i had to nap.

here's some rough notes about half-way through.

- hyperwave bit autobiographical [star wars/trek]

- playing with modern existence in terms of humans not going outside. if the first two robot novels were allegories about marxist theory, this one might be more of a commentary on modern existence.

- check laws of humanics in subtexts [in expanded robot]

- baley frequently presented as child-like, juvenilized by earth society, seeking to escape the womb

- asimov may have been coerced to return to writing fiction within the context of the blockbuster scifi films of the late 70s and early 80s, given that he was responsible for so many of the ideas underlying them. this text goes over a lot of previous ideas for that apparent reason.

- freudian undertones in the sex life. not really interested.

- the reflection on the sex life of aurorans seems to be a reflection of asimov's views on sexuality within the bourgeois elite in new york city, specifically, in the 70s. asimov seems to be suggesting that bourgeois american culture has overdone it on the sex, and reduced it to something meaningless and boring - so much so that the promise of unhindered sex with robots offers an escape from the ubiquitous mundanity of sex with people. i have to admit some sympathy with this perspective. it is the closest thing to a purpose in the text. again: the underlying society is broadly communist, but this is a pretty marxist critique of bourgeois sexuality.

- of the three planets - earth, solaria, aurora - i'd have to admit a strongest affinity with solaria. but, they all represent a potentially communist dystopia: the overcrowded kibbutz of earth, the alienation of solaria and the empty hedonism of aurora.

- asimov introduces a conflict between the pro-auroran globalists and the pan-humanity humanists, and you'd have to imagine that asimov (acting director of the humanist society) would be most sympathetic to humanists. it's a bit of a hint as to who represents his own views, in truth - something that might be different in 1980 than it was in 1955. asimov's subtle slights on baley may be another indication that he's changing hosts in the story, so to speak, and that he now looks down on baley, whereas he previously saw him as his own voice. asimov's globalists - a vanguard elite that puts itself first and looks down on the broader swath of humanity - is not all that different than the contemporary concept of "globalist", which comes from a strange merging of far-left and far-tight anti-elitism. asimov seems to want to present humanism as a truer from of egalitarianism, a less corrupt concept of liberalism and a more authentic left. fastolfe's "decency" is presented in this context of representing humanism. asimov and i may quibble over details as to what the anti-vanguard left ought to look like (he was a liberal, and i'm an anarchist), but we seem to agree on the need to present a counter-left as a movement against vanguardism. but, once again, this is about leftist infighting - it's not some broad ideological discourse. only the primitivist utopians on earth seem to offer any opposition to the spread of communism throughout the galaxy.

so, this is inri001, updated (again) to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.:

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inri-cassette-demo-2

actually, i seem to have my timeline wrong for cronenberg - he was earlier than i thought.

but, you get the point.

i should have waited to comment on the second robot novel, so i'm going to hold off on this one, but my initial take is that the 25 year time lag is a sort of a clean break, conceptually. they're the same characters, and i'm sure the story will develop similarly, but it's also a very different type of novel, that is reflective of changes in the genre over the period. in the 40s and 50s, science fiction was just a mechanism for dystopian literature, so it was not fundamentally different than other types of literature, really, it just had a different setting. and, that would have been true through the 60s (you can really see that in the initial run of star trek, which frequently played on everything in the traditional canon of literature, from shakespeare to classical mythology), up until star wars, which sort of broke everything and left the genre in a juvenile state of focusing on special effects, like any other adventure film. this third robot novel was written and published in the early 80s, in the midst of the major shift in the genre that was happening.

asimov is adjusting by focusing more on how he sees the technology of the future, making it more of an exercise in futurism, which is what the standard was at the time in the literature, if not in the films. you see that kind of thing come out later in, like, cronenberg films, but not in the early 80s. and, i should point out that while daneel predated spock by a good distance, this text was written right in the middle of the star wars and star trek boom of the early 80s - and you can tell.

i don't remember the text and don't think i actually read it as a child, so i don't know the plot. but, i'm not expecting the same kind of allegorical treatment - i'm expecting a sort of empty exercise in futurism that will leave me sort of bored, as an adult.

i said that last time, though, and realized in the end that it was clearly about marxist alienation, even if it was sort of blurry. so, we'll see what happens.

i'm more willing to sit up, now, but now i'm into the story.

so, this is inri000, updated (again) to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.:

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inri-cassette-demo-1

my stomach has shrunk a little, meaning my big meals feel like big meals again, and i'm a little bloated after "lunch". that's ok. it means i'm reading a little in bed.

i've pointed out that baley/daneel are obviously sherlock holmes & watson. it's elementary.

but, are baley/daneel likewise the models for kirk and spock? 

i can see a lot of spock in daneel, certainly.

i will listen to a few things randomly, just to be sure, so don't fuck with it.

ok.

so, i can't listen to everything to be sure i didn't miss anything - i'm just going to go back to the start and reupload everything again.

please just leave it be.

if i wanted somebody's help, i'd ask for it. i don't. really.

so, i got the files to null, and now it sounds "normal" again. i'm going to carry through with what i was doing, regardless, because i want to make sure the tracks are truly normalized.

if somebody changed something, thank you for listening. pun intended. please do not revert to the previous corrupt mixes and please do not alter any more of my files.

and, if i was just imagining it, all i can do is keep going.

another point of ambiguity is the question of compression and limiting. the music is presented with a wide dynamic range, which is a conscious compositional decision. that keeps getting flattened out, and squished down, removing the changes in volume in the mix. it would seem that whomever is doing this doesn't understand the concept of mezzo-piano and mezzo-forte, and rather thinks everything should be presented at the same volume, and the same level of aggression. i know what they're doing - they're putting it through a limiter, and they're doing it because they think they're "cleaning it up". but, they're just ruining the detail and subtlety. the changes in volume are intentional parts of the composition, not relics to be removed in mastering.

i suppose it is possible that i'm getting upset about the playback process, and the answer is to realize that the playback algorithm is necessarily flawed. i might be getting upset about the downsampling done by the server, and deducing something is being altered. ok. so, i'm going to try to download the files after i reupload them and see if i can mathematically compare them to the correct versions on my hard drive.

and, if i have to accept that, so be it.

but, i actually expect to download altered files, and i'm going to be very upset if i do.

this is a synth pop record created in the 90s that should sound vaguely like a tears for fears or genesis record, but with a much more digital sounding recording footprint. it's not contemporary music, and should not sound like it. it's not intended for use in car stereos or nightclubs, it's intended for basement or bedroom listening through headphones. it may be music for reading, for doing homework, for doing employment, for exercising, for cleaning, for travelling, for shopping or just for active listening. but, it's meant for an alienated individual to listen to alone through headphones, and not to be experienced in a group setting with other people, through loudspeakers.

at specific point is a question as to the bass response on the mixes. i desire a minimal bass response, because most of the detail and interesting parts of the music are actually in the high end. i also dislike guitar parts with exaggerated low ends, and prefer my guitars to have a tinny, mono sort of sound. i like brittle, trebly, fuzzy sorts of digital distortion, and not deeper, crunchier sorts of amp distortion. i spent a lot of time getting that to sound correctly.

if the end user wants to play the music through a subwoofer, i suppose they have that choice, but i would not recommend it. rather, i would recommend that the music be listened to on as flat a system as is possible and through an entirely flat pair of headphones, and further that little attempt be made to exaggerate the low end, as the actual music is mostly in the upper mids.

i do not desire to be an artist that produces music intended for a deep bass response. i do not listen to or have an interest in bass music. and, i don't want it to sound chunky or analog or heavy - i want it to sound airy and digital and sharp and light.

the corruption is, unfortunately, returning to re-uploaded sound at the bandcamp site, and i'm remembering back to the fucker at the mixing desk, recognizing all of the apparent attempts to control my machine and putting 2+2 together.

the bottom line is this: if i can't present my mixes as i want to present them, they will not be presented at all. i don't want to resort to it, but i may have to unpublish everything as a means of protest.

i've unfortunately had to unpublish my first lp. i will be replacing the files with the corrected masters until the site stops corrupting them. if it will not relent, i will have to start unpublishing further documents, sequentially.

i'm not blaming bandcamp, exactly - i think this is exceedingly unusual for them, and i think it's deeper than them. i don't fully understand what's happening, but it's consistent with a broader narrative of outside control. somebody wants control over my body, over my thoughts and over my art, too. in the end, it's just a lot of resources wasted over what's truly a set of trivialities - especially considering that my tendency is to fight against the current, rather than go along with it. i will fight something like this out of spite.

i thought merely replacing the files would be enough to get the point across, but, again, they don't seem to have any kind of respect for individual autonomy, or artistic expression, whoever it is that they are.

if i have to, i'll put the files up at a google drive share, instead, with a direction to wire me money. it's not like i'm selling a ton of things over bandcamp, anyways.

this is inri016, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/eat-my-fuck

this is inri015, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inri-3

i was supposed to do legal stuff today, and clearly i'm not. i'm in the groove on this filing, taking advantage of the working machine and trying to catch up to the process i described early this morning.

the second run is going through the source material for inri000-inri074 and

1) making sure it's complete

2) making sure any files related to period 3 are pulled out and categorized correctly

3) making sure all files are mirrored, for redundancy

the third run will be going through the years 2003-2021 and making sure everything for period 3 is pulled out.

the fourth run will be pure redundancy.

at that point, i should be able to click back into the three phases in a smooth manner, as i'll be able to pull data out of the "file", put it back into the "file" and then store it when i'm done with it with greater clarity and ease.

this is inri014, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/schizoid-terrorist-2

this is inri013, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/on-sexual-confusion-in-adolescence-2

this is inri012, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/i-think-i-feel-much-better-now

this is inri011, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/nope-2

this is inri010, updated to remove any sound corruption, and let's hope it stays that way.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/why

this process might actually be helpful. if it takes an hour to get through each re-upload, i can spend ten-fifteen minutes going through the appropriate folder. so, i could conceivably be finished with the major part of the filing by the time i get the uploads done.

10 down, about 65 to go.