up. the other reason it's different this year is that there's central air here. my mom has never had an air conditioner, and in fact there were even no windows in the basement. so, conan or not, there was some greater value in sleeping through the hot days and living in the cooler evenings. it can actually get pretty hot in canada in the summer!
this has been my schedule for most of the summer:
1. wake up after 2:00 pm. 3:00, often. 4:00, sometimes, even.
2. eat. well, usually. sometimes, dad says not to eat before he goes because he's making something. or, he might leave a note. sometimes, he even phones to tell me not to eat - and, i'd better not, too. he gets strangely depressed when you won't eat his food, like he's failed at life or something. i think it's some kind of repressed italian cultural thing. that's the exception, though. usually, they eat out on their way home from work. so, i usually feed myself. i expect to feed myself.
3. play guitar until everybody goes to bed.
4. play civ 2 until the sun comes up, or later.
5. sleep until the afternoon and start again.
is that a pretty good summer? i think it is, actually. although, i'm not sure if they're really aware of my sleeping schedules. i think they mostly think that i just get up early, and am awake all day.
one of the things i enjoy about playing civ 2 all night is listening to music when i'm playing. the newest, greatest thing in my walkman is the new i mother earth record, scenery and fish. i did already have the first record, dig, although i found it a little dense to get into, at first. it was just a little more challenging than the grunge that came out in '93 and '94. so, it kind of sat for a while until i went back to it. right now, i'm actually listening to both of them.
i find that the lyrics are really quirky at points, which i kind of like. they kind of want to tell a story, but they're kind of tongue-in-cheek about it, too. it's kind of like that they know they're cliched and are simultaneously revelling in it and poking fun at themselves for it. i think that's called post-modernism, but i'm not completely sure. what i really, really like are the guitars on the record. the fact that the guitars on this record are just a bit more advanced than the grunge records i've been listening to for the last few years puts them in just about the right space for me, right now. it's kind of more like the stuff my guitar teacher shows me: jimi hendrix, stevie ray vaughn, eric clapton, carlos santana. or, maybe it's kind of like that it's half-way between the blues that i'm being trained in and the alternative rock (pearl jam, smashing pumpkins, soundgarden) that i'm listening to a lot of. either way, tracks like pisser and earth, sky and c are immensely fun to rock out to through headphones.
i mentioned in the last update that i was helping my dad build a room in the basement. it's something we've been doing on the weekends, mostly - and it's almost done. he already bought his drum kit, so he has to build it, now. that's what he said, anyways. we put all this pink insulation in between the walls, and then we put in sound-proof ceiling tiles to stop the sound from traveling upstairs. the last thing we have to do is put an outside layer of drywall around the wood joists. i tried to do as much as i could, but i really only had two tasks: (1) hold things still and (2) stay out of the way.
he says that it should be done by august. he seems really excited by the prospect that i may bring some people over, as he's a little concerned about how much time i spend by myself. i don't really know anybody that would want to come over and start a band, though.
it's past my bed time, so i'm going to sleep. enjoy the i mother earth: it's something special, i think.
http://therealinri.blogspot.ca/1996/07/scenery-and-fish-and-building-rooms-in.html
the vlogs will also be catching up over the next few hours:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCinQSeEtF0vSN1XVhQGfwKA
scenery and fish and building rooms in basements and other things.
good morning. i've been up all night playing civ 2. how was your night?
it's been a pretty good summer, so far. i've very much gotten into the routine of staying up all night and sleeping during the afternoon, which is a habit i can trace back a few years to when i used to live with my mom. when she got a new tv, she moved the old one into the basement, which is where my bedroom was. it was a nice, big tv - but very old. wood frame, with two dials on the front. uhf/vhf. it was around as long as i can remember, so it must have been from the 70s. at first, i used to stay up to watch conan and then get tired and fall asleep right after or even during it. i had to, because conan was the funniest thing to ever exist in the history of the universe. but, the habit of staying up late is something that builds on itself. you stay up a little later, you sleep in a little later; eventually, you're up all night. soon, i found myself watching muchmusic after conan; they always played better music at night. then, i was staying up even later to watch reruns of the original star trek series, which they were interestingly playing on cbc kingston. maybe somebody in the station went to high school with shatner, or something. kingston used to be the capital of canada, but it was eventually moved up the rideau river here to ottawa because kingston was considered to be too vulnerable to a sneak attack by american forces. those bastards are always trying to invade us, so we have to be careful. it's about half way to toronto, which is still close enough to get channels here in ottawa on basic cable. within a few years, i'd guess i'd seen pretty much the entire series - much of it several times.
i even found myself staying up even later, mostly for the purposes of reading. by the time i'd got to high school, i'd read almost everything that stephen king had ever written. i also read a lot of science fiction including a lot of isaac asimov, especially the foundation series. the gaia theory narrative was very interesting to me. some nights, i would stay up reading until lunch time. this wasn't always really a choice, either - sometimes i just got lost in it.
so, the idea of staying up all night is not something that's new to me. i'm only 15, but i've been doing this regularly over the summer for many years, already.
it is a little different this year, though, for a few reasons. one is that i'm not living at my mom's this summer. mom didn't really care when i went to bed. dad doesn't either, really, but my stepmother claims she is a light sleeper and doesn't want to be woken up because she has to work in the morning. also, i might wake the dogs up (we have two golden retrievers). i'm well aware that there's an unwritten and unenforced rule that i should be in bed, but i also know that nobody is going to give me grief so long as i don't wake anybody up. the other reason it's different this year is that there's central air here. my mom has never had an air conditioner, and in fact there were even no windows in the basement. so, conan or not, there was some greater value in sleeping through the hot days and living in the cooler evenings. it can actually get pretty hot in canada in the summer!
this has been my schedule for most of the summer:
1. wake up after 2:00 pm. 3:00, often. 4:00, sometimes, even.
2. eat. well, usually. sometimes, dad says not to eat before he goes because he's making something. or, he might leave a note. sometimes, he even phones to tell me not to eat - and, i'd better not, too. he gets strangely depressed when you won't eat his food, like he's failed at life or something. i think it's some kind of repressed italian cultural thing. that's the exception, though. usually, they eat out on their way home from work. so, i usually feed myself. i expect to feed myself.
3. play guitar until everybody goes to bed.
4. play civ 2 until the sun comes up, or later.
5. sleep until the afternoon and start again.
is that a pretty good summer? i think it is, actually. although, i'm not sure if they're really aware of my sleeping schedules. i think they mostly think that i just get up early, and am awake all day.
one of the things i enjoy about playing civ 2 all night is listening to music when i'm playing. the newest, greatest thing in my walkman is the new i mother earth record, scenery and fish. i did already have the first record, dig, although i found it a little dense to get into, at first. it was just a little more challenging than the grunge that came out in '93 and '94. so, it kind of sat for a while until i went back to it. right now, i'm actually listening to both of them.
i find that the lyrics are really quirky at points, which i kind of like. they kind of want to tell a story, but they're kind of tongue-in-cheek about it, too. it's kind of like that they know they're cliched and are simultaneously revelling in it and poking fun at themselves for it. i think that's called post-modernism, but i'm not completely sure. what i really, really like are the guitars on the record. the fact that the guitars on this record are just a bit more advanced than the grunge records i've been listening to for the last few years puts them in just about the right space for me, right now. it's kind of more like the stuff my guitar teacher shows me: jimi hendrix, stevie ray vaughn, eric clapton, carlos santana. or, maybe it's kind of like that it's half-way between the blues that i'm being trained in and the alternative rock (pearl jam, smashing pumpkins, soundgarden) that i'm listening to a lot of. either way, tracks like pisser and earth, sky and c are immensely fun to rock out to through headphones.
i mentioned in the last update that i was helping my dad build a room in the basement. it's something we've been doing on the weekends, mostly - and it's almost done. he already bought his drum kit, so he has to build it, now. that's what he said, anyways. we put all this pink insulation in between the walls, and then we put in sound-proof ceiling tiles to stop the sound from traveling upstairs. the last thing we have to do is put an outside layer of drywall around the wood joists. i tried to do as much as i could, but i really only had two tasks: (1) hold things still and (2) stay out of the way.
he says that it should be done by august. he seems really excited by the prospect that i may bring some people over, as he's a little concerned about how much time i spend by myself. i don't really know anybody that would want to come over and start a band, though.
it's past my bed time, so i'm going to sleep. enjoy the i mother earth: it's something special, i think.
http://therealinri.blogspot.ca/1996/07/scenery-and-fish-and-building-rooms-in.html
the vlogs will also be catching up over the next few hours:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCinQSeEtF0vSN1XVhQGfwKA
so, i came home from the show on tuesday night and was awake until late wednesday morning. then, i slept for a few hours and woke up on wednesday evening, around the time of the sunset. that was actually a very nice sleep. a hot, sweaty sleep. those are the best kind...
i spent the overnight arranging two weeks worth of video content into folders, and narrating some of the political rants. i then spent the morning shaving, and the rest of the day at the bluesfest in windsor. the i mother earth set was solid, and jeff martin also got the rest of the band up on stage for a few minutes (which was mostly expected, if not advertised). good show. glad i went. but it was a long day that ended with me completely baked, so i crashed pretty hard. my ears still hadn't entirely recovered from swans, so the culmination of things meant i had to sleep.
i was awake for a few hours in the morning yesterday, but i did actually sleep for pretty much the entire day of the 15th. i woke up at almost exactly midnight. so, i'm starting on saturday right now rather than winding down friday.
there was an editing fuck-up on the vlog for the 30th (of june) and therefore also for the 1st of july, so i had to redo and reupload them. the initial plan was that i'd actually be mostly caught up by now because the vlogs up until the 12th are going to be relatively short. but, that screwed the whole thing up. i'm currently rendering the vlog for the 3rd and also about to get something to eat.
i never did get that filing done. that's still something that i should stop to do. so, i don't really plan on doing any listening today, either. near the end, maybe. rather, it's going to mostly be filing and editing, as i get back into a schedule that i plan to hold to this time.
i spent the overnight arranging two weeks worth of video content into folders, and narrating some of the political rants. i then spent the morning shaving, and the rest of the day at the bluesfest in windsor. the i mother earth set was solid, and jeff martin also got the rest of the band up on stage for a few minutes (which was mostly expected, if not advertised). good show. glad i went. but it was a long day that ended with me completely baked, so i crashed pretty hard. my ears still hadn't entirely recovered from swans, so the culmination of things meant i had to sleep.
i was awake for a few hours in the morning yesterday, but i did actually sleep for pretty much the entire day of the 15th. i woke up at almost exactly midnight. so, i'm starting on saturday right now rather than winding down friday.
there was an editing fuck-up on the vlog for the 30th (of june) and therefore also for the 1st of july, so i had to redo and reupload them. the initial plan was that i'd actually be mostly caught up by now because the vlogs up until the 12th are going to be relatively short. but, that screwed the whole thing up. i'm currently rendering the vlog for the 3rd and also about to get something to eat.
i never did get that filing done. that's still something that i should stop to do. so, i don't really plan on doing any listening today, either. near the end, maybe. rather, it's going to mostly be filing and editing, as i get back into a schedule that i plan to hold to this time.
Friday, July 15, 2016
i walked out of that concert completely fried due to minimal sleep,
overexposure to my ears (remember: i saw swans on tuesday, too),
alcohol, nicotine and the other one that's still a few months away from
open mention. so, i'm not done sleeping yet. but there was an experience
near the end of the show that i want to say something about. it was one
of those really surreal moments of racism that you just can't do much
about besides point out loudly and shake your head about. so, i'm going
to scream about it for a few paragraphs.
i mother earth were a kind of iconic canadian band in the 90s, and they were uniting here with a singer they hadn't played with in many years. the announcer said 18 years. i'm not sure if that's literally true or not, but it's been a while. the audience was consequently full of nostalgia: an older and mostly white crowd rocking out to records released in 1993 and 1996. much drinking, yes.
now, everybody knows you're not supposed to smoke anything at all in these kinds of outdoor bank concerts. you're just supposed to shut up and drink your over-priced beer. that is, of course, the economic purpose of this event: to sell over-priced beer. but, you can't actually enforce this rule once the sun comes down a little, the least important reason being that most people in the crowd at rock concerts like this actually don't agree with bans on smoking at outdoor concerts. many of them actually even smoke. and, not just cigarettes.
the smell of marijuana is pretty normal at outdoor rock concerts. it's a part of the experience - whether you're actually inhaling, or just taking in the aroma. it wouldn't be a real festival, without it. whatever the eventual legality of the substance in canada, that smell is not going to lift from the concerts of the nation. there will simply be a trail of corrected signs "thank you for pot smoking".
the spirit of this event, combined with the nature of the audience, actually at one point near the end of the set had joints passing around amongst strangers. somebody decided everybody at the show ought to be high. or it seemed that way. they were just circling around. my nose and eyes caught multiple burning around me.
so, i will acknowledge that there were people smoking pot in the audience. see, but that's just it - *everybody* in the audience was smoking pot. no exaggeration. nine out of ten, anyways.
so, you'll imagine how absurd it was to watch security swoop in, walk past several burning joints and key in on the only black guy in eyesight - who, yes, was caught green-handed. like, they took it out of his hand. ok. drug abuse. but, they had to blatantly walk by scores of stoned white folks to do this, and then scores more as they were escorting him out. 90 out of 100 people in the immediate audience were stoned. it was being openly passed around. but, only one person in the audience was black.
i didn't stay for the literal headliner, so i don't know if they came back later for more minorities, or even for some white folk - or maybe if they just backed off and let people have a good time. but i know what i saw and how obvious it was.
i don't really have any point besides the obvious one: it's really not ok. i don't know exactly who the security personnel were (mall cops?), either, but....i guess the way i should articulate this to organizers is that i don't want to see anything like that ever again.
of course, this has nothing to do with the band. the actual show was excellent, for what it was. tight. no fuck-ups. the tracks were identifiable, but expanded upon enough to play out. i'd need at least two hands to count the number of times i saw this band in the 90s, and they were always a strong live set like that. so, i will actually have some footage coming up in the next few days of i mother earth with edwin in 2016. that's something that is actually happening. there's some teaparty footage, too.
right now, back to sleep....
i mother earth were a kind of iconic canadian band in the 90s, and they were uniting here with a singer they hadn't played with in many years. the announcer said 18 years. i'm not sure if that's literally true or not, but it's been a while. the audience was consequently full of nostalgia: an older and mostly white crowd rocking out to records released in 1993 and 1996. much drinking, yes.
now, everybody knows you're not supposed to smoke anything at all in these kinds of outdoor bank concerts. you're just supposed to shut up and drink your over-priced beer. that is, of course, the economic purpose of this event: to sell over-priced beer. but, you can't actually enforce this rule once the sun comes down a little, the least important reason being that most people in the crowd at rock concerts like this actually don't agree with bans on smoking at outdoor concerts. many of them actually even smoke. and, not just cigarettes.
the smell of marijuana is pretty normal at outdoor rock concerts. it's a part of the experience - whether you're actually inhaling, or just taking in the aroma. it wouldn't be a real festival, without it. whatever the eventual legality of the substance in canada, that smell is not going to lift from the concerts of the nation. there will simply be a trail of corrected signs "thank you for pot smoking".
the spirit of this event, combined with the nature of the audience, actually at one point near the end of the set had joints passing around amongst strangers. somebody decided everybody at the show ought to be high. or it seemed that way. they were just circling around. my nose and eyes caught multiple burning around me.
so, i will acknowledge that there were people smoking pot in the audience. see, but that's just it - *everybody* in the audience was smoking pot. no exaggeration. nine out of ten, anyways.
so, you'll imagine how absurd it was to watch security swoop in, walk past several burning joints and key in on the only black guy in eyesight - who, yes, was caught green-handed. like, they took it out of his hand. ok. drug abuse. but, they had to blatantly walk by scores of stoned white folks to do this, and then scores more as they were escorting him out. 90 out of 100 people in the immediate audience were stoned. it was being openly passed around. but, only one person in the audience was black.
i didn't stay for the literal headliner, so i don't know if they came back later for more minorities, or even for some white folk - or maybe if they just backed off and let people have a good time. but i know what i saw and how obvious it was.
i don't really have any point besides the obvious one: it's really not ok. i don't know exactly who the security personnel were (mall cops?), either, but....i guess the way i should articulate this to organizers is that i don't want to see anything like that ever again.
of course, this has nothing to do with the band. the actual show was excellent, for what it was. tight. no fuck-ups. the tracks were identifiable, but expanded upon enough to play out. i'd need at least two hands to count the number of times i saw this band in the 90s, and they were always a strong live set like that. so, i will actually have some footage coming up in the next few days of i mother earth with edwin in 2016. that's something that is actually happening. there's some teaparty footage, too.
right now, back to sleep....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)